Østfold University College Halden Norway.
Østfold Hospital Trust Grålum Norway.
Nurs Open. 2020 Jan 22;7(3):760-767. doi: 10.1002/nop2.448. eCollection 2020 May.
To investigate patient experiences with peripherally inserted venous catheters, namely PICC lines and Midlines, as well as the influence of socio-demographic variables, length of stay, comorbidity and complications on these experiences.
The study had a descriptive, multicentre, cross-sectional design.
We used a questionnaire to investigate patient experiences ( = 359).
Patients experiences were not optimal on each of the items in the questionnaire. Nevertheless, few respondents would have preferred a traditional peripheral venous catheter instead. Moreover, free-text answers indicated that patients were very satisfied with their catheter. Results also indicate that the hospitals have different approach when selecting a PICC line or a Midline as route of choice. The only factor associated with patient experiences was "complications."
Even though patients reported of several disadvantages with the PICC line/Midline, findings indicate that they would have chosen this again. PICC lines and Midlines are beneficial from the patients' perspective, even though they have disadvantages.
调查患者对外周静脉置入中心静脉导管（PICC 导管和中线导管）的体验，以及社会人口统计学变量、住院时间、合并症和并发症对这些体验的影响。
本研究为描述性、多中心、横断面设计。
我们使用问卷调查了患者的体验（=359）。
患者在问卷的每个项目上的体验都不是最佳的。然而，很少有受访者表示宁愿选择传统的外周静脉导管。此外，自由文本回答表明患者对他们的导管非常满意。结果还表明，医院在选择 PICC 导管或中线导管作为首选途径时有不同的方法。唯一与患者体验相关的因素是“并发症”。
尽管患者报告了 PICC 导管/中线导管的几个缺点，但研究结果表明，他们会再次选择这种导管。从患者的角度来看，PICC 导管和中线导管是有益的，尽管它们有缺点。
