Suppr超能文献

预防外周静脉导管失败的固定方法:一项随机对照试验性研究

Securement methods for peripheral venous catheters to prevent failure: a randomised controlled pilot trial.

作者信息

Marsh Nicole, Webster Joan, Flynn Julie, Mihala Gabor, Hewer Barbara, Fraser John, Rickard Claire M

机构信息

2 NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Nursing, Centre for Health Practice Innovation, Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University, Brisbane - Australia.

出版信息

J Vasc Access. 2015 May-Jun;16(3):237-44. doi: 10.5301/jva.5000348. Epub 2015 Feb 4.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To assess the effectiveness of four securement methods to prevent peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) failure.

METHODS

A single-centre, four-arm, randomised, controlled, non-blinded, superiority pilot trial was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital in Queensland (Australia), between November 2012 and January 2013. Adult patients, with a PIVC expected to remain in situ for ≥24 hours and admitted to general medical or surgical wards, were randomly allocated to standard polyurethane dressing (control, SPU), tissue adhesive (TA) with an SPU, bordered polyurethane dressing (BPU) or sutureless securement device (SSD) with an SPU, experimental groups. The primary endpoint was PIVC failure, defined as premature device removal before the end of therapy because of pain, blockage, leaking, accidental removal and local or catheter-related bloodstream infection.

RESULTS

PIVCs were used for an average of 2.6 days across all study groups (n = 85). Catheter failure was lowest in the TA group (3/21, 14%) and highest in the control group (8/21, 38%), with BPU and SSD failure at 5/20 (25%) and 5/23 (22%), respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio of catheter failure was lowest in the TA group (0.50, 95% CI: 0.13-1.98), and then the BPU (0.52, 95% CI: 0.15-1.78) and SSD (0.61, 95% CI: 0.20-1.91) groups. No patient was suspected of a local or catheter-related bloodstream infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Current SPU dressings alone do not prevent many cases of PIVC failure. TA appears promising as an innovative solution, but may not be suitable for all patients. A larger Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)-funded trial has commenced.

摘要

目的

评估四种固定方法预防外周静脉导管(PIVC)失败的有效性。

方法

2012年11月至2013年1月期间,在澳大利亚昆士兰州的一家三级转诊医院进行了一项单中心、四臂、随机、对照、非盲、优效性预试验。预计PIVC将原位保留≥24小时且入住普通内科或外科病房的成年患者被随机分配至标准聚氨酯敷料组(对照组,SPU)、使用SPU的组织粘合剂(TA)组、带边框聚氨酯敷料(BPU)组或使用SPU的无缝合固定装置(SSD)组,即试验组。主要终点为PIVC失败,定义为因疼痛、堵塞、渗漏、意外拔除以及局部或导管相关血流感染而在治疗结束前提前拔除装置。

结果

所有研究组(n = 85)中PIVC的平均使用时间为2.6天。导管失败率在TA组最低(3/21,14%),在对照组最高(8/21,38%),BPU组和SSD组的失败率分别为5/20(25%)和5/23(22%)。导管失败的调整风险比在TA组最低(0.50,95%CI:0.13 - 1.98),其次是BPU组(0.52,95%CI:0.15 - 1.78)和SSD组(0.61,95%CI:0.20 - 1.91)。无患者疑似发生局部或导管相关血流感染。

结论

单独使用目前的SPU敷料不能预防许多PIVC失败的情况。TA作为一种创新解决方案似乎很有前景,但可能并非适用于所有患者。一项由澳大利亚国家卫生与医学研究委员会(NHMRC)资助的更大规模试验已启动。

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