Peripheral venous access using devices over needles with and without extension: costs and outcomes

Abstract

Objectives: to analyze the mean direct cost and peripheral venous access length outcomes using devices over needle with and without extension. Methods: quantitative, exploratory-descriptive research. Venous punctures and length of the devices were followed. The mean direct cost was calculated by multiplying the time (timed) spent by nursing professionals by the unit cost of labor, adding to the cost of materials. Results: the total mean direct cost of using devices “with extension” (US$ 9.37) was 2.9 times the cost of using devices “without extension” (US$ 4.50), US$ 7.71 and US$ 2.66, respectively. Totaling 96 hours of stay, the “device over needle with extension” showed a lower occurrence of accidental loss. Conclusions: the use of the “device over needle with extension”, despite its higher mean direct cost, was more effective in favoring adequate length of peripheral venous access.

Phlebitis in Medical-Surgical Units

“…In the current study, the 22-gauge device was the majority in both groups, as well as in another study 5. Published data point out that the appropriate choice of gauge is a decisive factor for the successful establishment of the PIVC in the first cannulation attempt 21. In the present study, there was no significant difference between the gauge and the development of phlebitis, unlike the study by Simin et al,15 who reported that the 22-gauge catheter was 5.8 times more likely to develop phlebitis, the 20-gauge 11.3 times, and the 18-gauge 12.1 times.…”