Blood Samples of Peripheral Venous Catheter or The Usual Way: Do Infusion Fluid Alters the Biochemical Test Results?

Abstract

Background:Most blood tests require venous blood samples. Puncturing the vein also causes pain, infection, or damage to the blood, and lymph flow, or long-term healing. This study aimed to determine and compare the biochemical laboratory value of the blood samples that were provided through: peripheral vein infusion (PVI) receiving continuous intravenous fluid; and the usual method of blood sampling.Methods:This is an interventional, quasi-experimental, and controlled study. The selected study sample included 60 patients, who were hospitalized during 2014, in the Internal Medicine, part of Martyrs of Persian Gulf, teaching hospital at Bushehr. Three blood samples were taken from each patient that were provided through PVI line (5 ml blood collected at beginning of IVC and then another 5 cc), and another case was prepared by common blood sampling (control). All the samples were analyzed in terms of sodium, potassium, urea and creatinine using SPSS Ver.19 software, by paired t-test and Pearson’s correlation coefficients.Results:There was a statistically significant difference between the amount of sodium and potassium in the first blood samples taken from the intravenous infusion line and vein puncture. However, no significant differences were found among the biochemical amount in the second blood samples taken from the intravenous infusion line and vein puncture.Conclusions:We can use blood samples taken from peripheral intravenous infusion lines after 5cc discarding from the first part of the sample for measuring the value of sodium, potassium, urea and creatinine.

Blood sampling through peripheral intravenous cannulas: A look at current practice in Australia

“…The majority of nurses surveyed (n = 250, 74%) indicated they would not sample blood from a PIVC if connected to an infusion line. Investigation on the possibility of contamination when drawing blood from intravenous line demonstrated the influence of intravenous fluids was reduced after a second blood sample was taken (Taghizadeganzadeh, Yazdankhahfard, Farzaneh, & Mirzaei, 2016).…”

Reliability of blood tests taken from the peripheral intravenous catheter

“…For example, 1 study determined that blood test results with PVC sampling (after a 5-mL dead space was discarded into medical waste) were more reliable than those with DVS sampling; the study included only 60 participants and referred to only 4 indicators (sodium, potassium, urea, and creatinine). [9] Only 1 study examined the effects of time elapsed following PVC insertion on blood test results and showed that PVC could be used after 1 and 2 days of insertion, but it only examined coagulation functions (PT + PTT) [14] . Notably, our study included a relatively large number of participants (n = 211).…”

“…[2,5,6] Additional decrease in hemolysis rate can be achieved by drawing a "dead space" sample from the PVC. [6] Even if no hemolysis occurs, there is concern that because time has elapsed since catheter insertion and its use (drug administration and infusion through PVC), the results will not be reliable [8][9][10]16,17] Blood sampling via PVC for routine tests (complete blood count [CBC], blood chemistry, coagulation, creatinine level, liver function, and troponin level) is a reliable method. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13] However, these studies had several limitations: a low number of participants and indicators examined and no reference to failure in drawing blood through PVC.…”