Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 170
Filtrar
1.
J Adv Nurs ; 2024 Sep 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39278726

RESUMEN

AIM: To determine whether the I-DECIDED assessment and decision tool enhances peripheral intravenous catheter assessment, care and decision-making in paediatrics. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental, interrupted time-series study. METHODS: An interrupted time-series study was conducted in a paediatric inpatient unit at a public teaching hospital in Brazil. The participants were patients aged less than 15 years old with a peripheral intravenous catheter, and their parents or guardians. Data were collected between January and July 2023, encompassing six time points, three pre-intervention and three post-intervention. Evaluation data were based on the I-DECIDED tool, including idle devices, dressings, complications, patient/family awareness, hand hygiene, disinfection and documentation. RESULTS: We conducted 585 peripheral intravenous catheter observations, with 289 in the pre-intervention phase and 296 in the post-intervention phase, inserted in 65 hospitalised children, 30 in the pre-intervention phase and 35 in the post-intervention phase. After the intervention, reductions were observed in the number of idle catheters, substandard dressings and complications. Patients and family members reported an increase in device assessment, hand hygiene and peripheral intravenous catheter disinfection. Additionally, there was an increase in documentation of decision-making performed by nurses and nursing technicians/assistants. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the I-DECIDED assessment and decision tool in a paediatric unit significantly improved the assessment, care and decision-making regarding peripheral intravenous catheters. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Opportunity to enhance practice standards, elevate the quality of care provided to paediatric patients, contribute to improved patient outcomes, advance evidence-based practice in vascular access management and enhance patient experience through increased involvement in care. IMPACT: To influence clinical practice and healthcare policies aimed at improving peripheral intravenous catheter care and patient safety in paediatric settings. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution to the design of this study.

2.
Support Care Cancer ; 32(10): 662, 2024 Sep 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39283363

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To systematically review the proportion and incidence of CVAD-associated complications in pediatric patients with cancer. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched from 2012 to 2022. Cohort studies and the control arm of randomized controlled trials, which reported CVAD-associated complications in pediatric patients aged 0-18 years, were included. CVAD complications were defined as CVAD failure, central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), local infection, occlusion, CVAD-associated venous thromboembolism, dislodgement/migration, breakage/rupture, and dehiscence. The pooled proportion and incidence rate (IR) for each CVAD-associated complication were reported. RESULTS: Of 40 included studies, there was mixed quality of methods and reporting. Approximately 31.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.5-41.1; 6920 devices) of devices experienced a CVAD-associated complication, and 14.8% (95% CI 10.2-20.1; 24 studies; 11,762 devices) of CVADs failed before treatment completion (incidence rate (IR) of 0.5 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI 0.3-0.8; 12 studies; 798,000 catheter days)). Overall, 21.2% (95% CI 14.3-28.9; 26 studies; 5054 devices) of CVADs developed a CLABSI, with an IR of 0.9 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI 0.6-1.3; 12 studies; 798,094 catheter days). Tunneled central venous catheters (TCVC) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) were associated with increased complications in comparison to totally implanted venous access devices (TIVADs). CONCLUSION: CVAD complication rates in this population remain high. TCVCs and PICCs are associated with increased complications relative to TIVADs. Insufficient evidence exists to guide device selection in this cohort, necessitating further research to determine the role of PICCs in pediatric cancer care. PROSPERO: CRD42022359467. Date of registration: 22 September 2022.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Catéteres Venosos Centrales , Neoplasias , Humanos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Niño , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Adolescente , Preescolar , Lactante , Incidencia , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/epidemiología , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/etiología , Recién Nacido , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
3.
J Adv Nurs ; 2024 Sep 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39253763

RESUMEN

AIM: To explore the barriers and facilitators influencing emergency department clinicians' adherence to the Australian Peripheral Intravenous Catheter (PIVC) Clinical Care Standard, using the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW). BACKGROUND: Suboptimal PIVC practices are frequently linked to a range of patient-important adverse outcomes. The first Australian Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Clinical Care Standard was introduced in 2021, aiming to standardize practice. However, a recent national survey revealed a lack of adherence to the Standard among emergency department clinicians. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive study. METHOD: The study was conducted across two Australian emergency departments in 2023. Utilizing purposive sampling, semi-structured interviews were conducted. The analysis incorporated both deductive and inductive approaches, mapping the findings to the BCW. FINDINGS: Interviews with 25 nurses and doctors revealed nine key subthemes. The main barriers were the stressful environment, insufficient education and training, and the absence of a feedback mechanism. The main facilitators were recognition of suboptimal practice, belief in the importance of patient engagement, and the desire to improve practice. CONCLUSION: Multiple complex factors have an impact on clinicians' adherence to the Standard. The identified interventions will serve as a guide for future implementation of the Standard. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: The findings inform healthcare organizations of the significance of implementing strategies to enhance clinicians' acceptance of the Standard. Clinicians should consider incorporating the multifaceted interventions developed in accordance with the BCW for future implementation projects. IMPACT: Promoting adherence to standards opens avenues to challenge suboptimal practice and has the potential to instigate a culture shift in the fundamental skills of frontline clinicians. REPORTING METHOD: The study is designed and reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

4.
J Adv Nurs ; 2024 Sep 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39258848

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: An evidence and consensus-based instrument is needed to classify central venous access device-associated skin impairments. AIM: The aim of this study was to design and evaluate the central venous access device-associated skin impairment classification tool. DESIGN: A two-phase modified Delphi study. METHODS: This two-phase study consisted of a literature review, followed by the development and validation of a classification instrument, by experts in the fields of central venous access devices and wound management (Phase 1). The instrument was tested (Phase 2) using 38 clinical photographs of a range of relevant skin impairments by the same expert panel. The expert panel consisted of registered nurses who were clinical researchers (n = 4) and clinical experts (n = 3) with an average of 24 years of nursing and research experience and 11 years of experience in wound management. Measures to assess preliminary content validity and inter-rater reliability were used. RESULTS: The instrument consists of five overarching aetiological classifications, including contact dermatitis, mechanical injury, infection, pressure injury and complex clinical presentation, with 14 associated subcategory diagnoses (e.g., allergic dermatitis, skin tear and local infection), with definitions and signs and symptoms. High agreement was achieved for preliminary scale content validity and item content validity (I-CVI = 1). Inter-rater reliability of aetiologies was high. The overall inter-rater reliability of individual definitions and signs and symptoms had excellent agreement. CONCLUSION: The development and preliminary validation of this classification tool provide a common language to guide the classification and assessment of central venous access device-associated skin impairment. IMPACT: The comprehensive and validated classification tool will promote accurate identification of central venous access device-associated skin impairment by establishing a common language for healthcare providers. The availability of this tool can reduce clinical uncertainty, instances of misdiagnosis and the potential for mismanagement. Consequently, it will play a pivotal role in guiding clinical decision-making, ultimately enhancing the quality of treatment and improving patient outcomes. REPORTING METHOD: The Guidance on Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies (CREDES) was adhered to. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

6.
BMJ Open ; 14(7): e085637, 2024 Jul 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38986559

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Central venous access devices (CVADs) are commonly used for the treatment of paediatric cancer patients. Catheter locking is a routine intervention that prevents CVAD-associated adverse events, such as infection, occlusion and thrombosis. While laboratory and clinical data are promising, tetra-EDTA (T-EDTA) has yet to be rigorously evaluated or introduced in cancer care as a catheter lock. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for a two-arm, superiority type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation randomised controlled trial conducted at seven hospitals across Australia and New Zealand. Randomisation will be in a 3:2 ratio between the saline (heparinised saline and normal saline) and T-EDTA groups, with randomly varied blocks of size 10 or 20 and stratification by (1) healthcare facility; (2) CVAD type and (3) duration of dwell since insertion. Within the saline group, there will be a random allocation between normal and heparin saline. Participants can be re-recruited and randomised on insertion of a new CVAD. Primary outcome for effectiveness will be a composite of CVAD-associated bloodstream infections (CABSI), CVAD-associated thrombosis or CVAD occlusion during CVAD dwell or at removal. Secondary outcomes will include CABSI, CVAD-associated-thrombosis, CVAD failure, incidental asymptomatic CVAD-associated-thrombosis, other adverse events, health-related quality of life, healthcare costs and mortality. To achieve 90% power (alpha=0.05) for the primary outcome, data from 720 recruitments are required. A mixed-methods approach will be employed to explore implementation contexts from the perspective of clinicians and healthcare purchasers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been provided by Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) (HREC/22/QCHQ/81744) and the University of Queensland HREC (2022/HE000196) with subsequent governance approval at all sites. Informed consent is required from the substitute decision-maker or legal guardian prior to participation. In addition, consent may also be obtained from mature minors, depending on the legislative requirements of the study site. The primary trial and substudies will be written by the investigators and published in peer-reviewed journals. The findings will also be disseminated through local health and clinical trial networks by investigators and presented at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12622000499785.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres , Cateterismo Venoso Central , Catéteres Venosos Centrales , Neoplasias , Niño , Humanos , Australia , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/prevención & control , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Ácido Edético/uso terapéutico , Heparina/efectos adversos , Heparina/administración & dosificación , Heparina/uso terapéutico , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Nueva Zelanda , Calidad de Vida , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Trombosis/prevención & control , Trombosis/etiología
7.
BMJ Open ; 14(7): e084313, 2024 Jul 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39013653

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are the most commonly used vascular access device in hospitalised patients. Yet PIVCs may be complicated by local or systemic infections leading to increased healthcare costs. Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-impregnated dressings may help reduce PIVC-related infectious complications but have not yet been evaluated. We hypothesise an impregnated CHG transparent dressing, in comparison to standard polyurethane dressing, will be safe, effective and cost-effective in protecting against PIVC-related infectious complications and phlebitis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The ProP trial is a multicentre, superiority, randomised clinical and cost-effectiveness trial with internal pilot, conducted across three centres in Australia and France. Patients (adults and children aged ≥6 years) requiring one PIVC for ≥48 hours are eligible. We will exclude patients with emergent PIVCs, known CHG allergy, skin injury at site of insertion or previous trial enrolment. Patients will be randomised to 3M Tegaderm Antimicrobial IV Advanced Securement dressing or standard care group. For the internal pilot, 300 patients will be enrolled to test protocol feasibility (eligibility, recruitment, retention, protocol fidelity, missing data and satisfaction of participants and staff), primary endpoint for internal pilot, assessed by independent data safety monitoring committee. Clinical outcomes will not be reviewed. Following feasibility assessment, the remaining 2624 (1312 per trial arm) patients will be enrolled following the same methods. The primary endpoint is a composite of catheter-related infectious complications and phlebitis. Recruitment began on 3 May 2023. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by Ouest I ethic committee in France and by The Queensland Children's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee in Australia. The findings will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences and publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05741866.


Asunto(s)
Vendajes , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres , Cateterismo Periférico , Clorhexidina , Adulto , Niño , Humanos , Antiinfecciosos Locales/administración & dosificación , Australia , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/prevención & control , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos , Clorhexidina/análogos & derivados , Clorhexidina/administración & dosificación , Clorhexidina/uso terapéutico , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Francia , Flebitis/prevención & control , Flebitis/etiología , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
8.
J Adv Nurs ; 2024 Jul 24.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39046170

RESUMEN

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.

9.
JAMA Pediatr ; 178(9): 861-869, 2024 Sep 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39008311

RESUMEN

Importance: Catheter dislodgement is a common complication for children with tunneled or peripherally inserted noncuffed central venous catheters (CVCs). A subcutaneous anchor securement system (SASS) may reduce this risk compared with traditional adhesive securement. Objective: To compare dislodgement of noncuffed CVCs secured with SASS with dislodgement of noncuffed CVCs secured with sutureless securement devices (SSDs). Design, Setting, and Participants: The SECURED (Securing Central Venous Catheters to Prevent Dislodegment) trial was a pragmatic, multicenter, superiority randomized clinical trial with an internal pilot and was conducted from August 5, 2020, to August 30, 2022, at 2 Australian quaternary pediatric hospitals. Data analysis was performed in January 2023. Patients aged 0 to 18 years requiring a noncuffed CVC (≥3F catheter) were eligible for inclusion. Follow-up duration was 8 weeks or until device removal. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive an SASS or SSD, stratified by hospital and catheter type. Only 1 catheter was studied per patient. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was dislodgement (partial or total), defined as movement of the catheter tip by greater than 1 cm (change in external catheter length) at any point during catheter dwell. Dislodgement, reported as a risk ratio (RR), was estimated using a generalized linear model with binomial family and log link. Secondary outcomes were reported as incidence rate ratios and were analyzed using Poission regression. Outcomes reported as mean differences (MDs) were analyzed using linear regression. Results: Of 310 randomized patients, 175 patients (56.5%) were male and median (IQR) patient age was 48 (16-120) months. A total of 307 patients had a catheter device inserted, of which 153 (49.8%) were SASS and 154 (50.2%) were SSD, and were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Device dislodgement was lower with SASS (8 dislodgements in 153 patients [5.2%]) compared with SSD (35 dislodgements in 154 patients [22.7%]) (RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.48; P < .001). The per-protocol analysis was consistent with the ITT analysis. Partial dislodgement accounted for most dislodgement events, including 6 partial dislodgements in the SASS group (3.9%) and 30 partial dislodgements in the SSD group (19.5%) (RR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.08-0.42). This contributed to fewer complications during dwell in the SASS group (37 reported complications [24.2%]) vs the SSD group (60 reported complications [39.0%]) (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44-0.87). Staff reported greater difficulty removing devices anchored with SASS vs SSD (mean [SD], 29.1 [31.3] vs 5.3 [17.0], respectively; MD, 23.8; 95% CI, 16.7-31.0). However, use of SASS resulted in reduced per-participant health care costs of A$36.60 (95% credible interval, 4.25-68.95; US $24.36; 95% credible interval, 2.83-45.89). Conclusions and Relevance: In the SECURED trial, noncuffed CVCs secured with SASS had fewer dislodgements compared with SSDs, with a lower cost per patient and an acceptable safety profile. Future efforts should be directed at SASS implementation at the health service level. Trial Registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12620000783921.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Catéteres Venosos Centrales , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Niño , Lactante , Preescolar , Adolescente , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Recién Nacido , Falla de Equipo/estadística & datos numéricos
10.
J Adv Nurs ; 2024 Jun 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38896020

RESUMEN

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.

11.
J Pediatr Nurs ; 78: 112-117, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38917612

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico , Enfermería Pediátrica , Humanos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Femenino , Masculino , Recién Nacido , Enfermería Neonatal/educación , Brasil , Competencia Clínica , Aplicaciones Móviles , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/enfermería , Adulto
12.
Pediatr Res ; 2024 Jun 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38937641

RESUMEN

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.

13.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 6: CD013366, 2024 06 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38940297

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres , Cateterismo Periférico , Diseño de Equipo , Falla de Equipo , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Periférico/instrumentación , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/prevención & control , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevención & control , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiología , Obstrucción del Catéter , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Causas de Muerte , Sesgo , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/instrumentación , Bacteriemia/prevención & control , Bacteriemia/etiología
14.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 5: CD013023, 2024 05 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38780138

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Vendajes , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres , Cateterismo Periférico , Poliuretanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Periférico/instrumentación , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/prevención & control , Sesgo , Falla de Equipo
15.
Rev Paul Pediatr ; 42: e2023159, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38747843

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To perform the translation and adaptation of the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters in Pediatrics (miniMAGIC) into Brazilian Portuguese. METHODS: Methodological study performed in five recommended stages: initial translations; synthesis of the translations; back translations; assessment of the back translations; expert committee assessment. The expert committee was composed of three registered nurses and two doctors who had a Master's and/or PhD degree, and an expertise in intravenous therapy and pediatric and neonatal care. To assess the semantic, idiomatic, experiential and conceptual adequacy, a Likert scale was applied, in which 1, "not equivalent"; 2, "inequivalent"; 3, "cannot assess"; 4, "quite equivalent"; 5, "totally equivalent". The terms mostly analyzed as negative in equivalence and with a lower than 20 score were reviewed and submitted to a new assessment, with the Delphi Technique until consensus was obtained. The results were stored in electronic spreadsheets and treated with concordance index, with a minimum acceptable result of 0.80. RESULTS: The content of all recommendations, named as miniMAGIC-Brasil, was validated by the expert committee after two stages of evaluation. All recommendations had an overall agreement index of 0.91. CONCLUSIONS: The miniMAGIC-Brazil guide was validated in respect to the adequacy of the translation after two steps.


Asunto(s)
Traducciones , Humanos , Brasil , Niño , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Pediatría/normas
16.
Semin Oncol Nurs ; 40(3): 151618, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38622044

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To identify the prevalence and type of central venous access device-associated skin complications for adult cancer patients, describe central venous access device management practices, and identify clinical and demographic characteristics associated with risk of central venous access device-associated skin complications. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 369 patients (626 central venous access devices; 7,682 catheter days) was undertaken between March 2017 and March 2018 across two cancer care in-patient units in a large teaching hospital. RESULTS: Twenty-seven percent (n = 168) of participants had a central venous access device-associated skin complication. In the final multivariable analysis, significant (P < .05) risk factors for skin complications were cutaneous graft versus host disease (2.1 times greater risk) and female sex (1.4 times greater risk), whereas totally implanted vascular access device reduced risk for skin complications by two-thirds (incidence risk ratio 0.37). CONCLUSION: Central venous access device-associated skin complications are a significant, potentially avoidable injury, requiring cancer nurses to be aware of high-risk groups and use evidence-based preventative and treatment strategies. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study has confirmed how common these potentially preventable injuries are. Therefore, the prevalence of these complications could be reduced by focusing on improvements in skin assessment, reductions in central venous access device dressing variation and improving clinician knowledge of this injury.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Neoplasias , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Adulto , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Enfermedades de la Piel/etiología , Enfermedades de la Piel/epidemiología , Factores de Riesgo , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes
17.
JAMA Pediatr ; 178(5): 437-445, 2024 May 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38558161

RESUMEN

Importance: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) facilitate essential treatment. Failure of these essential devices is frequent and new securement strategies may reduce failure and improve patient outcomes. Objective: To evaluate clinical effectiveness of novel PIVC securement technologies for children to reduce catheter failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: A 3-arm, parallel group, superiority randomized clinical trial was conducted at 2 regional Australian hospitals from February 5, 2020, to January 14, 2022. Children aged 6 months to 8 years who were anticipated to require admission with a PIVC for at least 24 hours of in hospital treatment were eligible. Data were analyzed from May 25, 2022, to February 20, 2024. Interventions: Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to standard care, bordered polyurethane (Tegaderm [3M]), integrated securement dressing (SorbaView SHIELD [Medline]), and integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive (Secureport IV). One catheter was studied per patient. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was PIVC failure, defined as premature cessation of PIVC function for any reason prior to completion of planned treatment. Secondary outcomes were PIVC complications (any time dislodgement, occlusion, infiltration, partial dislodgement, extravasation, device leaking, phlebitis, pain), PIVC longevity, intervention acceptability (clinicians, participants, caregivers; 0-10 scale), and pain on removal (participants and caregivers; 0-10 scale relevant to age), adverse events, and health care costs. Results: A total of 383 patients (51% female; median age 36 [25th-75th percentiles, 22-72] months) were randomized 134 to standard care, 118 to integrated securement dressing, and 131 to integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive. PIVC failure was lowest in integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive (15 [12%]; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.26-0.84) compared with integrated securement dressing (24 [21%]; aHR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.47-1.28) and standard care (43 [34%]). Direct costs were significantly lower for integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive (median, Australian dollars [A$], 312 [A$1 is equal to $0.65 US dollars]; IQR, A$302-A$380) and integrated securement dressing (median, A$303; IQR, A$294-A$465) compared with standard care (median, A$341; IQR, A$297-A$592; P ≤ .002) when considering the economic burden related to failure of devices. PIVC longevity and intervention acceptability were similar across all groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, PIVCs secured with integrated securement dressings and tissue adhesive, in comparison with standard care, bordered polyurethane dressings, were associated with significantly reduced PIVC failure, for children admitted to hospital via the emergency department. Further research should focus on implementation in inpatient units where prolonged dwell and reliable intravenous access is most needed. Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: ACTRN12619001026112.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico , Falla de Equipo , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos , Cateterismo Periférico/instrumentación , Cateterismo Periférico/economía , Niño , Preescolar , Lactante , Vendajes/economía , Australia , Poliuretanos , Adhesivos Tisulares/administración & dosificación
18.
Aust Crit Care ; 37(5): 747-754, 2024 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38485556

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Unidades de Cuidado Intensivo Neonatal , Venas Umbilicales , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Recién Nacido , Femenino , Masculino , Factores de Riesgo , Incidencia , Arterias Umbilicales , Australia/epidemiología , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos
19.
J Adv Nurs ; 2024 Mar 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38468151

RESUMEN

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.

20.
Hosp Pediatr ; 14(3): 180-188, 2024 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38404202

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe how the current practice of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) use in hospitalized children aligns with the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (miniMAGIC) in Children recommendations, explore variation across sites, and describe the population of children who do not receive appropriate PICCs. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted at 4 children's hospitals in the United States. Children with PICCs placed January 2019 to December 2021 were included. Patients in the NICU were excluded. PICCs were categorized using the miniMAGIC in Children classification as inappropriate, uncertain appropriateness and appropriate. RESULTS: Of the 6051 PICCs identified, 9% (n = 550) were categorized as inappropriate, 9% (n = 550) as uncertain appropriateness, and 82% (n = 4951) as appropriate. The number of PICCs trended down over time, but up to 20% of PICCs each year were not appropriate, with significant variation between sites. Within inappropriate or uncertain appropriateness PICCs (n = 1100 PICC in 1079 children), median (interquartile range) patient age was 4 (0-11) years, 54% were male, and the main reason for PICC placement was prolonged antibiotic course (56%, n = 611). The most common admitting services requesting the inappropriate/uncertain appropriateness PICCs were critical care 24%, general pediatrics 22%, and pulmonary 20%. Complications resulting in PICC removal were identified in 6% (n = 70) of inappropriate/uncertain PICCs. The most common complications were dislodgement (3%) and occlusion (2%), with infection and thrombosis rates of 1% (n = 10 and n = 13, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although the majority of PICCs met appropriateness criteria, a substantial proportion of PICCs were deemed inappropriate or of uncertain appropriateness, illustrating an opportunity for quality improvement.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Cateterismo Periférico , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Catéteres , Niño Hospitalizado , Estudios Retrospectivos , Recién Nacido , Lactante
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA