Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 20 de 4.763
Filtrer
1.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 13(1): 57, 2024 Jun 05.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38840171

RÉSUMÉ

AIM: Although uncommon, infections associated with peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) may be responsible for severe life-threatening complications and increase healthcare costs. Few data are available on the relationship between PIVC insertion site and risk of infectious complications. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the CLEAN 3 database, a randomized 2 × 2 factorial study comparing two skin disinfection procedures (2% chlorhexidine-alcohol or 5% povidone iodine-alcohol) and two types of medical devices (innovative or standard) in 989 adults patients requiring PIVC insertion before admission to a medical ward. Insertion sites were grouped into five areas: hand, wrist, forearm, cubital fossa and upper arm. We evaluated the risk of risk of PIVC colonization (i.e., tip culture eluate in broth showing at least one microorganism in a concentration of at least 1000 Colony Forming Units per mL) and/or local infection (i.e., organisms growing from purulent discharge at PIVC insertion site with no evidence of associated bloodstream infection), and the risk of positive PIVC tip culture (i.e., PIVC-tip culture eluate in broth showing at least one microorganism regardless of its amount) using multivariate Cox models. RESULTS: Eight hundred twenty three PIVCs with known insertion site and sent to the laboratory for quantitative culture were included. After adjustment for confounding factors, PIVC insertion at the cubital fossa or wrist was associated with increased risk of PIVC colonization and/or local infection (HR [95% CI], 1.64 [0.92-2.93] and 2.11 [1.08-4.13]) and of positive PIVC tip culture (HR [95% CI], 1.49 [1.02-2.18] and 1.59 [0.98-2.59]). CONCLUSION: PIVC insertion at the wrist or cubital fossa should be avoided whenever possible to reduce the risk of catheter colonization and/or local infection and of positive PIVC tip culture.


Sujet(s)
Infections sur cathéters , Cathétérisme périphérique , Humains , Femelle , Mâle , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Infections sur cathéters/prévention et contrôle , Infections sur cathéters/microbiologie , Adulte d'âge moyen , Sujet âgé , Chlorhexidine , Adulte , Désinfection/méthodes , Povidone iodée , Facteurs de risque , Anti-infectieux locaux , Contamination de matériel , Poignet/microbiologie
2.
Trials ; 25(1): 380, 2024 Jun 12.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38867301

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: Maintaining venous access is of great clinical importance. Running a slow continuous infusion to keep the vein open (KVO) is often used in peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs). Previous studies have compared the effects of intermittent flushing and continuous infusion via peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). In this study, we applied KVO to central venous catheters (CVCs) and compared the occlusion rate of this technique with that of the intermittent flushing technique. METHOD: This is a randomized controlled trial of 14 hospitals in China. A total of 250 patients will be recruited in this study, and they will be randomized at a 1:1 ratio. After study inclusion, patients who will undergo CVC insertion will receive intermittent flushing with prefilled saline syringes (control group) or KVO infusion with elastic pumps (test group). All the catheters will be checked for patency by scoping Catheter Injection and Aspiration (CINAS) Classification on Days 3 and 7. The primary outcome is the rate of catheter occlusion in 7 days. Patients will be followed up until 9 days after CVC insertion, catheter occlusion, or catheter removal. The secondary outcomes are the rate of catheter occlusion in 3 days, nurse satisfaction, cost-effectiveness, adverse event rate, catheter-related bloodstream infection rate, catheter-related thrombosis rate, extravasation rate, phlebitis rate, and catheter migration. DISCUSSION: We expect that the trial will generate findings that can provide an evidence-based basis for the improvement and optimization of clinical catheter flushing techniques. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2200064007. Registered on 23 September 2022. https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=177311 .


Sujet(s)
Obstruction de cathéter , Cathétérisme veineux central , Voies veineuses centrales , Études multicentriques comme sujet , Humains , Voies veineuses centrales/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme veineux central/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme veineux central/instrumentation , Cathétérisme veineux central/méthodes , Obstruction de cathéter/étiologie , Chine , Essais d'équivalence comme sujet , Adulte d'âge moyen , Adulte , Mâle , Résultat thérapeutique , Femelle , Facteurs temps , Essais contrôlés randomisés comme sujet , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme périphérique/instrumentation , Cathétérisme périphérique/méthodes , Cathéters à demeure/effets indésirables , Perfusions veineuses , Irrigation thérapeutique/effets indésirables , Irrigation thérapeutique/méthodes , Irrigation thérapeutique/instrumentation , Sujet âgé
3.
BMC Womens Health ; 24(1): 344, 2024 Jun 15.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38877474

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy via peripherally inserted central catheter often experience serious behavioral and psychological challenges, with uncertainty and cancer-related fatigue being prevalent issues that profoundly impact prognosis. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between uncertainty and cancer-related fatigue by employing a chain mediation model to examine the potential mediating roles of psychological resilience and self-care. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 223 breast cancer patients receiving peripherally inserted central catheter chemotherapy at two tertiary affiliated hospitals of China Medical University in Liaoning, China, from February 2021 to December 2022. Participants completed self-reported questionnaires to assess uncertainty, psychological resilience, self-care, and cancer-related fatigue. The collected data were subsequently analyzed using Pearson's correlation analysis, hierarchical regression analysis, and mediation analysis. RESULTS: Uncertainty exhibited a significant positive correlation with cancer-related fatigue (p < 0.01) and a negative correlation with psychological resilience (p < 0.01) and self-care (p < 0.01). Uncertainty was found to impact cancer-related fatigue through three pathways: psychological resilience mediated the relationship between uncertainty and cancer-related fatigue (mediating effect = 0.240, 95% confidence interval: 0.188 to 0.298, effect ratio = 53.22%); self-care also mediated this relationship (mediating effect = 0.080, 95% confidence interval: 0.044 to 0.121, effect ratio = 17.74%); furthermore, there was a significant joint mediating effect of psychological resilience and self-care on the association between uncertainty and cancer-related fatigue (mediating effect = 0.042, 95% confidence interval: 0.021 to 0.068, effect ratio o = 9.31%). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study revealed that uncertainty not only directly influenced cancer-related fatigue, but also operated through the mediating effect of psychological resilience, self-care, and sequential mediation of psychological resilience and self-care. Interventions tailored for breast cancer patients receiving peripherally inserted central catheter chemotherapy should target these factors to help alleviate uncertainty, enhance psychological resilience, and improve self-care practices, thereby ameliorating cancer-related fatigue.


Sujet(s)
Tumeurs du sein , Fatigue , Résilience psychologique , Autosoins , Humains , Femelle , Tumeurs du sein/psychologie , Tumeurs du sein/complications , Tumeurs du sein/traitement médicamenteux , Fatigue/psychologie , Fatigue/étiologie , Incertitude , Adulte d'âge moyen , Autosoins/psychologie , Autosoins/méthodes , Études transversales , Adulte , Chine/épidémiologie , Enquêtes et questionnaires , Cathétérisme périphérique/psychologie , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Sujet âgé , Antinéoplasiques/usage thérapeutique , Antinéoplasiques/effets indésirables , Antinéoplasiques/administration et posologie
4.
BMJ Open ; 14(5): e081749, 2024 May 17.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38760049

RÉSUMÉ

OBJECTIVES: To compare catheter-related outcomes of individuals who received a tunnelled femorally inserted central catheter (tFICC) with those who received a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) in the upper extremities. DESIGN: A propensity-score matched cohort study. SETTING: A 980-bed tertiary referral hospital in South West Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: In-patients referred to the hospital central venous access service for the insertion of a central venous access device. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of interest was the incidence of all-cause catheter failure. Secondary outcomes included the rates of catheters removed because of suspected or confirmed catheter-associated infection, catheter dwell and confirmed upper or lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). RESULTS: The overall rate of all-cause catheter failure in the matched tFICC and PICC cohort was 2.4/1000 catheter days (95% CI 1.1 to 4.4) and 3.0/1000 catheter days (95% CI 2.3 to 3.9), respectively, and when compared, no difference was observed (difference -0.63/1000 catheter days, 95% CI -2.32 to 1.06). We found no differences in catheter dwell (mean difference of 14.2 days, 95% CI -6.6 to 35.0, p=0.910); or in the cumulative probability of failure between the two groups within the first month of dwell (p=0.358). No significant differences were observed in the rate of catheters requiring removal for confirmed central line-associated bloodstream infection (difference 0.13/1000 catheter day, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.63, p=0.896). Similarly, no significant differences were found between the groups for confirmed catheter-related DVT (difference -0.11 per 1000 catheter days, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.04, p=1.00). CONCLUSION: There were no differences in catheter-related outcomes between the matched cohort of tFICC and PICC patients, suggesting that tFICCs are a possible alternative for vascular access when the veins of the upper extremities or thoracic region are not viable for catheterisation.


Sujet(s)
Infections sur cathéters , Cathétérisme veineux central , Cathétérisme périphérique , Score de propension , Humains , Femelle , Mâle , Adulte d'âge moyen , Infections sur cathéters/épidémiologie , Infections sur cathéters/étiologie , Cathétérisme veineux central/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme veineux central/méthodes , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Sujet âgé , Voies veineuses centrales/effets indésirables , Études de cohortes , Australie/épidémiologie , Adulte , Cathéters à demeure/effets indésirables , Ablation de dispositif/statistiques et données numériques , Panne d'appareillage/statistiques et données numériques
5.
J Infus Nurs ; 47(3): 155-162, 2024.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38744240

RÉSUMÉ

This study aims to analyze the incidences of peripheral intravenous catheter-related phlebitis and infiltration and the associated risk factors in emergency departments. This descriptive cross-sectional, nonexperimental study was conducted with 300 participants in the emergency department of a university hospital in Türkiye between January 15 and February 15, 2018. The incidence of peripheral intravenous catheter-related phlebitis was 31%, which was grade 1 in 29.7% and grade 2 in 1.3% of the emergency department participants. Additionally, the incidence of peripheral intravenous catheter-related infiltration was 55.4%, including grades 1, 2, and 3 in 36.0%, 12.7%, and 6.7% of the participants, respectively. Incidences of phlebitis and infiltration were related to age, duration of peripheral intravenous catheterization longer than 24 hours, and repeated use of the catheter insertion site. The findings of this study may draw attention to the factors that trigger phlebitis and infiltration due to peripheral intravenous catheter insertions in the emergency department and may guide practices to prevent these complications before they develop. In this context, the Phlebitis Scale and Infiltration Scale developed by the Infusion Nurses Society are recommended to be used in the emergency department.


Sujet(s)
Cathétérisme périphérique , Service hospitalier d'urgences , Phlébite , Humains , Phlébite/étiologie , Phlébite/épidémiologie , Études transversales , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Femelle , Mâle , Adulte d'âge moyen , Adulte , Facteurs de risque , Incidence , Sujet âgé , Turquie , Hôpitaux universitaires
6.
PLoS One ; 19(5): e0295347, 2024.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38739611

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: When clinicians need to administer a vasopressor infusion, they are faced with the choice of administration via either peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) or central venous catheter (CVC). Vasopressor infusions have traditionally been administered via central venous catheters (CVC) rather than Peripheral Intra Venous Catheters (PIVC), primarily due to concerns of extravasation and resultant tissue injury. This practice is not guided by contemporary randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence. Observational data suggests safety of vasopressor infusion via PIVC. To address this evidence gap, we have designed the "Vasopressors Infused via Peripheral or Central Access" (VIPCA) RCT. METHODS: The VIPCA trial is a single-centre, feasibility, parallel-group RCT. Eligible critically ill patients requiring a vasopressor infusion will be identified by emergency department (ED) or intensive care unit (ICU) staff and randomised to receive vasopressor infusion via either PIVC or CVC. Primary outcome is feasibility, a composite of recruitment rate, proportion of eligible patients randomised, protocol fidelity, retention and missing data. Primary clinical outcome is days alive and out of hospital up to day-30. Secondary outcomes will include safety and other clinical outcomes, and process and cost measures. Specific aspects of safety related to vasopressor infusions such as extravasation, leakage, device failure, tissue injury and infection will be assessed. DISCUSSION: VIPCA is a feasibility RCT whose outcomes will inform the feasibility and design of a multicentre Phase-3 trial comparing routes of vasopressor delivery. The exploratory economic analysis will provide input data for the full health economic analysis which will accompany any future Phase-3 RCT.


Sujet(s)
Cathétérisme périphérique , Voies veineuses centrales , Maladie grave , Études de faisabilité , Vasoconstricteurs , Adulte , Femelle , Humains , Mâle , Cathétérisme veineux central/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme veineux central/méthodes , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme périphérique/méthodes , Voies veineuses centrales/effets indésirables , Perfusions veineuses , Unités de soins intensifs , Essais contrôlés randomisés comme sujet , Vasoconstricteurs/administration et posologie , Vasoconstricteurs/usage thérapeutique
7.
Thromb Res ; 239: 109030, 2024 Jul.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38735166

RÉSUMÉ

OBJECTIVES: This review aims to compare the performance of available risk assessment models (RAMs) for predicting peripherally inserted central catheter-related venous thrombosis (PICC-RVT) in adult patients with cancer. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted across ten databases from inception to October 20, 2023. Studies were eligible if they compared the accuracy of a RAM to that of another RAM for predicting the risk of PICC-RVT in adult patients with cancer. Two reviewers independently performed the study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessments. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to evaluate the performance of the RAMs. RESULTS: A total of 1931 studies were screened, and 7 studies with 10 RAMs were included in the review. The most widely used RAMs were the Caprini (4 studies), Padua prediction score (3 studies), Autar (3 studies), Michigan risk score (2 studies) and Seeley score (2 studies). The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy varied markedly between the models. Notably, the Caprini score achieved higher sensitivity than 4 RAMs (Wells, Revised Geneva, modified MRS, MRS). The Michigan risk score had greater specificity than did the other 6 RAMs (Caprini, Autar, Padua, Seeley, the novel RAM, Wells). The predictive accuracy of the MRS is significantly greater than that of the Caprini and Autar RAM. CONCLUSION: The MRS could be the most accurate RAM for identifying patients at high risk of PICC-RVT. However, as limited studies are available, more rigorous studies should be conducted to examine the accuracy of the Michigan risk score for PICC-RVT in different contexts.


Sujet(s)
Tumeurs , Thrombose veineuse , Humains , Appréciation des risques , Tumeurs/complications , Thrombose veineuse/étiologie , Méta-analyse en réseau , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Adulte , Cathétérisme veineux central/effets indésirables , Facteurs de risque
8.
PLoS One ; 19(5): e0303152, 2024.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38722995

RÉSUMÉ

INTRODUCTION: Short peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) failure is a common complication that is generally underdiagnosed. Some studies have evaluated the factors associated with these complications, but the impact of care complexity individual factors and nurse staffing levels on PIVC failure is still to be assessed. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and risk factors of PIVC failure in the public hospital system of the Southern Barcelona Metropolitan Area. METHODS: A retrospective multicentre observational cohort study of hospitalised adult patients was conducted in two public hospitals in Barcelona from 1st January 2016 to 31st December 2017. All adult patients admitted to the hospitalisation ward were included until the day of discharge. Patients were classified according to presence or absence of PIVC failure. The main outcomes were nurse staffing coverage (ATIC patient classification system) and 27-care complexity individual factors. Data were obtained from electronic health records in 2022. RESULTS: Of the 44,661 patients with a PIVC, catheter failure was recorded in 2,624 (5.9%) patients (2,577 [5.8%] phlebitis and 55 [0.1%] extravasation). PIVC failure was more frequent in female patients (42%), admitted to medical wards, unscheduled admissions, longer catheter dwell time (median 7.3 vs 2.2 days) and those with lower levels of nurse staffing coverage (mean 60.2 vs 71.5). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the female gender, medical ward admission, catheter dwell time, haemodynamic instability, uncontrolled pain, communication disorders, a high risk of haemorrhage, mental impairments, and a lack of caregiver support were independent factors associated with PIVC failure. Moreover, higher nurse staffing were a protective factor against PIVC failure (AUC, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.74). CONCLUSION: About 6% of patients presented PIVC failure during hospitalisation. Several complexity factors were associated with PIVC failure and lower nurse staffing levels were identified in patients with PIVC failure. Institutions should consider that prior identification of care complexity individual factors and nurse staffing coverage could be associated with a reduced risk of PIVC failure.


Sujet(s)
Cathétérisme périphérique , Humains , Femelle , Mâle , Études rétrospectives , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Adulte d'âge moyen , Sujet âgé , Facteurs de risque , Adulte , Affectation du personnel et organisation du temps de travail , Panne d'appareillage/statistiques et données numériques , Personnel infirmier hospitalier/statistiques et données numériques , Hospitalisation/statistiques et données numériques , Espagne/épidémiologie
9.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 5: CD013023, 2024 05 23.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38780138

RÉSUMÉ

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.


Sujet(s)
Bandages , Infections sur cathéters , Cathétérisme périphérique , Polyuréthanes , Essais contrôlés randomisés comme sujet , Humains , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme périphérique/instrumentation , Infections sur cathéters/prévention et contrôle , Biais (épidémiologie) , Panne d'appareillage
10.
PLoS One ; 19(5): e0300425, 2024.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38709807

RÉSUMÉ

INTRODUCTION: Deep Venous Thrombosis (DVT) due to Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) is one of the most threatening complications after device insertion. OBJECTIVE: To assess the rate of PICC-associated DVT and analyze the risk factors associated with this event in cancer and critically ill patients. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive, retrospective cohort study with 11,588 PICCs from December 2014 to December 2019. Patients ≥ 18 years receiving a PICC were included. Pre-and post-puncture variables were collected and a logistic regression was used to identify the independent factors associated with the risk of DVT. RESULTS: The DVT prevalence was 1.8% (n = 213). The median length of PICC use was 15.3 days. The median age was 75 years (18; 107) and 52% were men, 53.5% were critically ill and 29.1% oncological patients. The most common indications for PICC's were intravenous antibiotics (79.1%). Notably, 91.5% of PICC showed a catheter-to-vein ratio of no more than 33%. The tip location method with intracavitary electrocardiogram was used in 43%. Most catheters (67.9%) were electively removed at the end of intravenous therapy. After adjusting for cancer profile ou chemotherapy, regression anaysis revealed that age (OR 1.011; 95% CI 1.002-1.020), previous DVT (OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.12-3.44) and obstruction of the device (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.05-2.42) were independent factors associated with PICC-associated DVT, whereas the use of an anticoagulant regimen was a protective variable (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.54-0.99). CONCLUSION: PICC is a safe and suitable intravenous device for medium and long-term therapy, with low rates of DVT even in a cohort of critically ill and cancer patients.


Sujet(s)
Cathétérisme périphérique , Thrombose veineuse , Humains , Mâle , Femelle , Sujet âgé , Études rétrospectives , Thrombose veineuse/étiologie , Thrombose veineuse/épidémiologie , Adulte d'âge moyen , Brésil/épidémiologie , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Facteurs de risque , Adulte , Sujet âgé de 80 ans ou plus , Tumeurs/complications , Tumeurs/traitement médicamenteux , Cathétérisme veineux central/effets indésirables , Maladie grave , Adolescent , Jeune adulte , Prévalence
11.
J Infus Nurs ; 47(3): 190-199, 2024.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38744244

RÉSUMÉ

This study aimed to compare patients' experience of pain during ultrasound (US)-guided peripheral venipuncture versus conventional peripheral venipuncture. This randomized clinical trial was conducted at a public university hospital in 2021. Adult patients with indication for intravenous therapy compatible with peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) were included: intervention group (IG), US peripheral venipuncture executed by specialist nurses; control group (CG), conventional peripheral venipuncture executed by clinical practice nurses. The primary outcome was patient experience of pain during the procedure and patient experience related to the PIVC placement method. Sixty-four patients were included, 32 for each group. The pain experienced was none-to-mild in the IG for 25 patients (78.1%) and moderate-to-severe in the CG for 21 patients (65.7%; P < .001). The overall pain rating was 2 (1-3) in the IG and 4 (3-6) in the CG (P < .001). The recommendation of the procedure in IG (net promoter score [NPS] + 90.6%) versus CG (NPS + 18.8%) was considered excellent and good, respectively (P < .001). Patients had less pain and significantly recommended the US-guided procedure. Patient experience with US-guided PIVC, performed by a specialist nurse, was superior to that of conventional peripheral venipuncture.


Sujet(s)
Phlébotomie , Échographie interventionnelle , Humains , Femelle , Mâle , Phlébotomie/effets indésirables , Adulte d'âge moyen , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Adulte , Mesure de la douleur , Douleur/prévention et contrôle , Gestion de la douleur/méthodes , Sujet âgé
12.
Perfusion ; 39(1_suppl): 23S-38S, 2024 Apr.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38651584

RÉSUMÉ

Limb ischaemia is a clinically relevant complication of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) with femoral artery cannulation. No selective distal perfusion or other advanced techniques were used in the past to maintain adequate distal limb perfusion. A more recent trend is the shift from the reactive or emergency management to the pro-active or prophylactic placement of a distal perfusion cannula to avoid or reduce limb ischaemia-related complications. Multiple alternative cannulation techniques to the distal perfusion cannula have been developed to maintain distal limb perfusion, including end-to-side grafting, external or endovascular femoro-femoral bypass, retrograde limb perfusion (e.g., via the posterior tibial, dorsalis pedis or anterior tibial artery), and, more recently, use of a bidirectional cannula. Venous congestion has also been recognized as a potential contributing factor to limb ischaemia development and specific techniques have been described with facilitated venous drainage or bilateral cannulation being the most recent, to reduce or avoid venous stasis as a contributor to impaired limb perfusion. Advances in monitoring techniques, such as near-infrared spectroscopy and duplex ultrasound analysis, have been applied to improve decision-making regarding both the monitoring and management of limb ischaemia. This narrative review describes the evolution of techniques used for distal limb perfusion during peripheral VA ECMO.


Sujet(s)
Oxygénation extracorporelle sur oxygénateur à membrane , Artère fémorale , Humains , Oxygénation extracorporelle sur oxygénateur à membrane/méthodes , Perfusion/méthodes , Cathétérisme/méthodes , Ischémie/prévention et contrôle , Ischémie/étiologie , Adulte , Cathétérisme périphérique/méthodes , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Membres/vascularisation
15.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 17(8): 979-988, 2024 Apr 22.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38658126

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) sustain comparable improvements in health status over 5 years after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or SAVR. Whether a similar long-term benefit is observed among intermediate-risk AS patients is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess health status outcomes through 5 years in intermediate risk patients treated with a self-expanding TAVR prosthesis or SAVR using data from the SURTAVI (Surgical Replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial. METHODS: Intermediate-risk patients randomized to transfemoral TAVR or SAVR in the SURTAVI trial had disease-specific health status assessed at baseline, 30 days, and annually to 5 years using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). Health status was compared between groups using fixed effects repeated measures modelling. RESULTS: Of the 1,584 patients (TAVR, n = 805; SAVR, n = 779) included in the analysis, health status improved more rapidly after TAVR compared with SAVR. However, by 1 year, both groups experienced large health status benefits (mean change in KCCQ-Overall Summary Score (KCCQ-OS) from baseline: TAVR: 20.5 ± 22.4; SAVR: 20.5 ± 22.2). This benefit was sustained, albeit modestly attenuated, at 5 years (mean change in KCCQ-OS from baseline: TAVR: 15.4 ± 25.1; SAVR: 14.3 ± 24.2). There were no significant differences in health status between the cohorts at 1 year or beyond. Similar findings were observed in the KCCQ subscales, although a substantial attenuation of benefit was noted in the physical limitation subscale over time in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In intermediate-risk AS patients, both transfemoral TAVR and SAVR resulted in comparable and durable health status benefits to 5 years. Further research is necessary to elucidate the mechanisms for the small decline in health status noted at 5 years compared with 1 year in both groups. (Safety and Efficacy Study of the Medtronic CoreValve® System in the Treatment of Severe, Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Intermediate Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement [SURTAVI]; NCT01586910).


Sujet(s)
Sténose aortique , Valve aortique , Artère fémorale , État de santé , Prothèse valvulaire cardiaque , Qualité de vie , Récupération fonctionnelle , Indice de gravité de la maladie , Remplacement valvulaire aortique par cathéter , Humains , Sténose aortique/chirurgie , Sténose aortique/imagerie diagnostique , Sténose aortique/physiopathologie , Femelle , Mâle , Facteurs temps , Remplacement valvulaire aortique par cathéter/effets indésirables , Remplacement valvulaire aortique par cathéter/instrumentation , Résultat thérapeutique , Sujet âgé , Sujet âgé de 80 ans ou plus , Facteurs de risque , Valve aortique/chirurgie , Valve aortique/physiopathologie , Valve aortique/imagerie diagnostique , Appréciation des risques , Implantation de valve prothétique cardiaque/instrumentation , Implantation de valve prothétique cardiaque/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Ponctions , Conception de prothèse
16.
Br J Nurs ; 33(7): S18-S26, 2024 Apr 04.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38578942

RÉSUMÉ

Occasionally, the administration of intravenous (IV) therapies can go wrong. Infiltration or extravasation is a complication when a drug or IV therapy leaks into the tissues surrounding the vascular access device. Extravasation can cause serious and often life-changing injuries. Extravasation is often associated with systemic anti-cancer therapy but non-chemotherapy drugs have been reported as having a greater risk of serious complications. This study outlines the first UK Infusion unit evaluation of the ivWatch infusion monitoring device which was undertaken from August 2023 to January 2024. Out of 2254 infusions monitored with ivWatch, the device prevented 122 cases of infiltration and extravasation from causing any harm to the patient, corresponding to a 5.4% 'check IV' notification rate.


Sujet(s)
Cathétérisme périphérique , Soins infirmiers , Dispositifs d'accès vasculaires , Humains , Perfusions veineuses , Extravasation de produits diagnostiques ou thérapeutiques , Dispositifs d'accès vasculaires/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables
17.
Crit Care Sci ; 36: e20240235en, 2024.
Article de Anglais, Portugais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38597484

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: Newborn infants admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit require arterial cannulation for hemodynamic monitoring and blood sampling. Arterial access is achieved through catheterization of umbilical or peripheral arteries. Peripheral artery cannulation is performed in critically ill newborns, but artery localization and cannulation is often challenging and unsuccessful. Therefore, increasing the internal diameter and preventing vasospasm are important for successful peripheral artery cannulation in neonates. Topical glyceryl trinitrate has the potential to increase cannulation success by relaxing arterial smooth muscles and thus increasing the internal diameter. We aim to conduct a pilot randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of topycal glyceryl trinitrate in increasing the diameter of the radial artery in neonates. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will be a single-center, observer-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted in the neonatal intensive care unit of Perth Children's Hospital, Western Australia. A total of 60 infants born at >34 weeks of gestation who are admitted for elective surgery or medical reasons and for whom a peripheral arterial line is needed for sampling or blood pressure monitoring will be recruited after informed parental consent is obtained. The primary outcome will be the change in radial arterial diameter from baseline to postintervention. Secondary outcomes will be the absolute and percentage change from baseline in the radial arterial diameter in both limbs and safety (hypotension and methemoglobinemia). DISCUSSION: This will be the first randomized controlled trial evaluating the use of topical glyceryl trinitrate to facilitate peripheral artery cannulation in neonates. If our pilot randomized controlled trial confirms the benefits of glyceryl trinitrate patches, it will pave the way for large multicenter randomized controlled trials in this field.


Sujet(s)
Cathétérisme périphérique , Nitroglycérine , Nourrisson , Enfant , Humains , Nouveau-né , Nitroglycérine/usage thérapeutique , Artère radiale , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Australie occidentale , Essais contrôlés randomisés comme sujet , Études multicentriques comme sujet
18.
Expert Rev Med Devices ; 21(5): 447-453, 2024 May.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38661659

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are superior to central venous catheters (CVCs); therefore, we compared post-implantation complications between CVC and PICC groups. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients who received CVCs or PICCs between April 2010 and March 2018 were identified from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, a national inpatient database in Japan. The outcomes of interest included catheter infection, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and phlebitis. Propensity score overlap weighting was used to balance patient backgrounds. Outcomes were compared using logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: We identified 164,185 eligible patients, including 161,605 (98.4%) and 2,580 (1.6%) in the CVC and PICC groups, respectively. The PICC group was more likely to have overall complications (odds ratio [OR], 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-2.19), pulmonary embolism (OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.38-3.89), deep vein thrombosis (OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.16-2.99), and phlebitis (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.27-2.32) than the CVC group. There was no significant intergroup difference in catheter infection (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.39-3.04). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PICCs had a significantly greater incidence of complications than did those with CVCs. Further research is necessary to explore the factors contributing to these complications.


Sujet(s)
Cathétérisme veineux central , Cathétérisme périphérique , Bases de données factuelles , Unités de soins intensifs , Score de propension , Humains , Mâle , Femelle , Sujet âgé , Adulte d'âge moyen , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Cathétérisme veineux central/effets indésirables , Voies veineuses centrales/effets indésirables , Phlébite/étiologie , Phlébite/épidémiologie , Japon/épidémiologie , Infections sur cathéters/épidémiologie , Infections sur cathéters/étiologie , Embolie pulmonaire/étiologie , Embolie pulmonaire/épidémiologie , Thrombose veineuse/étiologie , Thrombose veineuse/épidémiologie , Sujet âgé de 80 ans ou plus , Adulte
19.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 103(7): 1125-1137, 2024 Jun.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38639140

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: Despite the use of two crossed Perclose ProGlide™ (Abbott Vascular Devices) is the most widespread technique to close the main arterial access in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI), the safest and most effective strategy still remains much debated. AIMS: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the performance of a single Perclose ProGlide suture-mediated closure device to obtain femoral hemostasis after sheathless implantation of self-expanding transcatheter heart valves through their 14 F-equivalent fix delivery systems. METHODS: This prospective observational study included 439 patients undergoing TF-TAVI at the "Montevergine" Clinic of Mercogliano, Italy. All patients underwent hemostasis of the large-bore access using a single Perclose ProGlide with preclose technique, after sheathless implantation of self-expanding transcatheter heart valves through 14 F-equivalent fix delivery systems. A multidetector computed tomography analysis of size, tortuosity, atherosclerotic, and calcification burdens of the ilio-femoral access route was made by a dedicated corelab. Vascular complications (VCs), percutaneous closure device (PCD) failure, and bleedings were adjudicated by a clinical events committee. RESULTS: A total of 81 different VCs were observed in 60 patients (13.7%); among these, 41 (5% of patients) were categorized as major. PCD failure occurred in 14 patients (3.2%). At the logistic regression analysis, no predictors of PCD failure have been identified. CONCLUSION: This registry suggests that the use of a single suture-mediated closure device could be considered a safe and efficient technique to achieve access site hemostasis in patients undergoing TF-TAVI through 14 F-equivalent fix delivery systems.


Sujet(s)
Cathétérisme périphérique , Artère fémorale , Techniques d'hémostase , Ponctions , Techniques de suture , Remplacement valvulaire aortique par cathéter , Dispositifs de fermeture vasculaire , Humains , Artère fémorale/imagerie diagnostique , Mâle , Femelle , Remplacement valvulaire aortique par cathéter/instrumentation , Remplacement valvulaire aortique par cathéter/effets indésirables , Études prospectives , Sujet âgé de 80 ans ou plus , Résultat thérapeutique , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Sujet âgé , Techniques d'hémostase/instrumentation , Techniques d'hémostase/effets indésirables , Techniques de suture/effets indésirables , Techniques de suture/instrumentation , Facteurs de risque , Facteurs temps , Valve aortique/chirurgie , Valve aortique/imagerie diagnostique , Valve aortique/physiopathologie , Italie , Conception d'appareillage , Sténose aortique/chirurgie , Sténose aortique/imagerie diagnostique , Sténose aortique/physiopathologie , Hémorragie/étiologie , Hémorragie/prévention et contrôle
20.
Clin Infect Dis ; 78(6): 1640-1655, 2024 Jun 14.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38593192

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) contribute substantially to the global burden of infections. This systematic review assessed 24 infection prevention and control (IPC) interventions to prevent PIVC-associated infections and other complications. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, WHO Global Index Medicus, CINAHL, and reference lists for controlled studies from 1 January 1980-16 March 2023. We dually selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and rated the certainty of evidence (COE). For outcomes with 3 or more trials, we conducted Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: 105 studies met our prespecified eligibility criteria, addressing 16 of the 24 research questions; no studies were identified for 8 research questions. Based on findings of low to high COE, wearing gloves reduced the risk of overall adverse events related to insertion compared with no gloves (1 non-randomized controlled trial [non-RCT]; adjusted risk ratio [RR], .52; 95% CI, .33-.85), and catheter removal based on defined schedules potentially resulted in a lower phlebitis/thrombophlebitis incidence (10 RCTs; RR, 0.74, 95% credible interval, .49-1.01) compared with clinically indicated removal in adults. In neonates, chlorhexidine reduced the phlebitis score compared with non-chlorhexidine-containing disinfection (1 RCT; 0.14 vs 0.68; P = .003). No statistically significant differences were found for other measures. CONCLUSIONS: Despite their frequent use and concern about PIVC-associated complications, this review underscores the urgent need for more high-quality studies on effective IPC methods regarding safe PIVC management. In the absence of valid evidence, adherence to standard precaution measures and documentation remain the most important principles to curb PIVC complications. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: The protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/exdb4).


Sujet(s)
Infections sur cathéters , Cathétérisme périphérique , Humains , Infections sur cathéters/prévention et contrôle , Cathétérisme périphérique/effets indésirables , Prévention des infections/méthodes , Phlébite/prévention et contrôle , Phlébite/étiologie , Phlébite/épidémiologie , Théorème de Bayes
SÉLECTION CITATIONS
DÉTAIL DE RECHERCHE
...