Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
BMJ Qual Saf. 2021 Aug;30(8):628-638. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2020-011987. Epub 2020 Dec 24.
Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) provide reliable intravenous access for delivery of parenteral therapy. Yet, little is known about PICC care practices or how they vary across hospitals. We compared PICC-related processes across hospitals with different insertion delivery models.
We used a descriptive qualitative methodology and a naturalist philosophy, with site visits to conduct semistructured interviews completed between August 2018 and January 2019. Study sites included five Veterans Affairs Medical Centres, two with vascular access teams (VATs), two with PICC insertion primarily by interventional radiology (IR) and one without on-site PICC insertion capability. Interview participants were healthcare personnel (n=56), including physicians, bedside and vascular access nurses, and IR clinicians. Data collection focused on four PICC domains: use and decision-making process, insertion, in-hospital management and patient discharge education. We used rapid analysis and a summary matrix to compare practices across sites within each domain.
Our findings highlight the benefits of dedicated VATs across all PICC-related process domains, including implementation of criteria to guide PICC placement decisions, timely PICC insertion, more robust management practices and well-defined patient discharge education. We also found areas with potential for improvement, such as clinician awareness of PICC appropriateness criteria and alternative devices, deployment of VATs and patient discharge education.
Vascular access nurses play critical roles in all aspects of PICC-related care. There is variation in PICC decision-making, care and maintenance, and patient education across hospitals. Quality and safety improvement opportunities to reduce this variation are highlighted.
外周静脉置入中心静脉导管(PICC)为提供肠外治疗提供了可靠的静脉通路。然而,人们对 PICC 的护理实践知之甚少,也不清楚这些实践在不同医院之间有何差异。我们比较了具有不同插入输送模式的医院的 PICC 相关流程。
我们使用描述性定性方法和自然主义哲学,通过现场访问来进行半结构化访谈,访谈在 2018 年 8 月至 2019 年 1 月之间进行。研究地点包括五个退伍军人事务医疗中心,其中两个有血管接入团队(VAT),两个主要由介入放射科(IR)进行 PICC 插入,一个没有现场 PICC 插入能力。访谈参与者包括医疗保健人员(n=56),包括医生、床边和血管接入护士以及 IR 临床医生。数据收集集中在四个 PICC 领域:使用和决策过程、插入、院内管理和患者出院教育。我们使用快速分析和汇总矩阵来比较每个领域内各站点的实践。
我们的研究结果强调了专职 VAT 在所有 PICC 相关流程领域的优势,包括实施指导 PICC 放置决策的标准、及时进行 PICC 插入、更强大的管理实践以及明确的患者出院教育。我们还发现了一些有改进潜力的领域,例如临床医生对 PICC 适宜性标准和替代设备的认识、VAT 的部署以及患者出院教育。
血管接入护士在 PICC 相关护理的各个方面都起着至关重要的作用。不同医院之间在 PICC 决策、护理和维护以及患者教育方面存在差异。突出了减少这种差异的质量和安全改进机会。