Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Spiced RCT: Success and Pain Associated with Intravenous Cannulation in the Emergency Department Randomized Controlled Trial.
Mitra, Tatum Priyambada; Coulter-Nile, Sarah; Jegathees, Thuvarahan; Luong, Jason; Shetty, Amith; Lai, Kevin.
Afiliação
  • Mitra TP; Emergency Department, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Emergency Department, Westmead Children's Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Wollongong Hospital, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Coulter-Nile S; Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Royal Hospital for Women, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Jegathees T; Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Westmead Children's Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Luong J; Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Shetty A; Emergency Department, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; New South Wales Ministry of Health, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Lai K; Emergency Department, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
J Emerg Med ; 66(2): 57-63, 2024 02.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38278677
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Peripheral venous cannulation is one of the most common procedures in medicine. A larger cannula allows higher rates of fluid to be provided if needed in a deteriorating patient; however, it is also perceived that larger-gauge cannula placement is associated with increased pain and procedural difficulty.

OBJECTIVE:

This study aimed to compare the pain and procedural difficulty experienced during insertion between 18-gauge (18G) and 20-gauge (20G) cannulas.

METHODS:

We conducted a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial on adult patients who required peripheral IV cannulation within a tertiary hospital emergency department between April and October 2018. Patients were randomized to either the 18G or 20G cannula group. The primary outcomes of the study-pain experienced by patients and procedural difficulties experienced by clinical staff-were recorded on two separate 10-cm visual analog scales. Other outcomes include first-attempt success rate, operator designation, complications, and the intent and actual use of the IV cannula were documented on preformatted questionnaires.

RESULTS:

Data from 178 patients were included in the analysis. Eighty-nine patients were allocated to each cannula group. There were no statistically or clinically significant differences between mean pain score (0.23; 95% CI 0.56-1.02; p = 0.5662) and mean procedural difficulty score (0.12; 95% CI 0.66-0.93; p = 0.7396). between the two groups. There was no difference in first-attempt success rate (73 of 89 vs. 75 of 89; p = 0.1288), complications (2 of 89 vs. 1 of 89) between the 20G group and 18G group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS:

There was no significant difference between the 18G or 20G cannula for either pain experienced by patients or procedural difficulty experienced by clinicians.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Dor / Cateterismo Periférico Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Emerg Med Assunto da revista: MEDICINA DE EMERGENCIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Austrália

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Dor / Cateterismo Periférico Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Emerg Med Assunto da revista: MEDICINA DE EMERGENCIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Austrália