Controlling peripheral intravenous catheter failure by needleless connector design: A pilot randomised controlled trial.

AIM: To test the feasibility of a study protocol that compared the efficacy of neutral- and negative-pressure needleless connectors (NCs). DESIGN: A single-centre, parallel-group, pilot randomised control trial. METHODS: Our study compared neutral-(intervention) and negative-pressure (control) NCs among adult patients in an Australian hospital. The primary feasibility outcome was measured against predetermined criteria (e.g. eligibility, attrition). The primary efficacy outcome was all-cause peripheral intravenous catheter failure, analysed as time-to-event data. RESULTS: In total, 201 (100 control; 101 intervention) participants were enrolled between March 2020 and September 2020. All feasibility criteria were met except eligibility, which was lower (78%) than the 90% criterion. All-cause peripheral intravenous catheter failure was significantly higher in the intervention group (39%) compared to control (19%). CONCLUSION: With minor modifications to participant screening for eligibility, this randomised control trial is feasible for a large multicentre randomised control trial. The neutral NC was associated with an increased risk of peripheral intravenous catheter failure. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: There are several NC designs available, often identified by their mechanism of pressure (positive, negative and neutral). However, NCs can contribute to peripheral intravenous catheter failure. This is the first randomised controlled trial to compare neutral and negative NC designs. Negative pressure NCs had lower PIVC failure compared to neutral NCs, however the results might not be generalisable to other brands or treatment settings. Further high-quality research is needed to explore NC design. REPORTING METHOD: Study methods and results reported in adherence to the CONSORT Statement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

A pilot randomized controlled trial of securement bundles to reduce peripheral intravenous catheter failure.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are ubiquitous in acute care settings however failure rates are unacceptably high, with around half failing before prescribed treatment is complete. The most effective dressing and securement option to prolong PIVC longevity is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine feasibility of conducting a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating evidence-based securement bundles (medical adhesive tapes and supplementary securement products) to reduce PIVC failure. METHODS: In this pilot non-masked 3-group RCT, adults requiring a PIVC for >24 hrs were randomized to Standard care (bordered polyurethane dressing plus non-sterile tape over extension tubing), Securement Bundle 1 (two sterile tape strips over PIVC hub plus Standard care) or Securement Bundle 2 (Bundle 1 plus tubular bandage) with allocation concealed until study entry. EXCLUSIONS: laboratory-confirmed positive blood culture, current/high-risk of skin tear, or study product allergy. PRIMARY OUTCOME: feasibility (eligibility, recruitment, retention, protocol fidelity, participant/staff satisfaction). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: PIVC failure, PIVC dwell time, adverse skin events, PIVC colonization and cost. RESULTS: Of 109 randomized participants, 104 were included in final analyses. Feasibility outcomes were met, except eligibility criterion (79%). Absolute PIVC failure was 38.2% (13/34) for Bundle 2, 25% (9/36) for Bundle 1 and 23.5% (8/34) for Standard care. Incidence rate ratio for PIVC failure/1000 catheter days, compared to Standard care, was 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.4-2.7) and 2.1 (95% CI 0.9-5.1) for Bundles 1 and 2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A large RCT testing securement bundles is feasible, with adjustment to screening processes. Innovative dressing and securement solutions are needed to reduce unacceptable PIVC failure rates. Trial registration ACTRN12619000026123.

Peripheral intravenous catheter insertion and use of ultrasound in patients with difficult intravenous access: Australian patient and practitioner perspectives to inform future implementation strategies.

OBJECTIVE: To understand healthcare worker and patient experience with peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion in patients with difficult intravenous access (DIVA) including the use of ultrasound (US). METHODS: Descriptive study using 1-on-1 semi-structured interviews conducted between August 2020 and January 2021. Purposeful sampling was used to recruit healthcare practitioners (HCPs) and patients with DIVA who had PIVC experience. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Interview data were than mapped to the implementation theory Behaviour Change Wheel to inform implementation strategies. RESULTS: In total 78 interviews (13 patients; 65 HCPs) were completed with respondents from metropolitan (60%), regional (25%) and rural/remote (15%) settings across Australia. Thematic analysis revealed 4 major themes: i) Harmful patient experiences persist, with patient insights not leveraged to effect change; ii) 'Escalation' is just a word on the front lines; iii) Heightened risk of insertion failure without resources and training; and iv) Paving the way forward-'measures need to be in place to prevent failed insertion attempts. Themes were mapped to the behaviour change wheel and implementation strategies developed, these included: staff education, e-health record for DIVA identification, DIVA standard of care and DIVA guidelines to support escalation and ultrasound use. CONCLUSION(S): DIVA patients continue to have poor healthcare experiences with PIVC insertion. There is poor standardisation of DIVA assessment, escalation, US use and clinician education across hospitals. Quality, safety, and education improvement opportunities exist to improve the patient with DIVA experience and prevent traumatic insertions. We identified a number of implementation strategies to support future ultrasound and DIVA pathway implementation.

Prophylactic insertion of large bore peripheral intravenous catheters in maternity patients for postpartum haemorrhage: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Insertion of a 16 or 18 gauge peripheral intravenous catheter is a potentially painful intervention but one frequently experienced by pregnant women when admitted to hospital. Although the rationale for this practice is 'in case of an emergency bleed', evidence for using large-bore catheters in this population is absent. AIMS: (i) To identify the proportion of 18 gauge or larger peripheral catheters inserted into maternity patients; and (ii) to investigate the proportion of women who require blood products during their perinatal period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from a sub-set of maternity patients who were included in a study of risk factors for peripheral intravenous access failure were analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen catheters were inserted in 95 women. Of the 95 first-inserted catheters, 84 (88.4%) were 16 or 18 gauge and 69 (82.1%) of these were placed in the hand or wrist. Four women (4%) received blood products, all were for non-urgent transfusions. CONCLUSION: Postpartum haemorrhage requiring a blood transfusion remains a relatively rare event. Comprehensive risk assessment should be undertaken before inserting large-bore catheters in perinatal women. Small veins in the hand and wrist should not be used for large bore catheters.

Nursing physical assessment for patient safety in general wards: reaching consensus on core skills.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To determine consensus across acute care specialty areas on core physical assessment skills necessary for early recognition of changes in patient status in general wards. BACKGROUND: Current approaches to physical assessment are inconsistent and have not evolved to meet increased patient and system demands. New models of nursing assessment are needed in general wards that ensure a proactive and patient safety approach. DESIGN: A modified Delphi study. METHODS: Focus group interviews with 150 acute care registered nurses at a large tertiary referral hospital generated a framework of core skills that were developed into a web-based survey. We then sought consensus with a panel of 35 senior acute care registered nurses following a classical Delphi approach over three rounds. Consensus was predefined as at least 80% agreement for each skill across specialty areas. RESULTS: Content analysis of focus group transcripts identified 40 discrete core physical assessment skills. In the Delphi rounds, 16 of these were consensus validated as core skills and were conceptually aligned with the primary survey: (Airway) Assess airway patency; (Breathing) Measure respiratory rate, Evaluate work of breathing, Measure oxygen saturation; (Circulation) Palpate pulse rate and rhythm, Measure blood pressure by auscultation, Assess urine output; (Disability) Assess level of consciousness, Evaluate speech, Assess for pain; (Exposure) Measure body temperature, Inspect skin integrity, Inspect and palpate skin for signs of pressure injury, Observe any wounds, dressings, drains and invasive lines, Observe ability to transfer and mobilise, Assess bowel movements. CONCLUSIONS: Among a large and diverse group of experienced acute care registered nurses consensus was achieved on a structured core physical assessment to detect early changes in patient status. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Although further research is needed to refine the model, clinical application should promote systematic assessment and clinical reasoning at the bedside.

Model of care for a changing healthcare system: are there foundational pillars for design?

Currently, healthcare organisations are being challenged to provide optimal clinical services within budget limitations while simultaneously being confronted by aging consumers and labour and skill shortages. Within this dynamic and changing environment, the ability to remain responsive to patient needs while managing these issues poses further challenges. Development or review of the model of care (MOC) may provide a possible solution to support efficiencies in service provision. Although MOC are not readily understood or appreciated as an efficiency strategy, they can be more easily explained by considering several recurring pillars when developing or redesigning an MOC. Generic and recurring foundational pillars include integrated care models, team functioning and communication, leadership, change management and lean thinking. These foundational pillars should be incorporated into the development and application of MOC in order to achieve desired outcomes. However, sustainability requires continuous review to enable improvement and must be integrated into routine business. Moreover, successful review of MOC requires collaboration and commitment by all stakeholders. Leaders are critical to motivating clinicians and stakeholders in the review process. Further, it is imperative that leaders engage stakeholders to commit to support the agreed strategies designed to provide efficient and comprehensive healthcare services. Redesign of MOC can significantly improve patient care by applying the agreed strategies. In the current healthcare environment, these strategies can favourably affect healthcare expenditure and, at the same time, improve the quality of interprofessional health services.

Nursing and Medical Perceptions of a Hospital Rapid Response System: New Process But Same Old Game?

Perhaps no other patient safety intervention depends so acutely on effective interprofessional teamwork for patient survival than the hospital rapid response system. Yet, little is known about nurse-physician relationships when rescuing at-risk patients. This study compared nursing and medical staff perceptions of a mature rapid response system at a large tertiary hospital. Findings indicate that the rapid response system may be failing to address a hierarchical culture and systems-level barriers to early recognition and response to patient deterioration.

Screening for alcohol and drug use in pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: this study examined the clinical utility and precision of routine screening for alcohol and other drug use among women attending a public antenatal service. STUDY DESIGN: a survey of clients and audit of clinical charts. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: clients attending an antenatal clinic of a large tertiary hospital in Queensland, Australia, from October to December 2009. MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: data were collected from two sources. First, 32 women who reported use of alcohol or other drugs during pregnancy at initial screening were then asked to complete a full substance use survey. Second, data were collected from charts of 349 new clients who attended the antenatal clinic during the study period. Both sensitivity (86%, 67%) and positive predictive value (100%, 92%) for alcohol and other drug use respectively, were high. Only 15% of surveyed women were uncomfortable about being screened for substance use in pregnancy, yet the chart audit revealed poor staff compliance. During the study period, 25% of clients were either not screened adequately or not at all. KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTISE: despite recommended universal screening in pregnancy and the apparent acceptance by our participants, alcohol and other drug (A&OD) screening in the antenatal setting remains problematic. Investigation into the reasons behind, and ways to overcome, the low screening rate could improve health outcomes for mothers and children in this at-risk group. Targeted education and training for midwives may form part of the solution as these clinicians have a key role in implementing prevention and early intervention strategies.