• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

静脉留置针购置的功能评估与实践调查

Functional evaluation and practice survey to guide purchasing of intravenous cannulae.

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Darwin Hospital, Tiwi, NT 0810, Australia.

出版信息

BMC Anesthesiol. 2013 Dec 24;13(1):49. doi: 10.1186/1471-2253-13-49.

DOI:10.1186/1471-2253-13-49
PMID:24364899
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3882495/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There are wide variations in the physical designs and attributes between different brands of intravenous cannulae that makes product selection and purchasing difficult. In a systematic assessment to guide purchasing, we assessed two cannulae - Cannula P and I. We proposed that the results of in-vitro performance testing of the cannulae would be associated with preference after clinical comparison.

METHODS

We designed an observer-blinded randomised head-to-head trial between the 18, 20 and 22 gauge versions of Cannula P and I. Our primary end-point was pressure (mmHg) generated during various flow rates and our secondary end-point was the force (Newton) required to slide the catheter away from the needle. This was followed by a prospective electronic survey following a two-week clinical trial period.

RESULTS

The mean difference in resistance between Cannula P and I was: 307 mmHg.L-1.hr-1 (95% CI: 289-325, p < 0.001) for 22G; 135 mmHg.L-1.hr-1 (95% CI: 125-144, p < 0.001) for 20G; and 27 mmHg.L-1.hr-1 (95% CI: 26-28, p < 0.001) for 18G. The mean difference in the force needed to displace the catheter away from its needle was: 1.41 N (95% CI: 1.09-1.73, p < 0.001) for 22G; 0.19 N (95% CI: -0.04-0.41, p = 0.12) for 20G; and 1.96 N (95% CI: 1.40-2.52, p < 0.001) for 18G. After a trial period, all 16 anaesthetist who had used both cannulae preferred Cannula I to P.

CONCLUSIONS

The evaluation process described here could help hospitals improve efficient product selection and purchasing decisions for intravenous cannulae.

摘要

背景

不同品牌的静脉留置针在物理设计和属性方面存在很大差异,这使得产品选择和采购变得困难。在一项系统评估中,我们对两种留置针——P 型和 I 型留置针进行了评估,以指导采购。我们假设留置针的体外性能测试结果将与临床比较后的偏好相关。

方法

我们设计了一项盲法随机头对头试验,比较了 18G、20G 和 22G 规格的 P 型和 I 型留置针。主要终点是在不同流速下产生的压力(mmHg),次要终点是将导管从针头上滑开所需的力(牛顿)。随后,在为期两周的临床试验结束后进行了前瞻性电子调查。

结果

P 型和 I 型留置针之间的阻力差异平均值为:22G 时为 307mmHg·L-1·hr-1(95%CI:289-325,p<0.001);20G 时为 135mmHg·L-1·hr-1(95%CI:125-144,p<0.001);18G 时为 27mmHg·L-1·hr-1(95%CI:26-28,p<0.001)。将导管从针头上移开所需的力的差异平均值为:22G 时为 1.41N(95%CI:1.09-1.73,p<0.001);20G 时为 0.19N(95%CI:-0.04-0.41,p=0.12);18G 时为 1.96N(95%CI:1.40-2.52,p<0.001)。在试验期间,所有 16 名使用过两种留置针的麻醉师都更喜欢 I 型留置针。

结论

这里描述的评估过程可以帮助医院提高静脉留置针产品选择和采购决策的效率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4010/3882495/f2d36f3f7c48/1471-2253-13-49-3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4010/3882495/3bf558ae7757/1471-2253-13-49-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4010/3882495/1698f7d24064/1471-2253-13-49-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4010/3882495/f2d36f3f7c48/1471-2253-13-49-3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4010/3882495/3bf558ae7757/1471-2253-13-49-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4010/3882495/1698f7d24064/1471-2253-13-49-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4010/3882495/f2d36f3f7c48/1471-2253-13-49-3.jpg

相似文献

1
Functional evaluation and practice survey to guide purchasing of intravenous cannulae.静脉留置针购置的功能评估与实践调查
BMC Anesthesiol. 2013 Dec 24;13(1):49. doi: 10.1186/1471-2253-13-49.
2
A prospective clinical comparison of two intravenous polyurethane cannulae.两种静脉用聚氨酯套管的前瞻性临床比较。
Anaesth Intensive Care. 1996 Dec;24(6):705-9. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9602400614.
3
The 'Can't Intubate Can't Oxygenate' scenario in Pediatric Anesthesia: a comparison of different devices for needle cricothyroidotomy.小儿麻醉中的“无法插管无法给氧”情况:不同环甲膜穿刺切开术器械的比较
Paediatr Anaesth. 2012 Dec;22(12):1155-8. doi: 10.1111/pan.12048. Epub 2012 Oct 16.
4
A prospective clinical comparison of two intravenous polyurethane cannulae.两种静脉聚氨酯套管的前瞻性临床比较。
Anaesth Intensive Care. 1997 Feb;25(1):42-7. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9702500108.
5
Percutaneous central venous catheters versus peripheral cannulae for delivery of parenteral nutrition in neonates.经皮中心静脉导管与外周静脉套管用于新生儿肠外营养输注的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18(3):CD004219. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004219.pub3.
6
The Effect of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy on Mortality and Intubation Rate in Acute Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.高流量鼻导管给氧疗法对急性呼吸衰竭患者死亡率和插管率的影响:一项系统评价和Meta分析
Crit Care Med. 2017 Apr;45(4):e449-e456. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002091.
7
Percutaneous central venous catheters versus peripheral cannulae for delivery of parenteral nutrition in neonates.经皮中心静脉导管与外周静脉套管用于新生儿肠外营养输注的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004(2):CD004219. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004219.pub2.
8
The prevalence of peripheral intravenous cannulae and pattern of use: A point prevalence in a private hospital setting.外周静脉置管的流行情况和使用模式:私立医院环境中的现况调查。
J Clin Nurs. 2018 Jan;27(1-2):e363-e367. doi: 10.1111/jocn.13961. Epub 2017 Dec 6.
9
Pressure and flow properties of cannulae for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation I: return (arterial) cannulae.体外膜肺氧合用插管的压力和流量特性I:回流(动脉)插管
Perfusion. 2019 Apr;34(1_suppl):58-64. doi: 10.1177/0267659119830521.
10
Pressure and flow properties of cannulae for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation II: drainage (venous) cannulae.体外膜肺氧合用套管的压力和流量特性 II:引流(静脉)套管
Perfusion. 2019 Apr;34(1_suppl):65-73. doi: 10.1177/0267659119830514.

本文引用的文献

1
Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial.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。
Lancet. 2012 Sep 22;380(9847):1066-74. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61082-4.
2
An evaluation of sharp safety intravenous cannula devices.锐器安全型静脉留置针装置的评估
Nurs Stand. 2011;26(15-17):42-9. doi: 10.7748/ns2011.12.26.15.42.c8870.
3
An evaluation of the B. Braun Vasofix Safety intravenous cannula.贝朗Vasofix安全型静脉留置针评估
Anaesthesia. 2008 Dec;63(12):1379-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05772.x.
4
Needle pain in children: contextual factors.儿童的针刺疼痛:背景因素
Pediatrics. 2008 Nov;122 Suppl 3:S125-9. doi: 10.1542/peds.2008-1055d.
5
A prospective randomized trial of two safety peripheral intravenous catheters.两种安全外周静脉导管的前瞻性随机试验。
Anesth Analg. 2008 Jul;107(1):155-8. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e318174df5f.
6
Introducing new anaesthetic equipment into clinical practice.将新型麻醉设备引入临床实践。
Anaesthesia. 2008 Jun;63(6):571-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05583.x.
7
How can we regulate medicines better?我们如何能更好地监管药品?
BMJ. 2007 Oct 20;335(7624):803-5. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39281.615706.94.
8
Efficacy of catheter needles with safeguard mechanisms.带有安全防护装置的导管针的功效。
Anaesthesia. 2002 Jun;57(6):572-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2002.02571.x.
9
Prevention of needle-stick injury. Efficacy of a safeguarded intravenous cannula.预防针刺伤。一种安全静脉套管的功效。
Anaesthesia. 1999 Mar;54(3):258-61. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.1999.00749.x.
10
A comparison of three ported cannulae available in New Zealand.新西兰三种端口套管的比较。
Anaesth Intensive Care. 1993 Jun;21(3):337-41. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9302100315.