Abstract
Intravenous therapies are essential for hospitalised patients. The rapid dissemination of portable ultrasound machines has eased ultrasound-guided intravenous access and facilitated increased use of long peripheral venous catheters (LPCs). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical performance and complications of LPCs. Retrospective, observational single-site study. Data from all consecutively inserted LPCs during a period of 18 months was evaluated. The primary endpoint was the all-cause incidence rate of catheter removal. Secondary endpoints included specific reasons for the catheter removal and the associations between predefined characteristics of the patients, the infusions and the catheters with catheter failure. During the period, 751 PVCs were inserted in 457 patients. The reasons for catheter removal were recorded in 563 cases. The overall incidence rate of catheter removal was 95.8/1000 catheter days (95% CI 88.4-103.8). The median dwell time was 8 days (IQR 5-14), and the total dwell time was 6136 days. Catheter failure occurred in 283 (50.3%) cases, of which the most common cause was phlebitis (n = 101, 17.9%). In multivariable analyses, the use of the cephalic vein was significantly associated with both all-cause catheter failure (p < .001) and catheter failure due to phlebitis (p < .001). In multivariable analyses, vancomycin infusion was not significantly associated with all-cause catheter failure (HR 1.15 (0.55-2.42), p = .71) or catheter failure due to phlebitis (HR 1.49 (0.49-4.53), p = .49). The overall incidence rate of catheter removal was 95.8/1000 catheter days, and the most common causes of catheter failure were phlebitis, infiltration and unintended catheter removal. The use of the cephalic vein was significantly associated with catheter failure in multivariable analyses. We did not find an association between vancomycin infusion and catheter failure in multivariable analyses.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
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.