Pediatric invasive device utility and harm: a multi-site point prevalence survey.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Invasive devices are widely used in healthcare settings; however, pediatric patients are especially vulnerable to invasive device-associated harm. This study aimed to explore invasive device utility, prevalence, harm, and clinical practice across three Australian pediatric tertiary hospitals. METHODS: In 2022-2023, a multi-center, observational, rolling-point-prevalence survey was conducted. Fifty-per-cent of inpatients were systemically sampled by random allocation. Patients with devices were then followed for up to 3-days for device-related complications/failures and management/removal characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 285 patients audited, 78.2% had an invasive device (n = 412 devices), with a median of 1 device-per-patient (interquartile range 1-2), with a maximum of 13 devices-per-patient. Over half of devices were vascular access devices (n = 223; 54.1%), followed by gastrointestinal devices (n = 112; 27.2%). The point-prevalence of all device complications on Day 0 was 10.7% (44/412 devices) and period-prevalence throughout the audit period was 27.7% (114/412 devices). The period-prevalence of device failure was 13.4% (55/412 devices). CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted a high prevalence of invasive devices among hospitalized patients. One-in-ten devices failed during the audit period. These findings underscore the need for vigilant monitoring and improved strategies to minimize complications and enhance the safety of invasive devices in pediatric hospital settings. IMPACT: A high prevalence of invasive devices among hospitalized patients was reported. Of the 285 patients audited, almost 80% had an invasive device (total 412 devices), with a median of 1 device-per-patient and a maximum of 13 devices-per-patient. The most common devices used in pediatric healthcare are vascular access devices (n = 223; 54.1%), however, 16% (n = 36) of these devices failed, and one-third had complications. The point prevalence of all device complications at day 0 was 10.7% (44 out of 412 devices), with a period prevalence of 27.7% (114 out of 412 devices) throughout the audit period.

Use of central venous access devices outside of the pediatric intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Central venous access devices (CVAD) are associated with central line associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and venous thromboembolism (VTE). We identified trends in non-intensive care unit (ICU) CVAD utilization, described complication rates, and compared resources between low and high CVAD sites. METHODS: We combined data from the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) database and surveys from included hospitals. We analyzed 10-year trends in CVAD encounters for non-ICU children between 01/2012-12/2021 and described variation and complication rates between 01/2017-12/2021. Using Fisher's exact test, we compared resources between low and high CVAD users. RESULTS: CVAD use decreased from 6.3% to 3.8% of hospitalizations over 10 years. From 2017-2021, 67,830 encounters with CVAD were identified. Median age was 7 (IQR 2-13) years; 46% were female. Significant variation in CVAD utilization exists (range 1.4-16.9%). Rates of CLABSI and VTE were 4.0% and 3.4%, respectively. Survey responses from 33/41 (80%) hospitals showed 91% had vascular access teams, 30% used vascular access selection guides, and 70% used midline/long peripheral catheters. Low CVAD users were more likely to have a team guiding device selection (100% vs 43%, p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: CVAD utilization decreased over time. Significant variation in CVAD use remains and may be associated with hospital resources. IMPACT: Central venous access device (CVAD) use outside of the ICU is trending down; however, significant variation exists between institutions. Children with CVADs hospitalized on the acute care units had a CLABSI rate of 4% and VTE rate of 3.4%. 91% of surveyed institutions have a vascular access team; however, the services provided vary between institutions. Even though 70% of the surveyed institutions have the ability to place midline/long peripheral catheters, the majority use these catheters less than a few times per month. Institutions with low CVAD use are more likely to have a vascular access team that guides device selection.

Peripherally inserted central catheter design and material for reducing catheter failure and complications.

BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) facilitate diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in health care. PICCs can fail due to infective and non-infective complications, which PICC materials and design may contribute to, leading to negative sequelae for patients and healthcare systems. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of PICC material and design in reducing catheter failure and complications. SEARCH METHODS: The University of Queensland and Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 16 May 2023. We aimed to identify other potentially eligible trials or ancillary publications by searching the reference lists of retrieved included trials, as well as relevant systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology assessment reports. We contacted experts in the field to ascertain additional relevant information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PICC design and materials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were venous thromboembolism (VTE), PICC-associated bloodstream infection (BSI), occlusion, and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were catheter failure, PICC-related BSI, catheter breakage, PICC dwell time, and safety endpoints. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 RCTs involving approximately 2913 participants (one multi-arm study). All studies except one had a high risk of bias in one or more risk of bias domain. Integrated valve technology compared to no valve technology for peripherally inserted central catheter design Integrated valve technology may make little or no difference to VTE risk when compared with PICCs with no valve (risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 2.63; I² = 0%; 3 studies; 437 participants; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether integrated valve technology reduces PICC-associated BSI risk, as the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.00; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 257 participants). Integrated valve technology may make little or no difference to occlusion risk when compared with PICCs with no valve (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.38; I² = 0%; 5 studies; 900 participants; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether use of integrated valve technology reduces all-cause mortality risk, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.64; I² = 0%; 2 studies; 473 participants). Integrated valve technology may make little or no difference to catheter failure risk when compared with PICCs with no valve (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.03; I² = 0%; 4 studies; 720 participants; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether integrated-valve technology reduces PICC-related BSI risk (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.32; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 542 participants) or catheter breakage, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.22 to 5.06; I² = 20%; 4 studies; 799 participants). Anti-thrombogenic surface modification compared to no anti-thrombogenic surface modification for peripherally inserted central catheter design We are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces risk of VTE (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.54; I² = 15%; 2 studies; 257 participants) or PICC-associated BSI, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.00; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 257 participants). We are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces occlusion (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.04 to 11.22; I² = 70%; 2 studies; 257 participants) or all-cause mortality risk, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.26; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 111 participants). Use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters may make little or no difference to risk of catheter failure (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.54; I² = 46%; 2 studies; 257 participants; low certainty evidence). No PICC-related BSIs were reported in one study (111 participants). As such, we are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces PICC-related BSI risk (RR not estimable; I² = not applicable; very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces the risk of catheter breakage, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.79; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 257 participants). Antimicrobial impregnation compared to non-antimicrobial impregnation for peripherally inserted central catheter design We are uncertain whether use of antimicrobial-impregnated catheters reduces VTE risk (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.88; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 167 participants) or PICC-associated BSI risk, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 2.17, 95% CI 0.20 to 23.53; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 167 participants). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters probably make little or no difference to occlusion risk (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 2 studies; 1025 participants; moderate certainty evidence) or all-cause mortality (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.75; I² = 0%; 2 studies; 1082 participants; moderate certainty evidence). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters may make little or no difference to risk of catheter failure (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 221 participants; low certainty evidence). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters probably make little or no difference to PICC-related BSI risk (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.55; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 1082 participants; moderate certainty evidence). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters may make little or no difference to risk of catheter breakage (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.19 to 3.83; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 804 participants; low certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited high-quality RCT evidence available to inform clinician decision-making for PICC materials and design. Limitations of the current evidence include small sample sizes, infrequent events, and risk of bias. There may be little to no difference in the risk of VTE, PICC-associated BSI, occlusion, or mortality across PICC materials and designs. Further rigorous RCTs are needed to reduce uncertainty.

Dressings and securement devices to prevent complications for peripheral arterial catheters.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial catheters (ACs) are used in anaesthesia and intensive care settings for blood sampling and monitoring. Despite their importance, ACs often fail, requiring reinsertion. Dressings and securement devices maintain AC function and prevent complications such as infection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of peripheral AC dressing and securement devices to prevent failure and complications in hospitalised people. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL Plus up to 16 May 2023. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to 16 May 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different dressing and securement devices for the stabilisation of ACs in hospitalised people. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's RoB 1 tool. We resolved disagreements by discussion, or by consulting a third review author when necessary. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs with 1228 participants and 1228 ACs. All included studies had high risk of bias in one or more domains. We present the following four comparisons, with the remaining comparisons reported in the main review. Standard polyurethane (SPU) plus tissue adhesive (TA) compared with SPU: we are very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts rates of AC failure (risk ratio (RR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.98; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Neither study (165 participants) reported catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI), thus we are very uncertain whether SPU plus TA impacts on the incidence of CRBSI (very low-certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts AC dislodgement risk (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.03 to 9.62; I² = 44%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts AC occlusion rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.91; I² = 3%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts rates of adverse events with few reported events across groups (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.09 to 8.33; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Bordered polyurethane (BPU) compared to SPU: we are very uncertain whether use of BPU impacts rates of AC failure (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.13; 1 study, 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence). BPU may make little or no difference to CRBSI compared to SPU (RR 3.05, 95% CI 0.12 to 74.45; I² = not applicable as 1 study (60 participants) reported 0 events; 2 studies, 572 participants; low-certainty evidence). BPU may make little or no difference to the risk of AC dislodgement compared with SPU (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.17 to 3.22; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 572 participants; low-certainty evidence). BPU may make little or no difference to occlusion risk compared with SPU (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.07; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 572 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether BPU impacts on the risk of adverse events compared with SPU (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; 1 study, 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence). SPU plus sutureless securement devices (SSD) compared to SPU: we are very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts risk of AC failure compared with SPU (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.52; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain if SPU plus SSD impacts CRBSI incidence rate with no events in both groups (2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts risk of dislodgement (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.57; I² = not applicable as 1 study (96 participants) reported 0 events; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts risk of AC occlusion (RR 1.94, 95% CI 0.50 to 7.48; I² = 38%; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts on the risk of adverse events (RR 1.94, 95% CI 0.19 to 20.24; I² = not applicable as 1 study (96 participants) reported 0 events; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Integrated securement dressings compared to SPU: integrated securement dressings may result in little or no difference in risk of AC failure compared with SPU (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 4.84; 1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence); may result in little or no difference in CRBSI incidence with no events reported (1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence); may result in little or no difference in the risk of dislodgement (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.04; 1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence), may result in little or no difference in occlusion rates with no events reported (1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence), and may result in little or no difference in the risk of adverse events (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.45; 1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently limited rigorous RCT evidence available about the relative clinical effectiveness of AC dressing and securement products. Limitations of current evidence include small sample size, infrequent events, and heterogeneous outcome measurements. We found no clear difference in the incidence of AC failure, CRBSI, or adverse events across AC dressing or securement products including SPU, BPU, SSD, TA, and integrated securement products. The limitations of current evidence means further rigorous RCTs are needed to reduce uncertainty around the use of dressing and securement devices for ACs.

Invasive device-associated skin complications and mechanical dysfunctions in paediatric healthcare: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: This study aimed to estimate the proportion and rate of skin complications and mechanical dysfunction associated with indwelling invasive devices in paediatric healthcare. DESIGN: This systematic review is reported in accordance with Cochrane standards for randomized controlled trials and the Meta-analysis of Observation Studies in Epidemiology for cohort studies. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, clinical trial registries, and unpublished study databases were searched. REVIEW METHODS: Cohort studies and trials published from January 2011 to June 2022, including (1) indwelling invasive devices, (2) paediatric participants admitted to a hospital, (3) reporting post-insertion device-associated skin complication and/or mechanical dysfunction, and (4) published in English, were included. Device-associated skin complication and mechanical dysfunction (infiltration, leakage, occlusion/blockage, dislodgement/malposition, breakage and others). Pooled proportion and incidence rate per 1000 device days are reported. RESULTS: This review synthesized 114 studies (30,782 devices; 1,635,649 device-days). Skin complications were reported in 40 studies, but none exclusively reported individual device-related pressure injuries. Mechanical dysfunctions were well-reported for central venous access devices, peripheral intravenous catheters, nasogastric/gastric tubes and peritoneal dialysis catheters but less for arterial catheters, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and ventricular assist devices. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the need for standardized definitions and reporting methods to better surveil and benchmark device-related complications, particularly for understudied device types. Device-related pressure injuries were not reported in any of the included studies, and all devices except for vascular access devices require standardized reporting of complications. IMPACT: Despite the widespread use of invasive devices, comprehensive data on their prevalence, utility, and associated paediatric complications is limited. This review identified prevalent skin complications, occlusions and dislodgments in children with devices, underscoring the need for standardized reporting to enhance surveillance and understanding of paediatric device-related complications. REPORTING METHOD: MOOSE (Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) Checklist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution.

Implementation frameworks, strategies and outcomes in optimizing central venous access device practice in paediatrics: A scoping review.

Paediatric patients with complex or acute conditions may require a central venous access device, however, almost one-third of these devices have associated complications (e.g. infections). Implementation of evidence-based practices regarding central venous access devices can reduce and potentially prevent complications. AIMS: This scoping review aimed to explore recent interventional research in CVAD management through an implementation lens. DESIGN: This scoping review used the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Studies were included if they were written in English, published in 2012 to July 2023, involved children and were relevant to the study aims. Risk of bias was appraised by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. DATA SOURCES: Searches were undertaken in EMBASE, CINAHL (Ebsco), PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL). RESULTS: Of the 1769 studies identified in a systematic search, 46 studies were included. Studies mostly focused on health professionals and central venous access device maintenance and had quantitative pre-post study designs. Adherence to implementation frameworks was lacking, with many studies employing quality improvement approaches. Implementation strategies were typically multipronged, using health-professional education, bundles and working groups. Bundle compliance and reductions in central line-associated bloodstream infections were the most featured outcomes, with most studies primarily focusing on effectiveness outcomes. CONCLUSION: Translation of evidence-based practices to the clinical setting is difficult and current adoption of implementation frameworks (apart from 'quality improvement') is limited. Implementation strategies are diverse and dependent on the local context, and study outcomes typically focus on the effectiveness of the physical intervention, rather than measuring the implementation effort itself. IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENTS: Future intervention research requires a more uniform and deliberate application of implementation frameworks and strategies. IMPACT: Greater exploration of relationships between frameworks and strategies and implementation and service outcomes is required to increase understanding of their role in maximizing resources to improve health care. Adhered to best reporting guidelines as per PRISMA-ScR (Tricco et al., 2018). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Implementation contexts and strategies for alternative peripherally inserted central catheter material and design selection: A qualitative exploration using CFIR/ERIC approach.

AIM: To explore the implementation contexts and strategies that influence the uptake and selection of alternative peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) materials and design. DESIGN: Qualitative evaluation of end user perspectives within a randomized control trial of different PICC materials and design. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders were undertaken via an adapted, rapid-analytic approach using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Outcomes were mapped against the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) tool for strategies to guide innovation in PICC practice. RESULTS: Participants (n = 23) represented a combination of users and inserters/purchasers, from adult and paediatric settings. Dominant themes included intervention characteristics (intervention source), inner setting (structural characteristics) and individuals involved (self-efficacy). Strategies emerging to support a change from ERIC mapping (n = 16) included promotion of intervention adaptability, inclusion of staff and consumer perspectives and sufficient funding. Implementation contexts such as inner setting and individuals involved equally impacted PICC success and implementation effectiveness and enabled a greater understanding of barriers and facilitators to intervention implementation in this trial. CONCLUSION: Trial evidence is important, but healthcare decision-making requires consideration of local contexts especially resourcing. Implementation contexts for Australian healthcare settings include a practical, strategic toolkit for the implementation of alternative PICC materials and designs. REPORTING METHOD: This study adhered to COREQ guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Incidence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries and predictors of severity in a paediatric hospital.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) pose significant challenges in healthcare and cause increased patient suffering, longer hospital stays, and higher healthcare costs. Paediatric patients face unique risks, but evidence remains scarce. This study aimed to identify and describe HAPI admission incidence and severity predictors in a large Australian children's hospital. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study investigated all paediatric patients between January 2020 and December 2021 using a census approach. Demographic and clinical data including HAPI-related data were accessed from the incident monitoring and hospital administration databases. The incidence rate (per 1000 patient admissions) was calculated based on all admissions. Predictors of HAPI severity were identified using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. The study adhered to the STROBE guidelines for retrospective cohort studies. RESULTS: The HAPI incidence rate was 6.96 per 1000 patient admissions. Of the age groups, neonates had the highest HAPI incidence (15.5 per 1000 admissions). Critically ill children had the highest rate for admission location (12.8 per 1000 patient admissions). Most reported cases were stage I (64.2%). Age was associated with injury severity, with older paediatric patients more likely to develop higher-stage HAPIs. Additionally, Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander patients had a higher HAPI severity risk. CONCLUSION: HAPI injuries in paediatric patients are unacceptably high. Prevention should be prioritized, and the quality of care improved in Australia and beyond. Further research is needed to develop targeted prevention strategies for these vulnerable populations. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: This research emphasizes the need for standardized reporting, culturally sensitive care and tailored prevention strategies. IMPACT: The research has the potential to influence healthcare policies and practices, ultimately enhancing the quality of patient care. REPORTING METHOD: STROBE guidelines. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public contribution to the conduct of this study.

An mHealth application for chronic vascular access: A multi-method evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare consumers require diverse resources to assist their navigation of complex healthcare interactions, however, these resources need to be fit for purpose. AIM: In this study, we evaluated the utility, usability and feasibility of children, families and adults requiring long-term intravenous therapy using a recently developed mobile health application (App), intravenous (IV) Passport. DESIGN: Multi-site, parallel, multi-method, prospective cohort study. METHODS: A multi-site, multi-method study was carried out in 2020-2021, with 46 participants (20 adults, 26 children/family) reporting on their experiences surrounding the use of the IV Passport for up to 6 months. RESULTS: Overall, utility rates were acceptable, with 78.3% (N = 36) using the IV Passport over the follow-up period, with high rates of planned future use for those still active in the project (N = 21; 73%), especially in the child/family cohort (N = 13; 100%). Acceptability rates were high (9/10; IQR 6.5-10), with the IV Passport primarily used for documenting new devices and complications. Thematic analysis revealed three main themes (and multiple subthemes) in the qualitative data: Advocacy for healthcare needs, Complexity of healthcare and App design and functionality. CONCLUSION: Several recommendations were made to improve the end-user experience including 'how to' instructions; and scheduling functionality for routine care. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The IV Passport can be safely and appropriately integrated into healthcare, to support consumers. IMPACT: Patient-/parent-reported feedback suggests the Intravenous Passport is a useful tool for record-keeping, and positive communication between patients/parents, and clinicians. REPORTING METHOD: Not applicable. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION: Consumers reported their experiences surrounding the use of the IV Passport for up to 6 months.

PiccPed® app impact on nurses' knowledge to prevent adverse events for peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) in pediatric and neonatal healthcare: A quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: The PiccPed® health application was developed to support clinical decision-making in peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) management. We aimed to evaluate its impact on nurses' knowledge regarding the prevention of PICC-associated adverse events in pediatrics and neonatology. METHODS: A quasi-experimental, pre-post intervention study, was conducted with a dependent/paired sample of pediatric and neonatal nurses from two tertiary hospitals in South Brazil. Data were collected from October 2022 to January 2023 across three phases: pre-, intervention (use of the PiccPed®) and post-test. Study outcomes were a knowledge test (15 questions) of evidence-based PICC maintenance procedures, and PiccPed® app time spent and screens used. RESULTS: A total of 56 nurses completed the study. The post-test mean score was significantly higher (12/15; standard deviation (SD) 1.9) in comparison with the pre-test (mean 9/15; SD 2.2). The change in scores was significantly higher for nurses without postgraduate qualifications, in comparison to those with (Mean Difference 1.26; p = 0.039). Each minute using the app resulted in a significant increase of 0.04 points (95% confidence interval 0.01-0.08; p = 0.014) on the mean post-test score (10.94 points). CONCLUSION: The research demonstrated that PiccPed® enhances nurses' learning regarding the prevention of adverse events associated with PICC maintenance in pediatrics and neonatology. APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: The app can be safely and effectively used for training and continuing education of nurses who care for children and neonates with PICCs.

An mHealth application for chronic vascular access: Consumer led co-creation.

PURPOSE: Children with chronic and complex health conditions frequently need intravenous devices. The current approach to intravenous device selection, insertion, and monitoring is inconsistent, and healthcare consumers are often negatively affected by siloed health information, and poor future planning. Despite child- and family-centred care being recognised as a pillar of paediatric nursing care, limited implementation for vascular access device planning and management is evident. DESIGN AND METHODS: To address this, we conducted a multi-phased approach to co-create, then evaluate, a mobile health (mHealth) application: IV Passport. Co-creation involved a prioritisation survey, followed by a Passport advisory panel consensus meeting. Following confirmation of the required content and features of the Passport, the mHealth application was designed and content validation achieved via survey. RESULTS: The prioritisation survey yielded recommendations for seven features (e.g., graphical presentations of current/past devices). Content for nine device types (e.g., totally implanted ports) was suggested, each with 10 related items (e.g., insertion site). Content items for device-associated complications, future vascular access plans, and educational resources were also suggested. Following design, the application was released through Apple and Android platforms; and adapted to a paper version. Content validation was established; 100% strongly agreed the application was easy to use; 80% agreed/strongly agreed that they would recommend the Passport to others. CONCLUSION: IV Passport embodies effective child- and family-centred care through consumer co-creation to empower patients and families manage vascular access devices. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: IV Passport remains active; and can be utilised across many healthcare settings and patient populations.

Supportive care needs of adults living with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) at home: a qualitative content analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are common vascular access devices inserted for adults undergoing intravenous treatment in the community setting. Individuals with a PICC report challenges understanding information and adapting to the device both practically and psychologically at home. There is a lack of research investigating the supportive care needs of individuals with a PICC to inform nursing assessment and the provision of additional supports they may require to successfully adapt to life with a PICC. The aim of this study was to identify the supportive care needs of adults with cancer or infection living with a PICC at home. METHOD: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were used to identify supportive care needs of adults living with a PICC at home. Participants were recruited from cancer and infectious diseases outpatient units. Two researchers independently analysed transcripts using content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 15 participants were interviewed (30-87 years old). There were 5 males and 10 females interviewed, 9 participants had a cancer diagnosis and most lived in a metropolitan area. Many participants lived with a partner/spouse at home and three participants had young children. Participants identified supportive care needs in the following eight categories (i (i) Adapting daily life (ii) Physical comfort (iii) Self-management (iv) Emotional impact (v) Information content (vi) Understanding information (vii) Healthcare resources and (viii) Social supports. CONCLUSIONS: Adults living with a PICC at home report a broad range of supportive care needs. In addition to practical and information needs, health consumers may also require support to accept living with a device inside their body and to assume responsibility for the PICC. These findings may provide nurses with a greater understanding of individual needs and guide the provision of appropriate supports.

Adverse events associated with umbilical vascular catheters in the neonatal intensive care unit: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Umbilical catheters are commonly inserted in newborns in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) yet are associated with serious adverse events (AEs) such as malposition, migration, infection, thrombosis, hepatic complications, cardiac effusion, and cardiac tamponade. There is a need to determine the incidence and risk factors for AEs to inform safe practice. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the incidence and risk factors for AEs (all-cause and individual types) associated with umbilical venous catheters (UVCs) and umbilical arterial catheters (UACs) in the NICU. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in an Australian level-VI NICU over a 3-year period. Any newborn who had both a UVC and UAC insertion attempt was included. RESULTS: There were 236 neonates who had 494 catheters (245 UVCs and 249 UACs). Of these, 71% of UVCs (95% confidence interval [CI]: 65.6-76.9%; incidence rate: 181.1-237.3 per 1000 catheter days) and 43.8% of UACs (95% CI: 38-50.5%; incidence rate: 102.0-146.3 per 1000 catheter days) were associated with an AE. The most common AE was malposition on first X-ray for UVCs (60.1%, 95% CI: 55.1-67.3) and UACs (32.6%, 95% CI: 26.8-39.6). A dwell time of ≥7 days was a significant predictor of UAC failure (incidence risk ratio: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1-2.1, p = 0.006) and migration of the UVC (incidence risk ratio: 3.5, 95% CI: 1.0-11.5, p = 0.043). CONCLUSION: Adverse events related to insertion occurred in a relatively high percentage of umbilical catheters placed. Increased dwell time remains a significant risk factor for catheter migration and overall failure. Practice change and consideration of risk factors for both individual and overall AE risk are necessary to reduce complications.

Implementing paediatric appropriate use criteria for endotracheal suction to reduce complications in mechanically ventilated children with respiratory infections.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal suction is used to maintain endotracheal tube patency. There is limited guidance to inform clinical practice for children with respiratory infections. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine whether implementation of a paediatric endotracheal suction appropriate use guideline Paediatric AirWay Suction (PAWS) is associated with an increased use of appropriate and decreased use of inappropriate suction interventions. METHODS: A mixed-method, pre-implementation-post-implementation study was conducted between September 2021 and April 2022. Suction episodes in mechanically ventilated children with a respiratory infection were eligible. Using a structured approach, we implemented the PAWS guideline in a single paediatric intensive care unit. Evaluation included clinical (e.g., suction intervention appropriateness), implementation (e.g., acceptability), and cost outcomes (implementation costs). Associations between implementation of the PAWS guideline and appropriateness of endotracheal suction intervention use were investigated using generalised linear models. RESULTS: Data from 439 eligible suctions were included in the analysis. Following PAWS implementation, inappropriate endotracheal tube intervention use reduced from 99% to 58%, an absolute reduction (AR) of 41% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 25%, 56%). Reductions were most notable for open suction systems (AR: 48%; 95% CI: 30%, 65%), 0.9% sodium chloride use (AR: 23%; 95% CI: 8%, 38%) and presuction and postsuction manual bagging (38%; 95% CI: 16%, 60%, and 86%; 95% CI: 73%, 99%), respectively. Clinicians perceived PAWS as acceptable and suitable for use. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of endotracheal tube suction appropriate use guidelines in a mixed paediatric intensive care unit was associated with a large reduction in inappropriate suction intervention use in paediatric patients with respiratory infections.

Experiences of children with central venous access devices: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Our study aims to explore the experience of having a central venous access device (CVAD) from the perspective of the child and family and how movements within and outside of hospital environments influence this experience. METHODS: A mixed-methods study was conducted across Children's Health Queensland (Australia), including inpatient and home-care settings. Children less than 18 years with CVADs were eligible and followed for 3 months or CVAD removal. A subgroup of primary caregivers participated in semi-structured interviews. Quantitative and qualitative measures of child and family CVAD experiences were explored. RESULTS: In total, 163 patients with 200 CVADs were recruited and followed for 6993 catheter days (3329 [48%] inpatients; 3147 [45%] outpatients; 517 [7%] home). Seventeen participants were interviewed. Experiences of having a CVAD were complex but predominantly positive primarily related to personalized CVAD care, healthcare quality, and general wellbeing. Their experience was shaped by their movements through hospital and home environments, including care variation and distress with procedures. Device selection and insertion location further influenced experience, including safety, impairments in activities of daily living, school, and recreation. CONCLUSIONS: CVAD experiences were influenced by nonmodifiable (e.g., diagnosis) and modifiable factors (e.g., education; care variation). Clinical approaches and policies that account for family and child considerations should be explored. IMPACT: Variation in decision making and management for pediatric CVADs is accepted by many clinicians, but the influence this variation has on the health experience of children and their families is less well explored. This is the first study to draw from a broad range of children requiring CVADs to determine their experience within and outside of healthcare facilities. Interdisciplinary clinicians and researchers need to work collaboratively with children and their families to provide resources and support services to ensure they have positive experiences with CVADs, no matter where they are managed, or who they are managed by.

Central venous access device practice across haematology and oncology centres in Australia and New Zealand: a cross-sectional survey.

Central venous access devices (CVADs) are commonly used in malignancies. We conducted an online, anonymous cross-sectional survey of practice regarding CVAD management in haematology centres among clinicians in Australia and New Zealand. We identified variation in clinical practice regarding CVAD selection, insertion, management and removal. These findings highlight research gaps in CVAD care.

Performance of tunnelled, non-cuffed central venous catheters in infants: A scoping review.

AIM: To summarise and critique existing knowledge and evidence relating to the utility, and post-insertion complications surrounding tunnelled non-cuffed central venous catheters (tncCVCs) in infants. METHODS: A scoping review of original research studies reporting the use of, and post-insertion complications associated with, tncCVCs in infants was completed. MeSH terms were used to formulate a systematic search, and data were extracted using a customised data extraction form. Data were analysed descriptively across key themes based on the research questions. Study quality was evaluated using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: The systematic search generated 3994 studies, of which 9 studies met final inclusion criteria. Studies included 644 tncCVCs in infants based in the USA, Europe and Australia. Most studies were retrospective cohort studies. The most common vein of insertion, where individually specified, was the internal jugular (n = 177). Tunnel length, where reported, was 2.5-5 cm. Infection rates were most commonly reported (eight studies), with results ranging from 0 to 12.8%, and device dislodgements of up to 20% reported. Participant follow-up and definition of complications varied greatly between studies. Study quality across all papers was sound. CONCLUSIONS: This review has identified only a small number of studies, with small participant numbers, reporting the performance of tncCVCs in infants. Definitions of complications measured varied significantly between studies, and vastly different patient follow-up protocols were reported. Further larger-scale studies on the performance of tncCVC, employing internationally recognised reporting standards is warranted to ensure clinicians can make informed choices for medication and infusion delivery.

Improving difficult peripheral intravenous access requires thought, training and technology (DART3): a stepped-wedge, cluster randomised controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are the most used invasive medical device in healthcare. Yet around half of insertion attempts are unsuccessful leading to delayed medical treatments and patient discomfort of harm. Ultrasound-guided PIVC (USGPIVC) insertion is an evidence-based intervention shown to improve insertion success especially in patients with Difficult IntraVenous Access (BMC Health Serv Res 22:220, 2022), however the implementation in some healthcare settings remains suboptimal. This study aims to co-design interventions that optimise ultrasound guided PIVC insertion in patients with DIVA, implement and evaluate these initiatives and develop scale up activities. METHODS: A stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial will be conducted in three hospitals (two adult, one paediatric) in Queensland, Australia. The intervention will be rolled out across 12 distinct clusters (four per hospital). Intervention development will be guided by Michie's Behavior Change Wheel with the aim to increase local staff capability, opportunity, and motivation for appropriate, sustainable adoption of USGPIVC insertion. Eligible clusters include all wards or departments where > 10 PIVCs/week are typically inserted. All clusters will commence in the control (baseline) phase, then, one cluster per hospital will step up every two months, as feasible, to the implementation phase, where the intervention will be rolled out. Implementation strategies are tailored for each hospital by local investigators and advisory groups, through context assessments, staff surveys, and stakeholder interviews and informed by extensive consumer interviews and consultation. Outcome measures align with the RE-AIM framework including clinical-effectiveness outcomes (e.g., first-time PIVC insertion success for DIVA patients [primary outcome], number of insertion attempts); implementation outcomes (e.g., intervention fidelity, readiness assessment) and cost effectiveness outcomes. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research framework will be used to report the intervention as it was implemented; how people participated in and responded to the intervention; contextual influences and how the theory underpinning the intervention was realised and delivered at each site. A sustainability assessment will be undertaken at three- and six-months post intervention. DISCUSSION: Study findings will help define systematic solutions to implement DIVA identification and escalation tools aiming to address consumer dissatisfaction with current PIVC insertion practices. Such actionable knowledge is critical for implementation of scale-up activities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered (Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; ACTRN12621001497897).

Wound management across Australian and New Zealand pediatric cardiac services: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: CHD is associated with considerable burden of care. Up to one-third of babies born with CHD require surgery or intervention during the first year of life with an associated increased risk of surgical site infection. Pediatric wound care is informed largely by adult data, with no national or international guidelines available. AIM: To examine pediatric cardiac surgical wound care practices reported by healthcare professionals Australia and New Zealand-wide. METHODS: A bi-national cross-sectional survey exploring pre-, intra- and post-operative wound practices was distributed using Exponential Non-Discriminative Snowball Sampling. Data were subject to descriptive analysis using SPSS Statistics 22.0. FINDINGS: Sixty-eight surveys representing all Australian and New Zealand pediatric cardiac surgical services were analyzed. Most respondents were experienced nurses. Pre-operative care varied greatly in practice and pharmaceutical agents used. Little consistency was reported for intra- and post-operative wound care. Nursing and medical staff shared responsibility for wound care. Wound photography was widely used, but only uploaded to electronic medical records by some. DISCUSSION: These results highlight that wound care management is largely informed at an institutional level. The many practices reported are likely to reflect a range of factors including cardiac condition complexity, surgery, prematurity, and the presence of scar tissue. The importance of a research and training program, which is multimodal, available, and reflective, is highlighted. CONCLUSION: These findings call for the establishment of a nurse-led program of research and education. The resultant suite of cardiac wound strategies could offer an effective and consistent pathway forward.

Perceived barriers and facilitators to preventing hospital-acquired pressure injury in paediatrics: A qualitative analysis.

AIM: This qualitative study aimed to identify nurses' and allied health professionals' perceptions and experiences of providing hospital-acquired pressure injury (HAPI) prevention in a paediatric tertiary hospital in Australia, as well as understand the perceived barriers and facilitators to preventing HAPI. DESIGN: A qualitative, exploratory study of hospital professionals was undertaken using semi-structured interviews between February 2022 and January 2023. METHODS: Two frameworks, the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation Model of Behaviour (COM-B) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), were used to give both theoretical and pragmatic guidance. Participants included 19 nursing and allied health professionals and data analysis was informed by the framework approach. RESULTS: Analysis revealed nine core themes regarding professionals' beliefs about the barriers and facilitators to HAPI prevention practices across seven TDF domains. Themes included HAPI prevention skills and education, family-centred care, automated feedback and prompts, allocation and access to equipment, everybody's responsibility, prioritizing patients and clinical demands, organizational expectations and support, integrating theory and reality in practice and emotional influence. CONCLUSION: These findings provide valuable insights into the barriers and facilitators that impact paediatric HAPI prevention and can help identify and implement strategies to enhance evidence-based prevention care and prevent HAPI in paediatric settings. IMPACT: Overcoming barriers through evidence-based interventions is essential to reduce HAPI cases, improve patient outcomes, and cut healthcare costs. The findings have practical implications, informing policy and practice for improved preventive measures, education, and staffing in paediatric care, ultimately benefiting patient well-being and reducing HAPIs. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. The focus of the study is on healthcare professionals and their perspectives and experiences in preventing HAPIs in paediatric patients. Therefore, the involvement of patients or the public was not deemed necessary for achieving the specific research objectives.