RESUMO
Background: Peripheral intravenous catheter placement is one of the most common invasive procedures that nurses will perform, especially in emergency departments. Aims: This early analysis aimed to quantify the economic burden associated with intravenous therapy in patients presenting in emergency departments with difficult intravenous access, receiving traditional peripheral intravenous catheters. This may inform the opportunity for improvement for investment in nursing tools and services regarding difficult venous access burden reduction. Methods: Model parameter data were obtained from published literature where possible via a targeted literature review for the terms including relative variations of 'Difficult Venous Access', 'burden', and 'costs', or elicited from expert clinical opinion. A simple decision tree model was developed in Microsoft® Excel 2016. Results included number of insertion attempts, number of patients requiring escalation, catheter failures due to complications, healthcare professional (e.g. nurse) time, and total costs (including/excluding health care professional time). Sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: The model considers 64,000 individuals presenting in the emergency department annually, of which 75% (48,000) require a peripheral intravenous catheter; of these 22% (10,560) are estimated to have difficult venous access. The total cost burden of difficult venous access is estimated to be $890,095 per year/$84.29 per patient with difficult venous access, including the cost of clinician time. Key total cost drivers include the population size treated in the emergency department annually, the proportion of midlines placed by a specialist IV (intravenous access) nurse and the percentage of patients with difficult venous access. Conclusion: This is the first formal analysis estimating the significant economic burden of difficult venous access in emergency departments via peripheral intravenous catheter placement, a task frequently performed by nurses. Further studies are needed to evaluate nursing-centric strategies for reducing this burden. Additionally, adoption of a concise definition is needed, as is routine use of reliable assessment tools so that future cost analyses can be better contextualised.
RESUMO
The goal of the 2015 Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC) was to define indications and appropriate practices for peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) use; however, MAGIC recommendations virtually reduced the use of PICC in hospital settings, including critical care. The aim of this review is to present an assessment of the MAGIC guidelines, considering contemporary evidence to date. The validity of the MAGIC recommendations and their applicability to current practice are called into question given important concerns with the methodology for their development (e.g. high volume of clinical scenarios for evaluation) and the supporting evidence used. There is a considerable amount of contemporary evidence not considered in MAGIC that reports on evolving practices, techniques, and technologies targeted to reduce complications associated with central venous access devices (CVADs). Recent evidence dictates that CVADs are necessary in the intensive care unit (ICU), and that PICCs are a safe, reliable, and appropriate type of central lines, which cannot be replaced in several ICU situations. In light of evolving evidence and practice, as well as the methodological concerns identified, the MAGIC guidelines should be revisited. It is also recommended to create a clinical assessment tool that identifies potential uses of specific CVADs, based on patient needs. The choice of the CVAD should be based on unique clinical considerations and current scientific evidence, not on fears informed by antiquated data.
