Suppr超能文献

常规与临床指征外周静脉导管更换:一项随机对照等效试验。

Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial.

机构信息

Research Centre for Clinical and Community Practice Innovation, Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD, Australia.

出版信息

Lancet. 2012 Sep 22;380(9847):1066-74. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61082-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The millions of peripheral intravenous catheters used each year are recommended for 72-96 h replacement in adults. This routine replacement increases health-care costs and staff workload and requires patients to undergo repeated invasive procedures. The effectiveness of the practice is not well established. Our hypothesis was that clinically indicated catheter replacement is of equal benefit to routine replacement.

METHODS

This multicentre, randomised, non-blinded equivalence trial recruited adults (≥18 years) with an intravenous catheter of expected use longer than 4 days from three hospitals in Queensland, Australia, between May 20, 2008, and Sept 9, 2009. Computer-generated random assignment (1:1 ratio, no blocking, stratified by hospital, concealed before allocation) was to clinically indicated replacement, or third daily routine replacement. Patients, clinical staff, and research nurses could not be masked after treatment allocation because of the nature of the intervention. The primary outcome was phlebitis during catheterisation or within 48 h after removal. The equivalence margin was set at 3%. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints were catheter-related bloodstream and local infections, all bloodstream infections, catheter tip colonisation, infusion failure, catheter numbers used, therapy duration, mortality, and costs. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12608000445370.

FINDINGS

All 3283 patients randomised (5907 catheters) were included in our analysis (1593 clinically indicated; 1690 routine replacement). Mean dwell time for catheters in situ on day 3 was 99 h (SD 54) when replaced as clinically indicated and 70 h (13) when routinely replaced. Phlebitis occurred in 114 of 1593 (7%) patients in the clinically indicated group and in 114 of 1690 (7%) patients in the routine replacement group, an absolute risk difference of 0·41% (95% CI -1·33 to 2·15%), which was within the prespecified 3% equivalence margin. No serious adverse events related to study interventions occurred.

INTERPRETATION

Peripheral intravenous catheters can be removed as clinically indicated; this policy will avoid millions of catheter insertions, associated discomfort, and substantial costs in both equipment and staff workload. Ongoing close monitoring should continue with timely treatment cessation and prompt removal for complications.

FUNDING

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

摘要

背景

每年使用的数百万根外周静脉导管建议在成人中更换 72-96 小时。这种常规更换增加了医疗保健成本和员工工作量,需要患者反复接受侵入性操作。该实践的效果尚未得到充分证实。我们的假设是,临床指征的导管更换与常规更换同样有益。

方法

这项多中心、随机、非盲等效试验招募了来自澳大利亚昆士兰州的三家医院的预计使用时间超过 4 天的成年患者(≥18 岁),时间为 2008 年 5 月 20 日至 2009 年 9 月 9 日。计算机生成的随机分配(1:1 比例,无分组,按医院分层,分配前隐藏)为临床指征更换或每日第三次常规更换。由于干预的性质,患者、临床工作人员和研究护士在治疗分配后无法掩盖。主要结局是导管插入或移除后 48 小时内的静脉炎。等效范围设定为 3%。主要分析是意向治疗。次要终点是导管相关血流感染和局部感染、所有血流感染、导管尖端定植、输注失败、使用的导管数量、治疗持续时间、死亡率和成本。该试验在澳大利亚和新西兰临床试验注册中心注册,编号为 ACTRN12608000445370。

结果

所有 3283 名随机患者(5907 根导管)均纳入我们的分析(1593 例临床指征;1690 例常规更换)。第 3 天原位导管留置时间为 99 小时(SD 54),临床指征更换时为 70 小时(13 小时)。在临床指征组中,1593 例患者中有 114 例(7%)发生静脉炎,在常规更换组中,1690 例患者中有 114 例(7%)发生静脉炎,绝对风险差异为 0.41%(95%CI-1.33 至 2.15%),在预设的 3%等效范围内。没有与研究干预相关的严重不良事件发生。

解释

外周静脉导管可以根据临床指征拔出;这项政策将避免数百万例导管插入、相关不适和设备及员工工作量的大量成本。应继续进行密切监测,并及时停止治疗,以避免并发症。

资金来源

澳大利亚国家卫生和医学研究委员会。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验