ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Lack of agreed terminology and definitions in healthcare compromises communication, patient safety, optimal management of adverse events, and research progress. The purpose of this scoping review was to understand the terminologies used to describe central venous access devices (CVADs), associated complications and reasons for premature removal in people undergoing cancer treatment. It also sought to identify the definitional sources for complications and premature removal reasons. The objective was to map language and descriptions used and to explore opportunities for standardisation. METHODS: A systematic search of MedLine, PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL Complete and Embase databases was performed. Eligibility criteria included, but were not limited to, adult patients with cancer, and studies published between 2017 and 2022. Articles were screened and data extracted in Covidence. Data charting included study characteristics and detailed information on CVADs including terminologies and definitional sources for complications and premature removal reasons. Descriptive statistics, tables and bar graphs were used to summarise charted data. RESULTS: From a total of 2363 potentially eligible studies, 292 were included in the review. Most were observational studies (n = 174/60%). A total of 213 unique descriptors were used to refer to CVADs, with all reasons for premature CVAD removal defined in 84 (44%) of the 193 studies only, and complications defined in 56 (57%) of the 292 studies. Where available, definitions were author-derived and/or from national resources and/or other published studies. CONCLUSION: Substantial variation in CVAD terminology and a lack of standard definitions for associated complications and premature removal reasons was identified. This scoping review demonstrates the need to standardise CVAD nomenclature to enhance communication between healthcare professionals as patients undergoing cancer treatment transition between acute and long-term care, to enhance patient safety and rigor of research protocols, and improve the capacity for data sharing.
Subject(s)
Catheterization, Central Venous , Central Venous Catheters , Adult , Humans , Central Venous Catheters/adverse effects , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Medical Oncology , Health FacilitiesABSTRACT
Health practitioners often insert and maintain central venous access devices (CVADs) as part of cancer care. One in four CVADs prematurely fail, which is associated with increased mortality, morbidity and a negative impact on quality of life. To support implementation of updated guidelines, eviQ Education developed a comprehensive, peer-reviewed, evidence-based CVADs eLearning package. An evaluation indicated that the eLearning supported clinicians' practice and increased knowledge and clinical competency in CVAD insertion and management.
Subject(s)
Computer-Assisted Instruction , Neoplasms , Humans , Quality of Life , Clinical Competence , Educational Status , Patient Outcome Assessment , Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
Paediatric central venous access devices are associated with significant complications. Failure rates have been estimated to be as high as 25%, with securement failure a significant contributing factor. In this study, we evaluate the use of a subcutaneous securement device, securAcathTM, in minimising rates of central venous access device dislodgement and unintended early removal within a paediatric population. Data were collected on 52 consecutive paediatric patients, aged less than 18 years old, who required peripherally inserted central catheters and non-cuffed tunnelled centrally inserted central catheters. We found that the rate of securement failure with securAcathTM was 2.01 per 1000 catheter days. This compared to 2.58 in our previous practice without securAcathTM. With the use of securAcathTM, no securement failures were observed in our patients with non-cuffed tunnelled centrally inserted central catheters. There were three instances of securement failure in patients with peripherally inserted central catheters. We conclude that the use of a securAcathTM fixation device in central venous access devices is an effective method of securement, especially in use with non-cuffed tunneled centrally inserted central catheters. However, when significant tension is applied to the central venous access devices migration is still possible.
Subject(s)
Catheterization, Central Venous/instrumentation , Catheterization, Peripheral/instrumentation , Catheters, Indwelling , Central Venous Catheters , Device Removal , Foreign-Body Migration/prevention & control , Adolescent , Age Factors , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Catheterization, Peripheral/adverse effects , Child , Child, Preschool , Foreign-Body Migration/etiology , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Risk Factors , Tertiary Care Centers , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
A pilot study was conducted to compare gauze with silicone foam that may be left in place for as long as seven days. Adult patients who were receiving treatment via peripherally inserted central catheters were recruited and alternately assigned to either the gauze or silicone foam group. Patient-reported itch and discomfort, nurse-reported ease of removal, and skin status were recorded for four weeks at each weekly dressing change.
