Pediatric invasive device utility and harm: a multi-site point prevalence survey.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Invasive devices are widely used in healthcare settings; however, pediatric patients are especially vulnerable to invasive device-associated harm. This study aimed to explore invasive device utility, prevalence, harm, and clinical practice across three Australian pediatric tertiary hospitals. METHODS: In 2022-2023, a multi-center, observational, rolling-point-prevalence survey was conducted. Fifty-per-cent of inpatients were systemically sampled by random allocation. Patients with devices were then followed for up to 3-days for device-related complications/failures and management/removal characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 285 patients audited, 78.2% had an invasive device (n = 412 devices), with a median of 1 device-per-patient (interquartile range 1-2), with a maximum of 13 devices-per-patient. Over half of devices were vascular access devices (n = 223; 54.1%), followed by gastrointestinal devices (n = 112; 27.2%). The point-prevalence of all device complications on Day 0 was 10.7% (44/412 devices) and period-prevalence throughout the audit period was 27.7% (114/412 devices). The period-prevalence of device failure was 13.4% (55/412 devices). CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted a high prevalence of invasive devices among hospitalized patients. One-in-ten devices failed during the audit period. These findings underscore the need for vigilant monitoring and improved strategies to minimize complications and enhance the safety of invasive devices in pediatric hospital settings. IMPACT: A high prevalence of invasive devices among hospitalized patients was reported. Of the 285 patients audited, almost 80% had an invasive device (total 412 devices), with a median of 1 device-per-patient and a maximum of 13 devices-per-patient. The most common devices used in pediatric healthcare are vascular access devices (n = 223; 54.1%), however, 16% (n = 36) of these devices failed, and one-third had complications. The point prevalence of all device complications at day 0 was 10.7% (44 out of 412 devices), with a period prevalence of 27.7% (114 out of 412 devices) throughout the audit period.

Use of central venous access devices outside of the pediatric intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Central venous access devices (CVAD) are associated with central line associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and venous thromboembolism (VTE). We identified trends in non-intensive care unit (ICU) CVAD utilization, described complication rates, and compared resources between low and high CVAD sites. METHODS: We combined data from the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) database and surveys from included hospitals. We analyzed 10-year trends in CVAD encounters for non-ICU children between 01/2012-12/2021 and described variation and complication rates between 01/2017-12/2021. Using Fisher's exact test, we compared resources between low and high CVAD users. RESULTS: CVAD use decreased from 6.3% to 3.8% of hospitalizations over 10 years. From 2017-2021, 67,830 encounters with CVAD were identified. Median age was 7 (IQR 2-13) years; 46% were female. Significant variation in CVAD utilization exists (range 1.4-16.9%). Rates of CLABSI and VTE were 4.0% and 3.4%, respectively. Survey responses from 33/41 (80%) hospitals showed 91% had vascular access teams, 30% used vascular access selection guides, and 70% used midline/long peripheral catheters. Low CVAD users were more likely to have a team guiding device selection (100% vs 43%, p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: CVAD utilization decreased over time. Significant variation in CVAD use remains and may be associated with hospital resources. IMPACT: Central venous access device (CVAD) use outside of the ICU is trending down; however, significant variation exists between institutions. Children with CVADs hospitalized on the acute care units had a CLABSI rate of 4% and VTE rate of 3.4%. 91% of surveyed institutions have a vascular access team; however, the services provided vary between institutions. Even though 70% of the surveyed institutions have the ability to place midline/long peripheral catheters, the majority use these catheters less than a few times per month. Institutions with low CVAD use are more likely to have a vascular access team that guides device selection.

Interventions to optimise preoperative fasting in paediatrics: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative fasting is the standard of care for patients undergoing a procedure under general anaesthesia. Despite the increased leniency of fasting guideline recommendations, prolonged preoperative fasting periods continue to disproportionally affect paediatric patients. This review maps existing interventions optimising paediatric fasting practices, to explore strategies that can be best applied in clinical practice. METHODS: A search strategy applied to PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database involved four key concepts: (1) fasting, (2) preoperative, (3) paediatric, and (4) quality improvement intervention. The Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping Reviews was utilised in this review. RESULTS: Thirteen heterogeneous studies, involving approximately 31 000 children across five continents, were included. Each intervention studied fell into at least one of the following six themes: (1) change in facility protocol, (2) technology-based intervention, (3) individualised fasting programs, (4) processes to improve communication between clinicians, (5) processes to improve communication to parents and families, and (6) staff education. CONCLUSIONS: A variety of interventions have been studied to optimise paediatric preoperative fasting duration. These interventions show potential in reducing preoperative fasting duration.

Central venous access device adverse events in pediatric patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the proportion and incidence of CVAD-associated complications in pediatric patients with cancer. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched from 2012 to 2022. Cohort studies and the control arm of randomized controlled trials, which reported CVAD-associated complications in pediatric patients aged 0-18 years, were included. CVAD complications were defined as CVAD failure, central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), local infection, occlusion, CVAD-associated venous thromboembolism, dislodgement/migration, breakage/rupture, and dehiscence. The pooled proportion and incidence rate (IR) for each CVAD-associated complication were reported. RESULTS: Of 40 included studies, there was mixed quality of methods and reporting. Approximately 31.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.5-41.1; 6920 devices) of devices experienced a CVAD-associated complication, and 14.8% (95% CI 10.2-20.1; 24 studies; 11,762 devices) of CVADs failed before treatment completion (incidence rate (IR) of 0.5 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI 0.3-0.8; 12 studies; 798,000 catheter days)). Overall, 21.2% (95% CI 14.3-28.9; 26 studies; 5054 devices) of CVADs developed a CLABSI, with an IR of 0.9 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI 0.6-1.3; 12 studies; 798,094 catheter days). Tunneled central venous catheters (TCVC) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) were associated with increased complications in comparison to totally implanted venous access devices (TIVADs). CONCLUSION: CVAD complication rates in this population remain high. TCVCs and PICCs are associated with increased complications relative to TIVADs. Insufficient evidence exists to guide device selection in this cohort, necessitating further research to determine the role of PICCs in pediatric cancer care. PROSPERO: CRD42022359467. Date of registration: 22 September 2022.

Use of tissue adhesive for neonatal intravenous access devices: A scoping review.

Neonates often require vascular access devices for medication or fluid therapy, but a third of devices fail before treatment completion or end with a complication. For adults and children, securing these devices with tissue adhesive (TA) increases the dwell and reduces complications. However, there is a lack of evidence for the neonatal population. This scoping review aimed to assess the evidence of TA for vascular access devices in neonates. The Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) framework was used. The inclusion criteria covered studies published from 2007 (when TA was first reported for use in vascular access devices) to June 2024, available in English, Portuguese, and Spanish, across six databases. Two independent reviewers assessed the studies using Covidence software, with a third reviewer resolving conflicts. Quality assessment was performed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. From 981 identified studies, 12 were included. Most studies (n = 5, 41.7%) enrolled between 100 and 500 neonates with vascular access devices. Publications originated from four regions and were observational studies (n = 6, 50%), quasi-experimental (n = 3, 25%), and case series (n = 2, 16.7%) with one randomized controlled trial (8.3%) focusing on umbilical venous catheters (UVC). The most common TA composition used was a combination of n-butyl- and 2-octyl- cyanoacrylate (n = 4, 33.3%). The amount of TA applied varied across studies, and often TA was part of a bundle (n = 7, 58.3%). Most studies applied TA to central venous access devices (n = 10, 83.3%) and 2 (16.7%) in peripheral devices. Although there was variation in device failure, the studies generally indicated a reduction in complications such as dislodgment (central catheter: 11.3% [peripherally inserted central catheter {PICC}] to 24.6% [UVC] in non-TA group vs 0.7% [PICC] to 7.7% [UVC] in TA group), device-associated bloodstream infections (central: 7.7% [UVC] and incidence of 2.76/1000 catheter days [PICC] in non-TA group vs 3.1% [UVC] and incidence of 0.99/1000 catheter day [PICC] in TA group), and phlebitis (13% in non-TA group vs 3% in TA-group), as well as increased dwell time in peripheral catheters. Most studies included both term and preterm neonates but did not differentiate between them in their analyses. Skin assessment, life of first dressing, and follow-up of catheters and patients were not reported in most studies. CONCLUSION: TA may reduce complications in vascular access devices, but the evidence in neonates is limited and varied. Many studies include TA as part of bundle, making it difficult to isolate its effects. Additionally, the current evidence lacks robustness due to the design limitations of the studies. Future research should focus on randomized controlled trials to evaluate TA's effectiveness and safety in preventing device failures and complications in neonates, considering different subgroups, to ensure the safety of TA in these nuanced populations. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Research in adults and pediatrics provides evidence supporting the use of tissue adhesive (TA) for vascular access devices, showing a positive impact in reducing failures and complications. • The use of TA in neonates needs to be carefully considered due to their unique characteristics. WHAT IS NEW: • There is a gap in the literature on the use of TA for securing vascular access devices in neonates, particularly regarding its safety and effectiveness in preventing failures and complications. • Further studies are needed to provide robust evidence verifying the effectiveness and safety of TA in this population.

Peripherally inserted central catheter design and material for reducing catheter failure and complications.

BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) facilitate diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in health care. PICCs can fail due to infective and non-infective complications, which PICC materials and design may contribute to, leading to negative sequelae for patients and healthcare systems. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of PICC material and design in reducing catheter failure and complications. SEARCH METHODS: The University of Queensland and Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 16 May 2023. We aimed to identify other potentially eligible trials or ancillary publications by searching the reference lists of retrieved included trials, as well as relevant systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology assessment reports. We contacted experts in the field to ascertain additional relevant information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PICC design and materials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were venous thromboembolism (VTE), PICC-associated bloodstream infection (BSI), occlusion, and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were catheter failure, PICC-related BSI, catheter breakage, PICC dwell time, and safety endpoints. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 RCTs involving approximately 2913 participants (one multi-arm study). All studies except one had a high risk of bias in one or more risk of bias domain. Integrated valve technology compared to no valve technology for peripherally inserted central catheter design Integrated valve technology may make little or no difference to VTE risk when compared with PICCs with no valve (risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 2.63; I² = 0%; 3 studies; 437 participants; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether integrated valve technology reduces PICC-associated BSI risk, as the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.00; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 257 participants). Integrated valve technology may make little or no difference to occlusion risk when compared with PICCs with no valve (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.38; I² = 0%; 5 studies; 900 participants; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether use of integrated valve technology reduces all-cause mortality risk, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.64; I² = 0%; 2 studies; 473 participants). Integrated valve technology may make little or no difference to catheter failure risk when compared with PICCs with no valve (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.03; I² = 0%; 4 studies; 720 participants; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether integrated-valve technology reduces PICC-related BSI risk (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.32; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 542 participants) or catheter breakage, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.22 to 5.06; I² = 20%; 4 studies; 799 participants). Anti-thrombogenic surface modification compared to no anti-thrombogenic surface modification for peripherally inserted central catheter design We are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces risk of VTE (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.54; I² = 15%; 2 studies; 257 participants) or PICC-associated BSI, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.00; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 257 participants). We are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces occlusion (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.04 to 11.22; I² = 70%; 2 studies; 257 participants) or all-cause mortality risk, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.26; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 111 participants). Use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters may make little or no difference to risk of catheter failure (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.54; I² = 46%; 2 studies; 257 participants; low certainty evidence). No PICC-related BSIs were reported in one study (111 participants). As such, we are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces PICC-related BSI risk (RR not estimable; I² = not applicable; very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces the risk of catheter breakage, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.79; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 257 participants). Antimicrobial impregnation compared to non-antimicrobial impregnation for peripherally inserted central catheter design We are uncertain whether use of antimicrobial-impregnated catheters reduces VTE risk (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.88; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 167 participants) or PICC-associated BSI risk, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 2.17, 95% CI 0.20 to 23.53; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 167 participants). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters probably make little or no difference to occlusion risk (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 2 studies; 1025 participants; moderate certainty evidence) or all-cause mortality (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.75; I² = 0%; 2 studies; 1082 participants; moderate certainty evidence). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters may make little or no difference to risk of catheter failure (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 221 participants; low certainty evidence). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters probably make little or no difference to PICC-related BSI risk (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.55; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 1082 participants; moderate certainty evidence). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters may make little or no difference to risk of catheter breakage (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.19 to 3.83; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 804 participants; low certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited high-quality RCT evidence available to inform clinician decision-making for PICC materials and design. Limitations of the current evidence include small sample sizes, infrequent events, and risk of bias. There may be little to no difference in the risk of VTE, PICC-associated BSI, occlusion, or mortality across PICC materials and designs. Further rigorous RCTs are needed to reduce uncertainty.

Dressings and securement devices to prevent complications for peripheral arterial catheters.

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.

Crying wolf, alarm safety and management in paediatrics: A scoping review.

AIM: To provide a contemporaneous evidentiary overview of neonatal and paediatric studies investigating alarm-related patient safety and alarm system management. Furthermore, to describe how clinical alarm burden is captured and reported, to identify clinical devices that contribute to alarm burden, to explore alarm-related and patient safety measures and terminologies and to review alarm management initiatives. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus and EBSCOhost was conducted from 2013 to 2023 using predetermined search terms, index terms, medical subject headings and truncation. METHODS: Observational and qualitative studies with neonatal and paediatric populations reporting monitoring and alarm practices; and interventional studies reporting the success of alarm safety interventions were included. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the mixed methods appraisal tool. RESULTS: The search yielded 37 studies of acceptable quality. The majority explored alarm burden associated with physiological monitoring (n = 35; 95%). Alarm definitions were reported in 46% (n = 17) of studies, and commonly included what constituted actionable and non-actionable alarms. While 32% (n = 12) of studies considered alarms in relation to clinical outcomes surrounding patient safety, clinician response to alarms was only reported in 19% (n = 7) of studies. Alarm and monitoring interventions were assessed in 51% (n = 19) of included studies, with categorization into six domains: changing alarm parameters, clinician education, communication and planning, technology, alarm ordering and standardization or guidelines. CONCLUSION: This review has demonstrated the enormity of alarms in clinical settings, heterogeneity of alarm definitions and outlined interventions associated with alarm burden and patient safety. IMPLICATION FOR THE PROFESSION/PATIENT CARE: Strategies to ensure appropriate alarm limits are set and clinicians are empowered through education to recognize and respond appropriately to alarms can maximize patient safety. REPORTING METHOD: This review adheres to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis protocols extension for scoping reviews. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Implementation frameworks, strategies and outcomes in optimizing central venous access device practice in paediatrics: A scoping review.

Paediatric patients with complex or acute conditions may require a central venous access device, however, almost one-third of these devices have associated complications (e.g. infections). Implementation of evidence-based practices regarding central venous access devices can reduce and potentially prevent complications. AIMS: This scoping review aimed to explore recent interventional research in CVAD management through an implementation lens. DESIGN: This scoping review used the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Studies were included if they were written in English, published in 2012 to July 2023, involved children and were relevant to the study aims. Risk of bias was appraised by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. DATA SOURCES: Searches were undertaken in EMBASE, CINAHL (Ebsco), PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL). RESULTS: Of the 1769 studies identified in a systematic search, 46 studies were included. Studies mostly focused on health professionals and central venous access device maintenance and had quantitative pre-post study designs. Adherence to implementation frameworks was lacking, with many studies employing quality improvement approaches. Implementation strategies were typically multipronged, using health-professional education, bundles and working groups. Bundle compliance and reductions in central line-associated bloodstream infections were the most featured outcomes, with most studies primarily focusing on effectiveness outcomes. CONCLUSION: Translation of evidence-based practices to the clinical setting is difficult and current adoption of implementation frameworks (apart from 'quality improvement') is limited. Implementation strategies are diverse and dependent on the local context, and study outcomes typically focus on the effectiveness of the physical intervention, rather than measuring the implementation effort itself. IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENTS: Future intervention research requires a more uniform and deliberate application of implementation frameworks and strategies. IMPACT: Greater exploration of relationships between frameworks and strategies and implementation and service outcomes is required to increase understanding of their role in maximizing resources to improve health care. Adhered to best reporting guidelines as per PRISMA-ScR (Tricco et al., 2018). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Invasive device-associated skin complications and mechanical dysfunctions in paediatric healthcare: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: This study aimed to estimate the proportion and rate of skin complications and mechanical dysfunction associated with indwelling invasive devices in paediatric healthcare. DESIGN: This systematic review is reported in accordance with Cochrane standards for randomized controlled trials and the Meta-analysis of Observation Studies in Epidemiology for cohort studies. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, clinical trial registries, and unpublished study databases were searched. REVIEW METHODS: Cohort studies and trials published from January 2011 to June 2022, including (1) indwelling invasive devices, (2) paediatric participants admitted to a hospital, (3) reporting post-insertion device-associated skin complication and/or mechanical dysfunction, and (4) published in English, were included. Device-associated skin complication and mechanical dysfunction (infiltration, leakage, occlusion/blockage, dislodgement/malposition, breakage and others). Pooled proportion and incidence rate per 1000 device days are reported. RESULTS: This review synthesized 114 studies (30,782 devices; 1,635,649 device-days). Skin complications were reported in 40 studies, but none exclusively reported individual device-related pressure injuries. Mechanical dysfunctions were well-reported for central venous access devices, peripheral intravenous catheters, nasogastric/gastric tubes and peritoneal dialysis catheters but less for arterial catheters, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and ventricular assist devices. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the need for standardized definitions and reporting methods to better surveil and benchmark device-related complications, particularly for understudied device types. Device-related pressure injuries were not reported in any of the included studies, and all devices except for vascular access devices require standardized reporting of complications. IMPACT: Despite the widespread use of invasive devices, comprehensive data on their prevalence, utility, and associated paediatric complications is limited. This review identified prevalent skin complications, occlusions and dislodgments in children with devices, underscoring the need for standardized reporting to enhance surveillance and understanding of paediatric device-related complications. REPORTING METHOD: MOOSE (Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) Checklist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution.

Peripheral intravenous catheter clinical care standard adherence in emergency departments: A qualitative study underpinned by the behaviour change wheel.

AIM: To explore the barriers and facilitators influencing emergency department clinicians' adherence to the Australian Peripheral Intravenous Catheter (PIVC) Clinical Care Standard, using the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW). BACKGROUND: Suboptimal PIVC practices are frequently linked to a range of patient-important adverse outcomes. The first Australian Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Clinical Care Standard was introduced in 2021, aiming to standardize practice. However, a recent national survey revealed a lack of adherence to the Standard among emergency department clinicians. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive study. METHOD: The study was conducted across two Australian emergency departments in 2023. Utilizing purposive sampling, semi-structured interviews were conducted. The analysis incorporated both deductive and inductive approaches, mapping the findings to the BCW. FINDINGS: Interviews with 25 nurses and doctors revealed nine key subthemes. The main barriers were the stressful environment, insufficient education and training, and the absence of a feedback mechanism. The main facilitators were recognition of suboptimal practice, belief in the importance of patient engagement, and the desire to improve practice. CONCLUSION: Multiple complex factors have an impact on clinicians' adherence to the Standard. The identified interventions will serve as a guide for future implementation of the Standard. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: The findings inform healthcare organizations of the significance of implementing strategies to enhance clinicians' acceptance of the Standard. Clinicians should consider incorporating the multifaceted interventions developed in accordance with the BCW for future implementation projects. IMPACT: Promoting adherence to standards opens avenues to challenge suboptimal practice and has the potential to instigate a culture shift in the fundamental skills of frontline clinicians. REPORTING METHOD: The study is designed and reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Implementation contexts and strategies for alternative peripherally inserted central catheter material and design selection: A qualitative exploration using CFIR/ERIC approach.

AIM: To explore the implementation contexts and strategies that influence the uptake and selection of alternative peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) materials and design. DESIGN: Qualitative evaluation of end user perspectives within a randomized control trial of different PICC materials and design. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders were undertaken via an adapted, rapid-analytic approach using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Outcomes were mapped against the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) tool for strategies to guide innovation in PICC practice. RESULTS: Participants (n = 23) represented a combination of users and inserters/purchasers, from adult and paediatric settings. Dominant themes included intervention characteristics (intervention source), inner setting (structural characteristics) and individuals involved (self-efficacy). Strategies emerging to support a change from ERIC mapping (n = 16) included promotion of intervention adaptability, inclusion of staff and consumer perspectives and sufficient funding. Implementation contexts such as inner setting and individuals involved equally impacted PICC success and implementation effectiveness and enabled a greater understanding of barriers and facilitators to intervention implementation in this trial. CONCLUSION: Trial evidence is important, but healthcare decision-making requires consideration of local contexts especially resourcing. Implementation contexts for Australian healthcare settings include a practical, strategic toolkit for the implementation of alternative PICC materials and designs. REPORTING METHOD: This study adhered to COREQ guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Incidence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries and predictors of severity in a paediatric hospital.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) pose significant challenges in healthcare and cause increased patient suffering, longer hospital stays, and higher healthcare costs. Paediatric patients face unique risks, but evidence remains scarce. This study aimed to identify and describe HAPI admission incidence and severity predictors in a large Australian children's hospital. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study investigated all paediatric patients between January 2020 and December 2021 using a census approach. Demographic and clinical data including HAPI-related data were accessed from the incident monitoring and hospital administration databases. The incidence rate (per 1000 patient admissions) was calculated based on all admissions. Predictors of HAPI severity were identified using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. The study adhered to the STROBE guidelines for retrospective cohort studies. RESULTS: The HAPI incidence rate was 6.96 per 1000 patient admissions. Of the age groups, neonates had the highest HAPI incidence (15.5 per 1000 admissions). Critically ill children had the highest rate for admission location (12.8 per 1000 patient admissions). Most reported cases were stage I (64.2%). Age was associated with injury severity, with older paediatric patients more likely to develop higher-stage HAPIs. Additionally, Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander patients had a higher HAPI severity risk. CONCLUSION: HAPI injuries in paediatric patients are unacceptably high. Prevention should be prioritized, and the quality of care improved in Australia and beyond. Further research is needed to develop targeted prevention strategies for these vulnerable populations. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: This research emphasizes the need for standardized reporting, culturally sensitive care and tailored prevention strategies. IMPACT: The research has the potential to influence healthcare policies and practices, ultimately enhancing the quality of patient care. REPORTING METHOD: STROBE guidelines. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public contribution to the conduct of this study.

Impact of the I-DECIDED Tool to Improve Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Care in Paediatrics: Interrupted Time-Series Study.

AIM: To determine whether the I-DECIDED assessment and decision tool enhances peripheral intravenous catheter assessment, care and decision-making in paediatrics. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental, interrupted time-series study. METHODS: An interrupted time-series study was conducted in a paediatric inpatient unit at a public teaching hospital in Brazil. The participants were patients aged less than 15 years old with a peripheral intravenous catheter, and their parents or guardians. Data were collected between January and July 2023, encompassing six time points, three pre-intervention and three post-intervention. Evaluation data were based on the I-DECIDED tool, including idle devices, dressings, complications, patient/family awareness, hand hygiene, disinfection and documentation. RESULTS: We conducted 585 peripheral intravenous catheter observations, with 289 in the pre-intervention phase and 296 in the post-intervention phase, inserted in 65 hospitalised children, 30 in the pre-intervention phase and 35 in the post-intervention phase. After the intervention, reductions were observed in the number of idle catheters, substandard dressings and complications. Patients and family members reported an increase in device assessment, hand hygiene and peripheral intravenous catheter disinfection. Additionally, there was an increase in documentation of decision-making performed by nurses and nursing technicians/assistants. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the I-DECIDED assessment and decision tool in a paediatric unit significantly improved the assessment, care and decision-making regarding peripheral intravenous catheters. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Opportunity to enhance practice standards, elevate the quality of care provided to paediatric patients, contribute to improved patient outcomes, advance evidence-based practice in vascular access management and enhance patient experience through increased involvement in care. IMPACT: To influence clinical practice and healthcare policies aimed at improving peripheral intravenous catheter care and patient safety in paediatric settings. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution to the design of this study.

Development and Preliminary Validation of a Central Venous Access Device-Associated Skin Impairment Classification Tool Using Modified Delphi and Clinimetric Methods.

BACKGROUND: An evidence and consensus-based instrument is needed to classify central venous access device-associated skin impairments. AIM: The aim of this study was to design and evaluate the central venous access device-associated skin impairment classification tool. DESIGN: A two-phase modified Delphi study. METHODS: This two-phase study consisted of a literature review, followed by the development and validation of a classification instrument, by experts in the fields of central venous access devices and wound management (Phase 1). The instrument was tested (Phase 2) using 38 clinical photographs of a range of relevant skin impairments by the same expert panel. The expert panel consisted of registered nurses who were clinical researchers (n = 4) and clinical experts (n = 3) with an average of 24 years of nursing and research experience and 11 years of experience in wound management. Measures to assess preliminary content validity and inter-rater reliability were used. RESULTS: The instrument consists of five overarching aetiological classifications, including contact dermatitis, mechanical injury, infection, pressure injury and complex clinical presentation, with 14 associated subcategory diagnoses (e.g., allergic dermatitis, skin tear and local infection), with definitions and signs and symptoms. High agreement was achieved for preliminary scale content validity and item content validity (I-CVI = 1). Inter-rater reliability of aetiologies was high. The overall inter-rater reliability of individual definitions and signs and symptoms had excellent agreement. CONCLUSION: The development and preliminary validation of this classification tool provide a common language to guide the classification and assessment of central venous access device-associated skin impairment. IMPACT: The comprehensive and validated classification tool will promote accurate identification of central venous access device-associated skin impairment by establishing a common language for healthcare providers. The availability of this tool can reduce clinical uncertainty, instances of misdiagnosis and the potential for mismanagement. Consequently, it will play a pivotal role in guiding clinical decision-making, ultimately enhancing the quality of treatment and improving patient outcomes. REPORTING METHOD: The Guidance on Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies (CREDES) was adhered to. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

An mHealth application for chronic vascular access: A multi-method evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare consumers require diverse resources to assist their navigation of complex healthcare interactions, however, these resources need to be fit for purpose. AIM: In this study, we evaluated the utility, usability and feasibility of children, families and adults requiring long-term intravenous therapy using a recently developed mobile health application (App), intravenous (IV) Passport. DESIGN: Multi-site, parallel, multi-method, prospective cohort study. METHODS: A multi-site, multi-method study was carried out in 2020-2021, with 46 participants (20 adults, 26 children/family) reporting on their experiences surrounding the use of the IV Passport for up to 6 months. RESULTS: Overall, utility rates were acceptable, with 78.3% (N = 36) using the IV Passport over the follow-up period, with high rates of planned future use for those still active in the project (N = 21; 73%), especially in the child/family cohort (N = 13; 100%). Acceptability rates were high (9/10; IQR 6.5-10), with the IV Passport primarily used for documenting new devices and complications. Thematic analysis revealed three main themes (and multiple subthemes) in the qualitative data: Advocacy for healthcare needs, Complexity of healthcare and App design and functionality. CONCLUSION: Several recommendations were made to improve the end-user experience including 'how to' instructions; and scheduling functionality for routine care. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The IV Passport can be safely and appropriately integrated into healthcare, to support consumers. IMPACT: Patient-/parent-reported feedback suggests the Intravenous Passport is a useful tool for record-keeping, and positive communication between patients/parents, and clinicians. REPORTING METHOD: Not applicable. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION: Consumers reported their experiences surrounding the use of the IV Passport for up to 6 months.

PiccPed® app impact on nurses' knowledge to prevent adverse events for peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) in pediatric and neonatal healthcare: A quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: The PiccPed® health application was developed to support clinical decision-making in peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) management. We aimed to evaluate its impact on nurses' knowledge regarding the prevention of PICC-associated adverse events in pediatrics and neonatology. METHODS: A quasi-experimental, pre-post intervention study, was conducted with a dependent/paired sample of pediatric and neonatal nurses from two tertiary hospitals in South Brazil. Data were collected from October 2022 to January 2023 across three phases: pre-, intervention (use of the PiccPed®) and post-test. Study outcomes were a knowledge test (15 questions) of evidence-based PICC maintenance procedures, and PiccPed® app time spent and screens used. RESULTS: A total of 56 nurses completed the study. The post-test mean score was significantly higher (12/15; standard deviation (SD) 1.9) in comparison with the pre-test (mean 9/15; SD 2.2). The change in scores was significantly higher for nurses without postgraduate qualifications, in comparison to those with (Mean Difference 1.26; p = 0.039). Each minute using the app resulted in a significant increase of 0.04 points (95% confidence interval 0.01-0.08; p = 0.014) on the mean post-test score (10.94 points). CONCLUSION: The research demonstrated that PiccPed® enhances nurses' learning regarding the prevention of adverse events associated with PICC maintenance in pediatrics and neonatology. APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: The app can be safely and effectively used for training and continuing education of nurses who care for children and neonates with PICCs.

An mHealth application for chronic vascular access: Consumer led co-creation.

PURPOSE: Children with chronic and complex health conditions frequently need intravenous devices. The current approach to intravenous device selection, insertion, and monitoring is inconsistent, and healthcare consumers are often negatively affected by siloed health information, and poor future planning. Despite child- and family-centred care being recognised as a pillar of paediatric nursing care, limited implementation for vascular access device planning and management is evident. DESIGN AND METHODS: To address this, we conducted a multi-phased approach to co-create, then evaluate, a mobile health (mHealth) application: IV Passport. Co-creation involved a prioritisation survey, followed by a Passport advisory panel consensus meeting. Following confirmation of the required content and features of the Passport, the mHealth application was designed and content validation achieved via survey. RESULTS: The prioritisation survey yielded recommendations for seven features (e.g., graphical presentations of current/past devices). Content for nine device types (e.g., totally implanted ports) was suggested, each with 10 related items (e.g., insertion site). Content items for device-associated complications, future vascular access plans, and educational resources were also suggested. Following design, the application was released through Apple and Android platforms; and adapted to a paper version. Content validation was established; 100% strongly agreed the application was easy to use; 80% agreed/strongly agreed that they would recommend the Passport to others. CONCLUSION: IV Passport embodies effective child- and family-centred care through consumer co-creation to empower patients and families manage vascular access devices. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: IV Passport remains active; and can be utilised across many healthcare settings and patient populations.

Supportive care needs of adults living with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) at home: a qualitative content analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are common vascular access devices inserted for adults undergoing intravenous treatment in the community setting. Individuals with a PICC report challenges understanding information and adapting to the device both practically and psychologically at home. There is a lack of research investigating the supportive care needs of individuals with a PICC to inform nursing assessment and the provision of additional supports they may require to successfully adapt to life with a PICC. The aim of this study was to identify the supportive care needs of adults with cancer or infection living with a PICC at home. METHOD: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were used to identify supportive care needs of adults living with a PICC at home. Participants were recruited from cancer and infectious diseases outpatient units. Two researchers independently analysed transcripts using content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 15 participants were interviewed (30-87 years old). There were 5 males and 10 females interviewed, 9 participants had a cancer diagnosis and most lived in a metropolitan area. Many participants lived with a partner/spouse at home and three participants had young children. Participants identified supportive care needs in the following eight categories (i (i) Adapting daily life (ii) Physical comfort (iii) Self-management (iv) Emotional impact (v) Information content (vi) Understanding information (vii) Healthcare resources and (viii) Social supports. CONCLUSIONS: Adults living with a PICC at home report a broad range of supportive care needs. In addition to practical and information needs, health consumers may also require support to accept living with a device inside their body and to assume responsibility for the PICC. These findings may provide nurses with a greater understanding of individual needs and guide the provision of appropriate supports.

Adverse events associated with umbilical vascular catheters in the neonatal intensive care unit: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Umbilical catheters are commonly inserted in newborns in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) yet are associated with serious adverse events (AEs) such as malposition, migration, infection, thrombosis, hepatic complications, cardiac effusion, and cardiac tamponade. There is a need to determine the incidence and risk factors for AEs to inform safe practice. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the incidence and risk factors for AEs (all-cause and individual types) associated with umbilical venous catheters (UVCs) and umbilical arterial catheters (UACs) in the NICU. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in an Australian level-VI NICU over a 3-year period. Any newborn who had both a UVC and UAC insertion attempt was included. RESULTS: There were 236 neonates who had 494 catheters (245 UVCs and 249 UACs). Of these, 71% of UVCs (95% confidence interval [CI]: 65.6-76.9%; incidence rate: 181.1-237.3 per 1000 catheter days) and 43.8% of UACs (95% CI: 38-50.5%; incidence rate: 102.0-146.3 per 1000 catheter days) were associated with an AE. The most common AE was malposition on first X-ray for UVCs (60.1%, 95% CI: 55.1-67.3) and UACs (32.6%, 95% CI: 26.8-39.6). A dwell time of ≥7 days was a significant predictor of UAC failure (incidence risk ratio: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1-2.1, p = 0.006) and migration of the UVC (incidence risk ratio: 3.5, 95% CI: 1.0-11.5, p = 0.043). CONCLUSION: Adverse events related to insertion occurred in a relatively high percentage of umbilical catheters placed. Increased dwell time remains a significant risk factor for catheter migration and overall failure. Practice change and consideration of risk factors for both individual and overall AE risk are necessary to reduce complications.