Patient experiences with peripherally inserted venous catheters— A cross‐sectional, multicentre study in Norway

AIM: To investigate patient experiences with peripherally inserted venous catheters, namely PICC lines and Midlines, as well as the influence of socio‐demographic variables, length of stay, comorbidity and complications on these experiences. DESIGN: The study had a descriptive, multicentre, cross‐sectional design. METHODS: We used a questionnaire to investigate patient experiences (N = 359). RESULTS: Patients experiences were not optimal on each of the items in the questionnaire. Nevertheless, few respondents would have preferred a traditional peripheral venous catheter instead. Moreover, free‐text answers indicated that patients were very satisfied with their catheter. Results also indicate that the hospitals have different approach when selecting a PICC line or a Midline as route of choice. The only factor associated with patient experiences was “complications.” CONCLUSION: Even though patients reported of several disadvantages with the PICC line/Midline, findings indicate that they would have chosen this again. PICC lines and Midlines are beneficial from the patients' perspective, even though they have disadvantages.