Compare the efficacy of recommended peripheral intravascular cannula insertion practices with a standard protocol: A randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND

Millions of patients admitted globally in health care setups require insertion of peripheral intravascular catheter for intravenous drugs or fluid administration. However, if proper precautions are not followed during insertion, it results in significant morbidity. This study was designed to study the efficacy and safety of recommended Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for peripheral intravascular catheter insertion practice and its comparison with a standard insertion protocol being followed and their outcome.

METHODS

Patients were randomized and catheter was inserted as recommended by CDC guideline (Group 1,  = 100) or followed standard defined steps during insertion (Group 2,  = 100).

RESULTS

Almost double the patients had occurrence of thrombophlebitis in Group 1 ( = 0.02). No difference observed between catheter needle size and infection rates (p = 0.3). Infection rate increased significantly if second attempt is taken for insertion. The time required to insert catheter following CDC recommended protocol is less than as by standard surgical complete asepsis cleaning protocol (86.03 vs 109.40 s) (p = 0.001). Study also observed that insertion at wrist joint leads to higher incidence of thrombophlebitis. During 0-24 h, 6% (12) insertions turned positive followed by a dip during 25-48 h, 2% (5) insertions. 80% (159) insertions did not develop thrombophlebitis at the end of 72 h.

CONCLUSION

It is thus amply demonstrated that meticulous adherence to insertion procedure with asepsis plays an important role in decreasing intravascular catheter associated morbidity. Other parameters like needle gauge, sites of insertion, have little bearing. The time required in following standard aseptic technique is significantly more but keeping in view the benefit to the patient it is highly recommended.