Abstract
IntroductionEbola Virus Disease (EVD) causes severe diarrhoea and vomiting, leading to dehydration and electrolyte abnormalities. Treatment remains supportive and often requires intravenous (IV) access. IV catheters are difficult to insert and maintain in this context. Our primary objective was to compare peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) and central venous catheters (CVCs) for volume resuscitation in patients with EVD. Material and methodsWe performed a prospective observational study between January and March 2015 at the Conakry Healthcare Workers Ebola Treatment Unit (ETU). The primary judgement criterion was the ratio of the daily infused volume of fluids to the prescribed volume (DIV/PV). ResultsFourteen patients were admitted. Twenty-eight PVCs and 8 CVCs were inserted. CVCs had a longer survival time (96±34hours versus 33.5±21hours, P<0.001). The mean DIV/PV was higher for the CVCs (0.95±0.08 versus 0.7±0.27, P<0.001), as well as the number of days with full administration of prescribed IV fluids (71.2% versus 34.1%, P=0.002). DiscussionInserting CVCs is a safe and reliable way of obtaining IV access in ETUs, provided adequately trained personnel are available. CVCs optimize fluid infusion compared to PVCs. Further studies comparing fluid management strategies in EVD are necessary.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.