Neo Shirlyn Hui-Shan, Khemlani Mansha Hari, Sim Lai Kiow, Seah Angeline Soek Tian
1 Division of Palliative Medicine, National Cancer Centre , Singapore .
2 Department of Geriatric Medicine, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital , Singapore .
J Palliat Med. 2016 Mar;19(3):318-22. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2015.0085. Epub 2015 Nov 19.
A comparison of metal needles and plastic cannulae (winged and nonwinged) for continuous subcutaneous infusion was done during a quality improvement project to reduce device-induced complications at our hospital. Design, Setting, and Measurements: Data were collected on incidence of site reactions (bruising, swelling, erythema, and blisters); mechanical complications (kinking and dislodgement); device durability; type, and volume of medications; and incidence of needle-stick injuries. All infusion devices used for patients in the Palliative Care Service from February 3 to March 26, 2014 were studied. Devices examined were: winged metal needle (Venofix(®), 23G, B. Braun Melsungen AG, Melsungen, Germany), winged vialon cannula (BD Nexiva™, 24G, Becton Dickinson Infusion Therapy Systems Inc., Sandy, UT), and nonwinged polyurethane cannula (Introcan Safety(®), 24G, B. Braun Medical, Mundelein, IL).
Thirty devices (10 per type) were used. Incidence of site reactions was 50.0%, 10.0%, and 0.0% for the metal needles, polyurethane cannulae, and vialon cannulae, respectively. Incidence of mechanical complications was 20.0% for the polyurethane cannulae and 0.0% for the metal needles and vialon cannulae. Duration of use was up to 60 hours, 83 hours, and 113 hours for the metal needles, polyurethane cannulae, and vialon cannulae, respectively. Daily volumes infused were up to 28.9 mL, 60.0 mL, and 29.4 mL for the metal needles, polyurethane cannulae, and vialon cannulae, respectively. No needle-stick injuries occurred.
The winged vialon cannula was the most durable, with no site reactions or mechanical complications, tolerating a volume comparable to that of the metal needle. We suggest its utilization for continuous subcutaneous infusions and consideration of future randomized controlled trials with an integrated economic evaluation for further in-depth comparisons of subcutaneous indwelling devices.
在我院一项旨在减少器械所致并发症的质量改进项目中,对用于连续皮下输注的金属针和塑料套管(带翼和无翼)进行了比较。设计、地点与测量:收集了关于局部反应(瘀斑、肿胀、红斑和水泡)发生率、机械并发症(扭结和移位)、器械耐用性、药物类型和用量以及针刺伤发生率的数据。对2014年2月3日至3月26日姑息治疗科所有用于患者的输注器械进行了研究。所检查的器械有:带翼金属针(Venofix(®),23G,贝朗医疗集团,德国梅尔松根)、带翼维隆套管(BD Nexiva™,24G,美国贝克顿·迪金森输液治疗系统公司,犹他州桑迪)和无翼聚氨酯套管(Introcan Safety(®),24G,贝朗医疗公司,伊利诺伊州芒德林)。
共使用了30个器械(每种10个)。金属针、聚氨酯套管和维隆套管的局部反应发生率分别为50.0%、10.0%和0.0%。聚氨酯套管的机械并发症发生率为20.0%,金属针和维隆套管的发生率为0.0%。金属针、聚氨酯套管和维隆套管的使用时长分别达60小时、83小时和113小时。金属针、聚氨酯套管和维隆套管的每日输注量分别达28.9 mL、60.0 mL和29.4 mL。未发生针刺伤。
带翼维隆套管最耐用,无局部反应或机械并发症,可耐受与金属针相当的输注量。我们建议将其用于连续皮下输注,并考虑未来进行随机对照试验及综合经济评估,以进一步深入比较皮下留置器械。