Cargando…

A comparison of first-attempt cannulation success of peripheral venous catheter systems with and without wings and injection ports in surgical patients—a randomized trial

BACKGROUND: A peripheral venous catheter (PVC) is the most widely used device for obtaining vascular access, allowing the administration of fluids and medication. Up to 25% of adult patients, and 50% of pediatric patients experience a first-attempt cannulation failure. In addition to patient and cli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mörgeli, Rudolf, Schmidt, Katrin, Neumann, Tim, Kruppa, Jochen, Föhring, Ulrich, Hofmann, Pascal, Rosenberger, Peter, Falk, Elke, Boemke, Willehad, Spies, Claudia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8969381/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35361115
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-022-01631-7
_version_ 1784679234220851200
author Mörgeli, Rudolf
Schmidt, Katrin
Neumann, Tim
Kruppa, Jochen
Föhring, Ulrich
Hofmann, Pascal
Rosenberger, Peter
Falk, Elke
Boemke, Willehad
Spies, Claudia
author_facet Mörgeli, Rudolf
Schmidt, Katrin
Neumann, Tim
Kruppa, Jochen
Föhring, Ulrich
Hofmann, Pascal
Rosenberger, Peter
Falk, Elke
Boemke, Willehad
Spies, Claudia
author_sort Mörgeli, Rudolf
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A peripheral venous catheter (PVC) is the most widely used device for obtaining vascular access, allowing the administration of fluids and medication. Up to 25% of adult patients, and 50% of pediatric patients experience a first-attempt cannulation failure. In addition to patient and clinician characteristics, device features might affect the handling and success rates. The objective of the study was to compare the first-attempt cannulation success rate between PVCs with wings and a port access (Vasofix® Safety, B. Braun, abbreviated hereon in as VS) with those without (Introcan® Safety, B. Braun, abbreviated hereon in as IS) in an anesthesiological cohort. METHODS: An open label, multi-center, randomized trial was performed. First-attempt cannulation success rates were examined, along with relevant patient, clinician, and device characteristics with univariate and multivariate analyses. Information on handling and adherence to use instructions was gathered, and available catheters were assessed for damage. RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred four patients were included in the intention to treat analysis. First-attempt success rate was significantly higher with winged and ported catheters (VS) than with the non-winged, non-ported design (IS) (87.5% with VS vs. 78.2% with IS; P(Chi) < .001). Operators rated the handling of VS as superior (rating of “good” or “very good: 86.1% VS vs. 20.8% IS, P(Chi) < .001). Reinsertion of the needle into the catheter after partial withdrawal—prior or during the catheterization attempt—was associated with an increased risk of cannulation failure (7.909, CI 5.989–10.443, P < .001 and 23.023, CI 10.372–51.105, P < .001, respectively) and a twofold risk of catheter damage (OR 1.999, CI 1.347–2.967, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: First-attempt cannulation success of peripheral, ported, winged catheters was higher compared to non-ported, non-winged devices. The handling of the winged and ported design was better rated by the clinicians. Needle reinsertions are related to an increase in rates of catheter damage and cannulation failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02213965, Date: 12/08/2014. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01631-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8969381
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89693812022-04-01 A comparison of first-attempt cannulation success of peripheral venous catheter systems with and without wings and injection ports in surgical patients—a randomized trial Mörgeli, Rudolf Schmidt, Katrin Neumann, Tim Kruppa, Jochen Föhring, Ulrich Hofmann, Pascal Rosenberger, Peter Falk, Elke Boemke, Willehad Spies, Claudia BMC Anesthesiol Research BACKGROUND: A peripheral venous catheter (PVC) is the most widely used device for obtaining vascular access, allowing the administration of fluids and medication. Up to 25% of adult patients, and 50% of pediatric patients experience a first-attempt cannulation failure. In addition to patient and clinician characteristics, device features might affect the handling and success rates. The objective of the study was to compare the first-attempt cannulation success rate between PVCs with wings and a port access (Vasofix® Safety, B. Braun, abbreviated hereon in as VS) with those without (Introcan® Safety, B. Braun, abbreviated hereon in as IS) in an anesthesiological cohort. METHODS: An open label, multi-center, randomized trial was performed. First-attempt cannulation success rates were examined, along with relevant patient, clinician, and device characteristics with univariate and multivariate analyses. Information on handling and adherence to use instructions was gathered, and available catheters were assessed for damage. RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred four patients were included in the intention to treat analysis. First-attempt success rate was significantly higher with winged and ported catheters (VS) than with the non-winged, non-ported design (IS) (87.5% with VS vs. 78.2% with IS; P(Chi) < .001). Operators rated the handling of VS as superior (rating of “good” or “very good: 86.1% VS vs. 20.8% IS, P(Chi) < .001). Reinsertion of the needle into the catheter after partial withdrawal—prior or during the catheterization attempt—was associated with an increased risk of cannulation failure (7.909, CI 5.989–10.443, P < .001 and 23.023, CI 10.372–51.105, P < .001, respectively) and a twofold risk of catheter damage (OR 1.999, CI 1.347–2.967, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: First-attempt cannulation success of peripheral, ported, winged catheters was higher compared to non-ported, non-winged devices. The handling of the winged and ported design was better rated by the clinicians. Needle reinsertions are related to an increase in rates of catheter damage and cannulation failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02213965, Date: 12/08/2014. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01631-7. BioMed Central 2022-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8969381/ /pubmed/35361115 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-022-01631-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Mörgeli, Rudolf
Schmidt, Katrin
Neumann, Tim
Kruppa, Jochen
Föhring, Ulrich
Hofmann, Pascal
Rosenberger, Peter
Falk, Elke
Boemke, Willehad
Spies, Claudia
A comparison of first-attempt cannulation success of peripheral venous catheter systems with and without wings and injection ports in surgical patients—a randomized trial
title A comparison of first-attempt cannulation success of peripheral venous catheter systems with and without wings and injection ports in surgical patients—a randomized trial
title_full A comparison of first-attempt cannulation success of peripheral venous catheter systems with and without wings and injection ports in surgical patients—a randomized trial
title_fullStr A comparison of first-attempt cannulation success of peripheral venous catheter systems with and without wings and injection ports in surgical patients—a randomized trial
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of first-attempt cannulation success of peripheral venous catheter systems with and without wings and injection ports in surgical patients—a randomized trial
title_short A comparison of first-attempt cannulation success of peripheral venous catheter systems with and without wings and injection ports in surgical patients—a randomized trial
title_sort comparison of first-attempt cannulation success of peripheral venous catheter systems with and without wings and injection ports in surgical patients—a randomized trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8969381/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35361115
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-022-01631-7
work_keys_str_mv AT morgelirudolf acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT schmidtkatrin acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT neumanntim acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT kruppajochen acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT fohringulrich acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT hofmannpascal acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT rosenbergerpeter acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT falkelke acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT boemkewillehad acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT spiesclaudia acomparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT morgelirudolf comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT schmidtkatrin comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT neumanntim comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT kruppajochen comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT fohringulrich comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT hofmannpascal comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT rosenbergerpeter comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT falkelke comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT boemkewillehad comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT spiesclaudia comparisonoffirstattemptcannulationsuccessofperipheralvenouscathetersystemswithandwithoutwingsandinjectionportsinsurgicalpatientsarandomizedtrial