Kondo Motoi, Kim Seung Jin, Fujiwara Yoshiyuki, Iinuma Akiko, Koji Keiko, Irie Yumiko, Tazumi Keiko, Noguchi Shinzaburo, Monden Morito
Infusion Room of Osaka University Hospital.
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 2004 Nov;31(12):2005-8.
We have a randomized trial to compare the operability and safety of ten 24-gauge intravenous catheters in the infusion room. In the present study, we used 3 intravenous catheters without safety covers (Jelco plus, Surflo flash, Intima) and 7 intravenous catheters with safety covers (Supercath, Introcan safety, Surshield surflo II, Insyte autoguard, Safetouch cath, Protective plus, Acuvance plus). All catheters were used 40 times. The detainment rate of the first time puncture and the incidence of needle accidents with Jelco plus and Insyte autoguard were 98% and 0%, respectively, against 100% and 0%, respectively, for all other catheters. There was no difference in the incidence of these two events in all groups (ANOVA; p > 0.05). On the other hand, all intravenous catheters with safety covers revealed that 1) an in situ needle has a resistance to the catheter (i.e., a resistance during catheter release), and/or 2) blood exposure can not be sufficiently avoided.
我们进行了一项随机试验，以比较十种24号静脉导管在输液室中的可操作性和安全性。在本研究中，我们使用了3种无安全套的静脉导管（Jelco plus、Surflo flash、Intima）和7种有安全套的静脉导管（Supercath、Introcan safety、Surshield surflo II、Insyte autoguard、Safetouch cath、Protective plus、Acuvance plus）。所有导管均使用40次。Jelco plus和Insyte autoguard的首次穿刺留置率和针刺事故发生率分别为98%和0%，而其他所有导管分别为100%和0%。所有组中这两个事件的发生率无差异（方差分析；p>0.05）。另一方面，所有有安全套的静脉导管均显示：1）原位针在导管释放时有阻力（即导管释放时的阻力），和/或2）不能充分避免血液暴露。
