Handheld Ultrasound Devices for Peripheral Intravenous Cannulation: A Scoping Review.

Ultrasound-guided insertion of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) is recommended for patients with difficult intravenous access, but access to ultrasound equipment is often limited to specialty departments. Compact, affordable handheld ultrasound devices are available, but the extent of their clinical adoption and impact on patient outcomes is unknown. This scoping review aimed to explore evidence regarding handheld and pocket ultrasound devices for PIVC insertion. Databases were searched for studies published in English between January 2000 and January 2023 evaluating handheld or pocket ultrasound devices weighing ≤3 kg for PIVC insertion. Data were extracted using standardized forms and summarized using descriptive statistics. Seventeen studies reporting the use of handheld or pocket ultrasound devices were identified. Most studies were conducted in adult inpatient facilities; 3 included pediatrics, and 2 reported out-of-hospital use. Participants with difficult intravenous access featured in 9 studies. Ultrasound training programs were described in 12 studies, with competency defined by number of successful PIVC insertions. Five studies reported clinician and/or patient perspectives. Ultrasound for PIVC insertion is not widely accessible in nonspecialist areas, but more compact and affordable handheld models could provide a solution, especially for patients with difficult access. More research evidence using handheld ultrasound is needed.

Peripheral intravenous catheter infection and failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral intravenous catheters are the most frequently used invasive device in nursing practice, yet are commonly associated with complications. We performed a systematic review to determine the prevalence of peripheral intravenous catheter infection and all-cause failure. METHODS: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched for observational studies and randomised controlled trials that reported peripheral intravenous catheter related infections or failure. The review was limited to English language and articles published from the year 2000. Pooled estimates were calculated with random-effects models. Meta-analysis of observation studies in epidemiology guidelines and the Cochrane process for randomised controlled trials were used to guide the review. Prospero registration number: CRD42022349956. FINDINGS: Our search retrieved 34,725 studies. Of these, 41 observational studies and 28 randomised controlled trials (478,586 peripheral intravenous catheters) met inclusion criteria. The pooled proportion of catheter-associated bloodstream infections was 0.028 % (95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.009-0.081; 38 studies), or 4.40 catheter-associated bloodstream infections per 100,000 catheter-days (20 studies, 95 % CI: 3.47-5.58). Local infection was reported in 0.150 % of peripheral intravenous catheters (95 % CI: 0.047-0.479, 30 studies) with an incidence rate of 65.1 per 100,000 catheter-days (16 studies; 95 % CI: 49.2-86.2). All cause peripheral intravenous catheter failure before treatment completion occurred in 36.4 % of catheters (95 % CI: 31.7-41.3, 53 studies) with an overall incidence rate of 4.42 per 100 catheter days (78,891 catheter days; 19 studies; 95 % CI: 4.27-4.57). INTERPRETATION: Peripheral intravenous catheter failure is a significant worldwide problem, affecting one in three catheters. Per peripheral intravenous catheter, infection occurrence was low, however, with over two billion catheters used globally each year, the absolute number of infections and associated burden remains high. Substantial and systemwide efforts are needed to address peripheral intravenous catheter infection and failure and the sequelae of treatment disruption, increased health costs and poor patient outcomes.

The impact of a structured assessment and decision tool (I-DECIDED®) on improving care of peripheral intravenous catheters: A multicenter, interrupted time-series study.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral intravenous catheters are the most widely used invasive device in hospitals but have serious risks. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a structured assessment and decision tool (I-DECIDED®) improves daily peripheral intravenous catheter assessment and care decisions. DESIGN: Prospective, interrupted time-series study. SETTINGS: Seven adult inpatient wards in three Australian hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 825 adults with 867 peripheral intravenous catheters. METHODS: Between August 2017 and December 2018, peripheral intravenous catheter assessments and chart audits were undertaken with informed patient consent. Following a 4-month pre-intervention period (with 2-weekly measures), the I-DECIDED® tool was implemented over 3 months (no data collection) using multiple strategies (stakeholder meetings, vascular access device form, education sessions, ward champions, lanyard cards, and posters), followed by a 4-month post-intervention period (with 2-weekly measures). Primary outcomes were device utilization (number of peripheral intravenous catheters per total number of patients screened); idle/unused catheters; insertion site complications, substandard dressing quality; and primary bloodstream infections. RESULTS: Of 2055 patients screened, 1175 (57.2%) had a peripheral intravenous catheter, and 825 patients (867 catheters) consented and were included in the final analysis. Device utilization increased from 42.0% of catheters at baseline to 49.6% post-intervention (absolute risk difference [ARD] 7.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.8, 10.3; relative risk [RR] 1.18, 95% CI 1.11, 1.25; p < 0.001). The proportion of idle catheters reduced from 12.7% to 8.3% (ARD -4.4%, 95% CI -8.5, -0.3; RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44, 0.97; p = 0.035). Peripheral intravenous catheter complications reduced from 16.1% to 10.9% (ARD -5.2%, 95% CI -9.7, -0.6; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48, 0.96; p = 0.026). Substandard dressings reduced from 24.6% to 19.5% (ARD -5.2%, 95% CI -10.7, 0.4; RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.61, 1.02; p = 0.067). Only one primary bloodstream infection occurred (post-intervention). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a comprehensive device assessment and decision tool (I-DECIDED®) reduced idle catheters and catheter complications, despite higher device utilization. Dressing quality improved but was not statistically significant. Further implementation of the tool could improve hospital safety for patients with an intravenous catheter. ANZCTR TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12617000067370. Date of registration 13 January 2017. Date of first data collection 3rd August 2017. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: #IDECIDEDassessment reduces prevalence of idle peripheral catheters and device complications.

Association between parenteral nutrition-containing intravenous lipid emulsion and bloodstream infections in patients with single-lumen central venous access: A secondary analysis of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Distinguishing primary bloodstream infections (BSIs) related to central venous access devices (CVADs) from those that occur through other mechanisms, such as a damaged mucosal barrier, is difficult. METHODS: Secondary analysis was conducted on data from patients with CVADs that were collected for a large, randomized trial. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received parenteral nutrition (PN)-containing intravenous lipid emulsion (ILE) and those who did not have PN-containing ILE. This study investigated the influence of PN-containing ILE (ILE PN) on primary BSIs in patients with a CVAD. RESULTS: Of the 807 patients, 180 (22%) received ILE PN. Most (627/807; 73%) were recruited from the hematology and hematopoietic stem cell transplant unit, followed by surgical (90/807; 11%), trauma and burns (61/807; 8%), medical (44/807; 5%), and oncology (23/807; 3%). When primary BSI was differentiated as a central line-associated BSI (CLABSI) or mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed BSI (MBI-LCBI), the incidence of CLABSI was similar in the ILE PN and non-ILE PN groups (15/180 [8%] vs 57/627 [9%]; P = 0.88) and the incidence of MBI-LCBI was significantly different between groups (31/180 [17%] ILE PN vs 41/627 [7%] non-ILE PN; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that twice as many primary BSIs in ILE PN patients are due to MBIs than CVADs. It is important to consider the MBI-LCBI classification, as some CLABSI prevention efforts aimed at CVADs for the ILE PN population may be better directed to gastrointestinal tract protection interventions.

Development of a Wound Assessment Tool for Use in Adults at End of Life: A Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Some patients at end of life (EOL) develop wounds known as Kennedy terminal ulcers, terminal ulcers, and Skin Changes At Life's End. However, there is ambiguity around the defining wound characteristics of these conditions and a lack of validated clinical assessment tools available to identify them. OBJECTIVE: To gain consensus on the definition and characteristics of EOL wounds and establish the face and content validity of a wound assessment tool for use in adults at EOL. METHODS: Using a reactive online Delphi technique, international wound experts reviewed the 20 items in the tool. Over two iterative rounds, experts assessed item clarity, relevance, and importance using a four-point content validity index. The content validity index scores were calculated for each item, with a level of 0.78 or higher signifying panel consensus. RESULTS: Round 1 included 16 panelists (100.0%). The agreement for item relevance and importance ranged from 0.54% to 0.94%, and item clarity scored between 0.25% and 0.94%. Following round 1, four items were removed, and seven others reworded. Other suggestions included changing the tool name and including Kennedy terminal ulcer, terminal ulcer, and Skin Changes At Life's End in the EOL wound definition. In round 2, the now 13 panel members agreed with the final 16 items included and suggested minor wording changes. CONCLUSIONS: This tool could provide clinicians with an initially validated tool to accurately assess EOL wounds and gather much needed empirical prevalence data. Further research is needed to underpin accurate assessment and the development of evidence-based management strategies.

The burden of peripheral intravenous catheters in older hospital inpatients: A national cross-sectional study part of the ONE MILLION GLOBAL PERIPHERAL INTRAVENOUS CATHETERS COLLABORATION.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the burden of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) in older hospitalised patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional prospective observational study (2014/2015) to describe the characteristics, indications and outcomes of PIVCs among patients aged ≥65 from 65 Australian hospitals. RESULTS: Amongst 2179 individual PIVCs (in 2041 patients, mean age 77.6 years, 45% female, 58% in NSW), 43% were inserted by doctors and 74% used that day, meaning 25% were 'idle'. Overall, 18% (393/2179) exhibited signs of PIVC-related complications. Most commonly exhibited PIVC-related complications were tenderness (4.1%) and local redness (1.8%). Nearly one in three (29.1%) dressings was soiled, loosened or had come off, and only 36.8% had the time and date documented on the dressing. Both infusing IV medications (aOR 1.74, 95% CI 1.28-2.38, p < 0.001) and inserting the PIVC in a non-upper limb vein (aOR 3.40 compared to forearm [reference site], 95% CI 1.62-7.17, p < 0.001) were independently associated with PIVC failure. Phlebitis was exhibited in 7% (154) of the patients. Only infusing intravenous medications increased the likelihood of developing symptoms of phlebitis (aOR 1.61, 95% CI 1.01-2.57, p = 0.05). Increasing age was inversely associated with symptoms of phlebitis. Among the 1575 patients (79%) who rated their PIVC experience using the Likert scale 0-10 (where 10 = 'best possible'), the median score was 8 (IQR 6-10). Age in highest quartile (>84 years) was independently associated with lower likelihood of a high score (aOR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54-0.94, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Given 1 in 5 PIVCs were identified with having complications, further research should focus on optimising PIVC use in older patients.

Barriers and facilitators for implementing peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) appropriateness guidelines: A longitudinal survey study from 34 Michigan hospitals.

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are prevalent devices for medium-to-long-term intravenous therapy but are often associated with morbid and potentially lethal complications. This multi-center study sought to identify barriers and facilitators of implementing evidence-based appropriateness criteria to improve PICC safety and patient outcomes in a pay-for-performance model. Participating hospitals received an online toolkit with five recommendations: establishing a vascular access committee; implementing a clinical decision tool for PICC appropriateness; avoiding short-term PICC use (≤5 days); increasing use of single-lumen PICCs; and avoiding PICC placement in patients with chronic kidney disease. Longitudinal online surveys conducted biannually October 2014-November 2018 tracked implementation efforts. A total of 306 unique surveys from 34 hospitals were completed. The proportion of hospitals with a dedicated committee overseeing PICC appropriateness increased from 53% to 97%. Overall, 94% of hospitals implemented an initiative to reduce short-term and multi-lumen PICC use, and 91% integrated kidney function into PICC placement decisions. Barriers to implementation included: achieving agreement from diverse disciplines, competing hospital priorities, and delays in modifying electronic systems to enable appropriate PICC ordering. Provision of quarterly benchmarking reports, a decision algorithm, access to an online toolkit, and presence of local champion support were cited as crucial in improving practice. Structured quality improvement efforts including a multidisciplinary vascular access committee, clear targets, local champions, and support from an online education toolkit have led to sustained PICC appropriateness and improved patient safety.

Disinfection of needleless connectors to reduce Staphylococcus aureus bacterial load.

HIGHLIGHTS: Compare effectiveness of chemical disinfectants in reducing S. aureus. Five disinfectants reduced the bacterial load, especially chlorhexidine solutions. Focus on Brazilian clinical practice of needleless connector disinfection. PURPOSE: This study aimed to gain further knowledge about the comparative effectiveness of chemical disinfectants in reducing the bacterial load of NCs inoculated with S. aureus. METHODS: Disinfection of needleless connectors was undertaken in vitro against S. aureus comparing 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA), 70% ethanol, 0.5% and 2% chlorhexidine in 70% IPA applied with gauze, and 70% IPA single-use cap (Site-Scrub®). RESULTS: All disinfectants reduced the bacterial load (P<0.001), especially the chlorhexidine solutions. Mechanical friction should follow guidelines. CONCLUSION: This study found that all tested disinfectants effectively reduced the bacterial load and more clinical studies must be developed with a focus on the Brazilian clinical practice of needleless connector disinfection.

Mapping progress in intravascular catheter quality surveillance: An Australian case study of electronic medical record data linkage.

Background and significance: Intravascular (IV) catheters are the most invasive medical device in healthcare. Localized priority-setting related to IV catheter quality surveillance is a key objective of recent healthcare reform in Australia. We sought to determine the plausibility of using electronic health record (EHR) data for catheter surveillance by mapping currently available data across state-wide platforms. This work has identified barriers and facilitators to a state-wide EHR surveillance initiative. Materials and methods: Data variables were generated and mapped from routinely used EHR sources across Queensland, Australia through a systematic search of gray literature and expert consultation with clinical information specialists. EHR systems were eligible for inclusion if they collected data related to IV catheter insertion, care, or outcomes of hospitalized patients. Generated variables were mapped against international recommendations for IV catheter surveillance, with data linkage and data export capacity narratively summarized. Results: We identified five EHR systems, namely, iEMR, MetaVision ICU®, Multiprac, RiskMan, and the Nephrology Registry. Systems were used across jurisdictions and hospital wards. Data linkage was not evident across systems. Extraction processes for catheter data were not standardized, lacking clear and reliable extraction techniques. In combination, EHR systems collected 43/50 international variables recommended for catheter surveillance, however, individual systems collected a median of 24/50 (IQR 22, 30) variables. We did not identify integrated clinical analytic systems (incorporating machine learning) to support clinical decision making or for risk stratification (e.g., catheter-related infection). Conclusion: Current data linkage across EHR systems limits the development of an IV catheter quality surveillance system to provide timely data related to catheter complications and harm. To facilitate reliable and timely surveillance of catheter outcomes using clinical informatics, substantial work is needed to overcome existing barriers and transform health surveillance.

Peripheral intravenous catheters in the care of oncology and haematology patients.

Aim: To determine peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) characteristics, complications and risk factors among patients in cancer units. Methods: A secondary analysis of a global, cross-sectional study (127 hospitals in 24 countries). Participants (≥18 years) admitted to cancer units were assessed once for PIVC characteristics and the presence of complications. Variables included patient demographics, device characteristics, treatment details, and device and/or site complications. PIVC characteristics were presented using qualitative descriptors; mixed-effects logistic regression models determined risk factors for PIVC complications. Results: In total, 1,807 participants (1,812 PIVCs) were included; 12% (n=215) of PIVCs presented with complications. Risk factors included: insertion by doctors; insertion in ED and ambulance/other locations; poor PIVC dressing integrity; dwell time ≥49 hours; and administration of colloids/blood products and antiemetics. Conclusions: At least one in ten PIVCs in cancer units present with complications; regular PIVC assessment and improved dressing integrity is likely to reduce risk and improve outcomes.

Awareness of Peripheral Intravenous Catheters Among Nurses, Physicians, and Students.

OBJECTIVES: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are frequently used to meet patients' short-term health care needs. However, many PIVCs are not promptly removed at the completion of treatment, placing patients at risk of avoidable harm from serious complications including local and systemic infection. This study aims to report the proportion and accuracy of health care staff/students awareness of the presence of their patient's PIVC. METHODS: We asked staff/students to recall the presence or absence of a PIVC in a patient under their care, as well as details of the date of insertion and PIVC location. We recorded concordance of responses with direct observations. To achieve this, face-to-face interviews were conducted with clinical staff/students at 2 adult hospitals. RESULTS: Overall, 90% (n = 216) of staff responses (94% of nurses, 100% of nursing students, 76% of medical staff) correctly identified the presence/absence of a PIVC. Clinicians correctly identified the PIVC location 55% (n = 71) of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Health care services must recognize the implications of this lack of awareness and implement and evaluate tailored quality improvement efforts to address this.

I-DECIDED®-a decision tool for assessment and management of invasive devices in the hospital setting.

Indwelling medical devices, including vascular access and urinary catheters, pose a risk for infection, and therefore daily assessment and consideration of their continued need is a patient safety priority. The I-DECIDED® device assessment and decision tool is an evidence-based checklist, designed to improve the assessment, care and timely removal of invasive devices in acute hospitalized patients. This paper explains each step of the tool, with rationale for inclusion.

Peripheral vascular catheter use in Latin America (the vascular study): A multinational cross-sectional study.

Background: Peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion is one of the most common clinical procedures worldwide, yet little data are available from Latin America. Our aim was to describe processes and practices regarding PIVC use in hospitalized patients related to hospital guidelines, characteristics of PIVC inserters, prevalence of PIVC complications, and idle PIVCs. Methods: In 2019 we conducted a multinational, cross-sectional study of adult and pediatric patients with a PIVC in hospitals from five Latin American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Mexico. We used two data collection tools to collect hospital guidelines and patient-specific data on the day of the study. The vessel health and preservation (VHP) model guided synthesis of the study aims/questions and suggested opportunities for improvement. Results: A total of 9,620 PIVCs in adult (86%) and pediatric inpatients in 132 hospitals were assessed. Routine replacement 8-72 hourly was recommended for adults in 22% of hospitals, rather than evidence-based clinical assessment-based durations, and 69% of hospitals allowed the use of non-sterile tape rather than the international standard of a sterile dressing. The majority (52%) of PIVCs were inserted by registered nurses (RNs), followed by nursing assistants/technicians (41%). Eight percent of PIVCs had pain, hyperemia, or edema, 6% had blood in the extension tubing/connector, and 3% had dried blood around the device. Most PIVCs had been inserted for intravenous medications (81%) or fluids (59%) in the previous 24 h, but 9% were redundant. Conclusion: Given the variation in policies, processes and practices across countries and participating hospitals, clinical guidelines should be available in languages other than English to support clinician skills and knowledge to improve PIVC safety and quality. Existing and successful vascular access societies should be encouraged to expand their reach and encourage other countries to join in multinational communities of practice.

Association between emergency department length of stay and patient outcomes: A systematic review.

In this review, we investigate associations between time spent in the emergency department (ED) and patient reported outcomes. ED staff provide initial assessment, treatment and referral to patients presenting with an acute status to the hospital 24 h a day. ED length of stay, including ED boarding, and treatment received in the ED may affect patient outcomes. In this review we considered published studies that explored the association of ED length of stay of individuals of any age with their subsequent outcomes, including mortality and inpatient length of stay (IPLOS). Joanna Briggs Institute methods for systematic reviews of association were followed. Search strategies were developed to identify studies published in English since 2000 for inclusion. Two reviewers assessed the studies for inclusion and methodological quality and extracted data independently. In total, 34 studies were included in the review, including one case-control, one analytical cross-sectional, and 32 retrospective cohort studies, with a total sample size of 2,308,840 patients. Overall, there were variable associations of time spent in the ED and mortality, IPLOS, time-to-treatment and adverse events. However, findings indicated that older people are at risk for longer ED stays. They may also experience higher mortality. Specific focus should be placed upon elderly people in the ED, to reduce their exposure to the ED environment where possible and to implement focused initiatives that address their specific and complex treatment needs. We conclude that the diversity of individual settings and health systems will require locally defined and relevant solutions to locally identified issues.

Defining and Describing Terminal Ulcers in Adults at End of Life: An Integrative Review.

OBJECTIVE: The authors identify and synthesize the published primary literature on unavoidable skin breakdown and end-of-life wounds known as terminal ulcers. DATA SOURCES: Sources were identified through a systematic search of the Cochrane Library, Medline, ProQuest, EMBASE, CINAHL complete, and PubMed databases. STUDY SELECTION: The date limiters were set between 1984 and 2020 to locate primary qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed-methods studies on terminal ulcers. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators examined 180 sources and ultimately included four quantitative studies in this review. All were conducted in the US and published between 1989 and 2019. Retrospective chart audits of deceased patients' medical files were undertaken in three of the studies, and prospective observations were used in the fourth. DATA SYNTHESIS: Descriptive and inductive content analyses were conducted. Three categories emerged: (1) distinguishing the ulcer development patterns, (2) identifying the ulcer characteristics, and (3) delivering specialized and individualized end-of-life care. CONCLUSIONS: Limited primary evidence has been published on terminal ulcers. Pressure injuries and terminal ulcers have similar appearances, but their development differs significantly. The lack of a specific terminal ulcer assessment tool and staging system increases the risk of these unavoidable end-of-life wounds being incorrectly assessed and managed as pressure injuries. Further research on terminal ulcers is needed to inform clinical practice and ensure specialized care is delivered to patients who develop these wounds.

Understanding consumer preference for vascular access safety and quality measurement: an international survey.

Objectives The aim of this study was to examine patient perceptions regarding vascular access quality measurement. Methods A web-based, cross-sectional survey was performed using a convenience sample of healthcare consumers with vascular access experience, recruited from September 2019 to June 2020. Survey respondents were asked to rate the perceived importance of 50 vascular access data items, including patient demographics, clinical and device characteristics, and insertion, management and complication data. Data were ranked using a five-point Likert scale (1, least important; 5, most important), and are reported as median values. Respondents proposed additional items and explored broader perspectives using free-text responses, which were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Results In all, 68 consumers completed the survey. Participants were primarily female (82%), aged 40-49 years (29%) and living in Australia or New Zealand (84%). All respondents indicated that measuring the quality of vascular access care was important. Of the 50 items, 37 (74%) were perceived as 'most important' (median score 5), with measures of quality (i.e. outcomes and complications) rated highly (e.g. thrombosis and primary blood stream infection). Participants proposed 16 additional items. 'Gender' received the lowest perceived importance score (median score 3). Two themes emerged from the qualitative analysis of broader perspectives: (1) measurement of vascular access device complication severity and associated factors; and (2) patient experience. Conclusion Measuring vascular access quality and safety is important to consumers. Outcome and complication measures were rated 'most important', with respondents identifying a need for increased monitoring of their overall vascular access journey through the health system. What is known about the topic? The use of vascular access devices is common among hospitalised patients. Quality surveillance is not standardised, with no incorporation of patient preference. What does this paper add? We identify the data items consumers perceive as valuable to measure related to their vascular access journey; most importantly, consumers perceived the collecting of vascular access data as important. What are the implications for practitioners? Health services can use these data to develop platforms to monitor the quality and safety of vascular access care.

WoCoVA consensus on the clinical use of in-line filtration during intravenous infusions: Current evidence and recommendations for future research.

The need for filtering intravenous infusions has long been recognized in the field of venous access, though hard scientific evidence about the actual indications for in-line filters has been scarce. In the last few years, several papers and a few clinical studies have raised again this issue, suggesting that the time has come for a proper definition of the type of filtration, of its potential benefit, and of its proper indications in clinical practice. The WoCoVA Foundation, whose goal is to increase the global awareness on the risk of intravenous access and on patients' safety, developed the project of a consensus on intravenous filtration. A panel of experts in different aspects of intravenous infusion was chosen to express the current state of knowledge about filtration and to indicate the direction of future research in this field. The present document reports the final conclusions of the panel.

International recommendations for a vascular access minimum dataset: a Delphi consensus-building study.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding vascular access device use and outcomes are limited. In part, this gap reflects the absence of guidance on what variables should be collected to assess patient outcomes. We sought to derive international consensus on a vascular access minimum dataset. METHODS: A modified Delphi study with three rounds (two electronic surveys and a face-to-face consensus panel) was conducted involving international vascular access specialists. In Rounds 1 and 2, electronic surveys were distributed to healthcare professionals specialising in vascular access. Survey respondents were asked to rate the importance of variables, feasibility of data collection and acceptability of items, definitions and response options. In Round 3, a purposive expert panel met to review Round 1 and 2 ratings and reach consensus (defined as ≥70% agreement) on the final items to be included in a minimum dataset for vascular access devices. RESULTS: A total of 64 of 225 interdisciplinary healthcare professionals from 11 countries responded to Round 1 and 2 surveys (response rate of 34% and 29%, respectively). From the original 52 items, 50 items across five domains emerged from the Delphi procedure.Items related to demographic and clinical characteristics (n=5; eg, age), device characteristics (n=5; eg, device type), insertion (n=16; eg, indication), management (n=9; eg, dressing and securement), and complication and removal (n=15, eg, occlusion) were identified as requirements for a minimum dataset to track and evaluate vascular access device use and outcomes. CONCLUSION: We developed and internally validated a minimum dataset for vascular access device research. This study generated new knowledge to enable healthcare systems to collect relevant, useful and meaningful vascular access data. Use of this standardised approach can help benchmark clinical practice and target improvements worldwide.

Undergraduate nursing students' perceptions of the current content and pedagogical approaches used in PIVC education. A qualitative, descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: The peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) is the most frequently used invasive medical device. PIVCs fail for a variety of reasons and failure often results in serious adverse events leading to patient discomfort, delays in treatment, increased health care costs and even death. Undergraduate nurses assess and manage PIVCs as part of their clinical learning. To date, no study has explored undergraduate nurses' perceptions of the education they receive about PIVCs. AIM: We sought to critically explore the current state of education regarding PIVCs from the perspectives of undergraduate nurses. METHODS: This qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with third-year undergraduate nurses. Data were collected across two sites in Queensland, Australia. Fourteen face-to-face interviews were conducted and a modified 5-step qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data. FINDINGS: We identified three key domains relating to participants' experiences of PIVC education: 1) Universities provide foundational knowledge about PIVC assessment, management and removal; 2) Clinical practice consolidates and drives undergraduate nurses' knowledge, skills and confidence about PIVCs; and 3) inconsistencies in clinical practice and between individual clinicians impedes learning and knowledge translation about PIVCs. CONCLUSION: Nursing students benefit from theoretical content delivered in the university setting. Practical application of theory and skill development whilst on clinical placement is variable. The current undergraduate curriculum, related to management of patients with a PIVC, is disjointed and inconsistent and this inconsistency may negatively impact patient safety.