Background: In 2011, Dawson proposed the Zone Insertion MethodTM (ZIMTM) to identify the optimal peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) insertion site in the upper arm. However, data on the effectiveness and safety of the ZIMTM in guiding PICC placement in Chinese population is limited. Methods In this randomized controlled trial, 120 cancer patients were randomly assigned to the upper portion of the red zone (RZ), the green zone (GZ) and the lower portion of the yellow zone (YZ) groups (at a 1:1:1 ratio). The aim was to compare the degree of patient comfort and the incidence of major PICC complications among the three insertion zones based on the ZIMTM in a Chinese Cancer Center. (Clinical Trials. Gov number, ChiCTR1900024111) Results A total of 118 catheters were inserted in 118 patients (2 patients were lost to follow-up). After the 1-month follow-up, patients randomly assigned to the YZ group had a higher degree of comfort with a lower score than those assigned to the other two zone groups: 30.21±3.16 in the YZ group versus 31.65±2.51 in the RZ group and 31.59±2.92 in the GZ group ( P=.046). The incidence of thrombosis (10/40, 25%) and occlusion (4/40, 10%) in the RZ, which were significantly higher than those in the other two zone groups (χ2 =7.368, P=.02; χ2 =5.778, P =.03), whereas the risk in the GZ group was similar to that in the YZ group. The incidence of contact dermatitis in the GZ group was significantly higher than that of the other two zone groups (χ2=12.873, P=.001). Conclusions: This study found that the lower portion of YZ seems to be another suitable PICC insertion site for a higher degree of comfort and a lower risk of occlusion and thrombosis, which broadens the choice of PICC insertion sites in the upper arm for clinical practice.

No abstract

Objective To evaluate the effects of a video-assisted education intervention on informed consent and patient education for peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). Methods We conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing the effects on informed consent of video-assisted patient education and traditional face-to-face discussion in a catheter outpatient ward of a cancer centre in Guangzhou, China, in 2018. Participants were 140 patients randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to two groups: video-assisted or traditional intervention. General information, patient retention of PICC-related information, working time spent by nurses on the procedure, and patient and nurse satisfaction with the procedure were assessed. Results The time used for informed consent was significantly shorter in the experimental group (1.02 ± 0.24 minutes) than in the control group (6.87 ± 1.10 minutes). The time used for PICC-related education was significantly shorter in the experimental group (1.03 ± 0.28 minutes) than in the control group (5.11 ± 0.57 minutes). Nurses’ degree of satisfaction with the procedure was significantly higher in the experimental group (4.10 ± 0.57) than in the control group (2.60 ± 0.70). Conclusion The use of video-assisted informed consent and patient education in this cancer centre decreased nurses’ working time and improved nurses’ satisfaction. Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR1800015664