RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To establish a multidisciplinary management model based on Delphi method to guide nursing practice and reduce the incidence of CVAD-associated Skin Impairment (CASI) in tumor patients. METHODS: On the basis of literature review and focus group interview, the initial item pool of CASI management model for cancer patients was determined. The Delphi method was used to conduct two rounds of letter consultation with 36 authoritative and representative experts to determine the content and weight of indicators of CASI multidisciplinary management model for cancer patients. RESULTS: Most of the research group were experts with bachelor degree or above. More than 90% of experts have worked for more than 10 years; Areas of expertise include oncology care, venous therapy, wound stomatology, and dermatology. The recovery rate of the two rounds of expert correspondence questionnaire was 100%. The authority coefficient of experts was 0.898, indicating a good degree of authority. Kendall's harmony coefficients were 0.193 and 0.250, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). After two rounds of expert letter consultation, a multidisciplinary management model of CASI for cancer patients was initially formed, which included 15 first-level prevention indexes and 38 second-level prevention indexes of CASI for cancer patients. There were 9 first-level indexes and 16 second-level indexes of CASI treatment in tumor patients. CONCLUSION: Cancer patients based on Delphi method to construct CASI multidisciplinary management model has high reliability and scientificity, multidisciplinary management model in the management of patients with tumor CASI exploration will provide new methods for central venous catheter nursing and the new way of thinking, will also be intravenous fluids will provide a scientific basis for professional development and quality improvement and practical experience.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) placement using B-mode ultrasound with the modified Seldinger technique (BUMST) versus the blind puncture. METHODS: One hundred chemotherapy patients were recruited to participate in a randomised, controlled trial in Guangzhou, China. Fifty were assigned to the experimental group (using BUMST), and 50 were assigned to the control group (blind puncture). Demographic and background data, data related to PICC placement, complications after PICC placement, the patients' degree of comfort (determined via a questionnaire), and patients' costs for PICC maintenance were collected to compare the effects of the two methods. T-tests and chi-square tests were used to analyse the data; p < 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant. RESULTS: Nighty-eight of the 100 PICCs were successfully inserted (50 in the experimental group and 48 in the control group). Compared with the control group, the experimental group had a lower rate of unplanned catheter removal (4.0% vs. 18.7%; p = 0.02), a lower incidence of mechanical phlebitis (0% vs. 22.9%; p < 0.001), a lower incidence of venous thrombosis (0% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.037), and a higher incidence of catheter migration (32% vs. 2.1%; p < 0.001). Compared with the control group, the experimental group experienced significantly less severe contact dermatitis (p = 0.038), had improved comfort at 1 week, 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months after PICC placement (p < 0.001), and had lower costs for PICC maintenance at 2 months, 3 months and when the catheter was removed (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Using B-mode ultrasound with MST for PICC placement reduced complications and patients' costs for PICC maintenance and improved patients' degree of comfort; thus, this procedure should be more widely used. The clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR-TRC-12002749.