Cargando…

Time and resources of peripherally inserted central catheter insertion procedures: a comparison between blind insertion/chest X-ray and a real time tip navigation and confirmation system

BACKGROUND: The Sherlock 3CG™ Tip Confirmation System (TCS) provides real-time peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) tip insertion information using passive magnetic navigation and patient cardiac electrical activity. It is an alternative tip confirmation method to fluoroscopy or chest X-ray...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tomaszewski, Kenneth J, Ferko, Nicole, Hollmann, Sarah S, Eng, Simona C, Richard, Howard M, Rowe, Lynn, Sproule, Susan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5304969/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28223832
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S121230
_version_ 1782506976172834816
author Tomaszewski, Kenneth J
Ferko, Nicole
Hollmann, Sarah S
Eng, Simona C
Richard, Howard M
Rowe, Lynn
Sproule, Susan
author_facet Tomaszewski, Kenneth J
Ferko, Nicole
Hollmann, Sarah S
Eng, Simona C
Richard, Howard M
Rowe, Lynn
Sproule, Susan
author_sort Tomaszewski, Kenneth J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Sherlock 3CG™ Tip Confirmation System (TCS) provides real-time peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) tip insertion information using passive magnetic navigation and patient cardiac electrical activity. It is an alternative tip confirmation method to fluoroscopy or chest X-ray for PICC tip insertion confirmation in adults. The purpose of this study was to evaluate time and cost of the Sherlock 3CG TCS and blind insertion with chest X-ray tip confirmation (BI/CXR) for PICC insertions. METHODS: A cross-sectional, observational Time and Motion study was conducted. Data were collected at four hospitals in the US. Two hospitals used Sherlock 3CG TCS and two hospitals used BI/CXR to place/confirm successful PICC tip location. Researchers observed PICC insertions, collecting data from the beginning (ie, PICC kit opening) to catheter tip confirmation (ie, released for intravenous [IV] therapy). An economic model was developed to project outcomes for a larger population. RESULTS: A total of 120 subjects were enrolled, with 60 subjects enrolled in each arm and 30 enrolled at each of the four US hospitals. The mean time from initiation of the PICC procedure to the time to release for IV therapy was 33.93 minutes in the Sherlock 3CG arm and 176.32 minutes in the BI/CXR arm (p < 0.001). No malpositions were observed for PICC insertions using the Sherlock 3CG TCS, while 20% of subjects in the BI/CXR arm had a malposition. BI/CXR subjects had significantly more total malpositions (mean 0.23 vs. 0, p < 0.001). For a hypothetical population of 1,000 annual patients, adoption of Sherlock 3CG TCS was predicted to be cost saving compared with BI/CXR in all three analysis years. CONCLUSION: The results from this study demonstrate that Sherlock 3CG TCS, when compared with BI/CXR, is a superior alternative with regard to time to release subject to therapy, malposition rates, and minimization of X-ray exposure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5304969
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53049692017-02-21 Time and resources of peripherally inserted central catheter insertion procedures: a comparison between blind insertion/chest X-ray and a real time tip navigation and confirmation system Tomaszewski, Kenneth J Ferko, Nicole Hollmann, Sarah S Eng, Simona C Richard, Howard M Rowe, Lynn Sproule, Susan Clinicoecon Outcomes Res Original Research BACKGROUND: The Sherlock 3CG™ Tip Confirmation System (TCS) provides real-time peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) tip insertion information using passive magnetic navigation and patient cardiac electrical activity. It is an alternative tip confirmation method to fluoroscopy or chest X-ray for PICC tip insertion confirmation in adults. The purpose of this study was to evaluate time and cost of the Sherlock 3CG TCS and blind insertion with chest X-ray tip confirmation (BI/CXR) for PICC insertions. METHODS: A cross-sectional, observational Time and Motion study was conducted. Data were collected at four hospitals in the US. Two hospitals used Sherlock 3CG TCS and two hospitals used BI/CXR to place/confirm successful PICC tip location. Researchers observed PICC insertions, collecting data from the beginning (ie, PICC kit opening) to catheter tip confirmation (ie, released for intravenous [IV] therapy). An economic model was developed to project outcomes for a larger population. RESULTS: A total of 120 subjects were enrolled, with 60 subjects enrolled in each arm and 30 enrolled at each of the four US hospitals. The mean time from initiation of the PICC procedure to the time to release for IV therapy was 33.93 minutes in the Sherlock 3CG arm and 176.32 minutes in the BI/CXR arm (p < 0.001). No malpositions were observed for PICC insertions using the Sherlock 3CG TCS, while 20% of subjects in the BI/CXR arm had a malposition. BI/CXR subjects had significantly more total malpositions (mean 0.23 vs. 0, p < 0.001). For a hypothetical population of 1,000 annual patients, adoption of Sherlock 3CG TCS was predicted to be cost saving compared with BI/CXR in all three analysis years. CONCLUSION: The results from this study demonstrate that Sherlock 3CG TCS, when compared with BI/CXR, is a superior alternative with regard to time to release subject to therapy, malposition rates, and minimization of X-ray exposure. Dove Medical Press 2017-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5304969/ /pubmed/28223832 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S121230 Text en © 2017 Tomaszewski et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Tomaszewski, Kenneth J
Ferko, Nicole
Hollmann, Sarah S
Eng, Simona C
Richard, Howard M
Rowe, Lynn
Sproule, Susan
Time and resources of peripherally inserted central catheter insertion procedures: a comparison between blind insertion/chest X-ray and a real time tip navigation and confirmation system
title Time and resources of peripherally inserted central catheter insertion procedures: a comparison between blind insertion/chest X-ray and a real time tip navigation and confirmation system
title_full Time and resources of peripherally inserted central catheter insertion procedures: a comparison between blind insertion/chest X-ray and a real time tip navigation and confirmation system
title_fullStr Time and resources of peripherally inserted central catheter insertion procedures: a comparison between blind insertion/chest X-ray and a real time tip navigation and confirmation system
title_full_unstemmed Time and resources of peripherally inserted central catheter insertion procedures: a comparison between blind insertion/chest X-ray and a real time tip navigation and confirmation system
title_short Time and resources of peripherally inserted central catheter insertion procedures: a comparison between blind insertion/chest X-ray and a real time tip navigation and confirmation system
title_sort time and resources of peripherally inserted central catheter insertion procedures: a comparison between blind insertion/chest x-ray and a real time tip navigation and confirmation system
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5304969/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28223832
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S121230
work_keys_str_mv AT tomaszewskikennethj timeandresourcesofperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterinsertionproceduresacomparisonbetweenblindinsertionchestxrayandarealtimetipnavigationandconfirmationsystem
AT ferkonicole timeandresourcesofperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterinsertionproceduresacomparisonbetweenblindinsertionchestxrayandarealtimetipnavigationandconfirmationsystem
AT hollmannsarahs timeandresourcesofperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterinsertionproceduresacomparisonbetweenblindinsertionchestxrayandarealtimetipnavigationandconfirmationsystem
AT engsimonac timeandresourcesofperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterinsertionproceduresacomparisonbetweenblindinsertionchestxrayandarealtimetipnavigationandconfirmationsystem
AT richardhowardm timeandresourcesofperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterinsertionproceduresacomparisonbetweenblindinsertionchestxrayandarealtimetipnavigationandconfirmationsystem
AT rowelynn timeandresourcesofperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterinsertionproceduresacomparisonbetweenblindinsertionchestxrayandarealtimetipnavigationandconfirmationsystem
AT sproulesusan timeandresourcesofperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterinsertionproceduresacomparisonbetweenblindinsertionchestxrayandarealtimetipnavigationandconfirmationsystem