Improvement of central vein ultrasound-guided puncture success using a homemade needle guide-a simulation study.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-plane (OOP) approach is frequently used for ultrasound-guided insertion of central venous catheter (CVC) owing to its simplicity but does not avoid mechanical complication. In-plane (IP) approach might improve safety of insertion; however, it is less easy to master. We assessed, a homemade needle guide device aimed to improve CVC insertion using IP approach. METHOD: We evaluated in a randomized simulation trial, the impact of a homemade needle guide on internal jugular, subclavian and femoral vein puncture, using three approaches: out-of-plane free hand (OOP-FH), in-plane free hand (IP-FH), and in-plane needle guided (IP-NG). Success at first pass, the number of needle redirections and arterial punctures was recorded. Time elapsed (i) from skin contact to first skin puncture, (ii) from skin puncture to successful venous puncture and (iii) from skin contact to venous return were measured. RESULTS: Thirty operators performed 270 punctures. IP-NG approach resulted in high success rate at first pass (jugular: 80%, subclavian: 95% and femoral: 100%) which was higher than success rate observed with OOP-FH and IP-FH regardless of the site (p = .01). Compared to IP-FH and OOP-FH, the IP-NG approach decreased the number of needle redirections at each site (p = .009) and arterial punctures (p = .001). Compared to IP-FH, the IP-NG approach decreased the total procedure duration for puncture at each site. CONCLUSION: In this simulation study, IP approach using a homemade needle guide for ultrasound-guided central vein puncture improved success rate at first pass, reduced the number of punctures/redirections and shortened the procedure duration compared to OOP and IP free-hand approaches.

French ICU's health care workers have a poor knowledge of the cost of the devices they use for patient care: A prospective multicentric study.

PURPOSE: ICU patient's care may require the use of onerous devices, which contributes to make this department one of the most expensive in the hospital. It seemed us relevant to assess healthcare workers' (HCWs) knowledge of the cost of the devices daily used in ICU. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous questionnaire was administered on a voluntary basis to HCWs of 3 ICUs. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Cost estimations were expressed as percentage of the real cost; an estimation was considered correct if it was ±50% of the true price. 107 HCWs (66 physicians and 41 nurses and nurse aids) answered the survey. Only 29% of estimations were within 50% of the real cost. The prices of the cheapest devices were overestimated, while the costs of the most expensive ones were underestimated. In multivariate analysis, cost less than50 euros [OR = 3.2; CI 95%(1.6-6.3)], professional experience <10 years [OR = 1.5; CI 95%(1.1-2.1)], being a medical student [OR = 2.0; CI 95%(1.3-3.0)], and working in a university affiliated hospital [OR = 0.6; CI 95%(0.4-0.9)] were associated with an incorrect estimation. CONCLUSIONS: ICU's HCWs have a poor knowledge of the price of devices they regularly use for the care of their patients.