A randomized comparison between an intravenous catheter system with a retractable guidewire and conventional intravenous catheters

被引:4
|
作者
Chick, Jeffrey Forris Beecham [1 ,2 ]
Reddy, Shilpa N. [2 ,3 ]
Chen, James X. [2 ]
Sammarco, Therese [2 ]
Chittams, Jesse [2 ]
Trerotola, Scott O. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Div Vasc & Intervent Radiol, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[2] Hosp Univ Penn, Perelman Sch Med, Dept Radiol, Div Intervent Radiol, 1 Silverstein,3400 Spruce St, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[3] Bryn Mawr Hosp, Div Vasc & Intervent Radiol, Radiol Associates Main Line, Main Line Hlth Syst, Bryn Mawr, PA USA
来源
JOURNAL OF VASCULAR ACCESS | 2017年 / 18卷 / 06期
关键词
AccuCath; Conventional intravenous catheters; Integrated catheter-wire device; Interventional radiology; Intravenous access; Retractable guidewire intravenous access; VENOUS ACCESS PATIENTS; SATISFACTION; PLACEMENT;
D O I
10.5301/jva.5000763
中图分类号
R6 [外科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100210 ;
摘要
Introduction: The aim of this study is to compare an intravenous (IV) catheter system which uses a retractable guidewire (RG-IV) designed to facilitate IV placement with a conventional IV (C-IV) catheter control. Materials and methods: A prospective, randomized design was used. Patients referred to interventional radiology for outpatient procedures were offered participation. Enrollment occurred between August and November 2013. Patients were assigned to receive the RG-IV or C-IV in a 1: 1 randomization scheme. After assignment, up to three attempts by a registered nurse occurred with the assigned device; if all three attempts failed, crossover to the other device occurred. The primary outcome variable was first-attempt success at IV placement. Secondary outcome variables included patient and clinician satisfaction, number of attempts, and time to successful placement. Two hundred twenty patients were enrolled (139 men, 81 women) in the study. Results: Of the 220 patients, two were withdrawn prior to IV attempt leaving 218 subjects, 109 in each group. First attempt success (77% RG-IV vs. 82% C-IV, p = 0.5), number of attempts to achieve IV access (1.26 RG-IV vs. 1.29 C-IV, p = 0.98), and time to achieve IV success (2.9 minutes RG-IV vs. 2.7 C-IV, p = 0.82) did not differ between groups. Patient satisfaction with insertion was higher in the C-IV group (4.5/5 vs. 3.9/5, p<0.001) although comfort comparison was not (3.3/5 RG-IV vs. 3.5/5 C-IV, p = 0.15). Conclusions: In an interventional radiology outpatient population, the RG-IV and C-IV were comparable in first-attempt success, number of attempts, and time to achieve IV success. Patient satisfaction was higher with C-IV.
引用
收藏
页码:530 / 534
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A MODELED HEALTH ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE ACCUCATH® INTRAVENOUS CATHETER SYSTEM WITH RETRACTABLE COILED TIP GUIDEWIRE COMPARED WITH CONVENTIONAL PERIPHERAL INTRAVENOUS CATHETERS
    Kara, R.
    Hollmann, S.
    Ferko, N.
    Delatore, P.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2016, 19 (07) : A705 - A705
  • [2] Long guidewire peripheral intravenous catheters in emergency departments for management of difficult intravenous access: A multicenter, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial
    Xu, Hui
    Corley, Amanda
    Young, Emily R.
    Doubrovsky, Anna
    Ware, Robert S.
    Afoakwah, Clifford
    Wang, Carrie
    Stirling, Scott
    Marsh, Nicole
    [J]. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2024,
  • [3] Are 2 smaller intravenous catheters as good as 1 larger intravenous catheter?
    Li, Siu Fai
    Cole, Michael
    Forest, Rhonda
    Chilstrom, Mikaela
    Reinersman, Eugene
    Jones, Michael P.
    Zinzuwadia, Shreni
    King, Sheila
    Yadav, Kabir
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2010, 28 (06): : 724 - 727
  • [4] Randomized Controlled Comparison of IV Catheter with Coiled Tip Guidewire and Conventional Peripheral IV Catheter
    Idemoto, Bette K.
    Rowbottom, James R.
    [J]. ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2014, 119
  • [5] Learning intravenous cannulation: a comparison of the conventional method and the CathSim Intravenous Training System
    Chang, KKP
    Chung, JWY
    Wong, TWS
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2002, 11 (01) : 73 - 78
  • [6] Feeding a urethral catheter over a guidewire using an intravenous cannula
    Henderson, J.
    [J]. ANNALS OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND, 2012, 94 (01) : 64 - 64
  • [7] An in vivo comparison of a catheter mounted pressure transducer system with conventional balloon catheters
    Stell, IM
    Tompkins, S
    Lovell, AT
    Goldstone, JC
    Moxham, J
    [J]. EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 1999, 13 (05) : 1158 - 1163
  • [8] A COMPARISON OF BACTERIAL COLONISATION BETWEEN TEFLON AND POLYURETHANE SHORT TERM INTRAVENOUS CATHETERS
    Spelta, C. W.
    Tan, R. H. H.
    Picard, J.
    Gummow, B.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF VETERINARY INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2012, 26 (03) : 743 - 743
  • [9] A Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Vascular Access Catheter Survival between Standard Long Intravenous Lines and Extended Dwell Catheters
    Shotkin, P.
    Hang, B.
    Brackney, A.
    Joseph, S.
    Karabon, P.
    Nnanabu, I
    Mohammad, A.
    Bahl, A.
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2018, 72 (04) : S71 - S71
  • [10] INTRADERMAL ANESTHESIA AND COMPARISON OF INTRAVENOUS CATHETER GAUGE
    GERSHON, RY
    MOKRISKI, BK
    MATJASKO, MJ
    [J]. ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 1991, 73 (04): : 469 - 470