The handling of peripheral venous catheters – from non‐compliance to evidence‐based needs

Abstract

National guidelines should be based on evidence and current facts, and evaluation of guidelines should be given priority.

Commentary on Hasselberg D, Ivarsson B, Andersson R & Tingstedt B (2010) The handling of peripheral venous catheters – from non‐compliance to evidence‐based needs. Journal of Clinical Nursing 19, 3358–3363

“…Moreover, the present study does not provide a definition of thrombophlebitis, rendering comparisons with other similar studies difficult. Although we agree with Hasselberg et al (2010) that national guidelines should be based on evidence, the fact remains that their study does not contribute solid evidence for replacement times of in situ PVCs. It is essential to use the concept of evidence correctly, especially when we raise arguments concerning cost effectiveness, better use of nurses' time, and saving patients from unnecessary suffering.…”

“…Professional staff were instructed to complete the registry correctly, for example, thrombophlebitis. Concerning relevance to clinical practice, Hasselberg et al (2010) suggest that the findings could be easily implemented in clinical practice by revising the Swedish national guideline that PVCs should be removed every 12-24 hours to avoid complications, and instead recommend every 72 hours, as shown by the present study.…”

“…Professional staff were instructed to complete the registry correctly, for example, thrombophlebitis. Concerning relevance to clinical practice, Hasselberg et al (2010) suggest that the findings could be easily implemented in clinical practice by revising the Swedish national guideline that PVCs should be removed every 12-24 hours to avoid complications, and instead recommend every 72 hours, as shown by the present study.Apart from the useful findings on compliance with Swedish guidelines, it is also important to acknowledge the paper's key limitations. The study was designed to describe compliance, but not to investigate different times between replacing in situ PVCs, an undertaking that would require a clinical controlled trial to yield solid evidence.…”

“…

This study by Hasselberg et al (2010) aimed to measure compliance with Swedish national guidelines addressing how long peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) should remain in situ, selection of the smallest possible PVC, and reporting of outcomes. The study included 196 patients (413 PVCs) from a single surgical ward.

…”

Complicações relacionadas ao uso do cateter venoso periférico: ensaio clínico randomizado

“…(12) In this research, no significant difference was found between the variables analyzed for obstruction, but a study involving surgical patients appointed that the 22 gauge caliber, used in 8.1% of the participants, presented more cases of obstruction, with a proven statistical difference (p=0.0004). (25) Equivalent rates resulted in 10% (9) (n=11 out of 110 catheters) and in 11.7% (12) for obstruction or function loss. For traction, similar to the present findings, studies measure rates of 10.2%, (4) 7.8%, (24) and between 6 and 9%.…”