The safety of clinically indicated replacement or routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: A randomized controlled study

Lu, Huapeng; Yang, Qinling; Nor, Hilal Mohamed; Lv, Yi; Zheng, Xuemei; Xia, Xin; Feng, Aifang; Sun, Yali; Zhou, Xiaoling; Zhang, Li; Qü, Yan; Li, Juanli; Guo, Xiaoye; Yang, Y C; Jiao, Jianfang; Xie, Ning

doi:10.1177/1129729821998528

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An updated systematic review conducted by Webster et al in 2019 corroborated these findings 16 . Lu et al , however, argue that the routine removal of PIVCs is safer 17 . Despite this conflicting evidence, consumer experience, preference, and reported outcomes of routine as opposed to clinically indicated removal of PIVCs are unknown.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumer experience and outcomes of insertion, removal, and management practices of short and midline peripheral intravenous catheters in acute health care: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

Nelson,

Coventry,

Baker

2024

JBI Evidence Synthesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This review will synthesize and integrate current research on the practices relating to the insertion, removal, and management of short and midline peripheral intravenous catheters on consumer experiences and outcomes in acute health care. The aim is to provide consolidated evidence to support policy decision-makers and health care workers in overcoming peripheral intravenous catheter device management challenges. Implementing the evidence provided by this review could increase positive consumer outcomes and reduce the gap between research evidence and clinical practice. Introduction: Peripheral intravenous catheterization is a process in which a device is inserted into a patient’s peripheral vein to administer medication, blood products, and therapeutic fluids. Recent studies have demonstrated the positive and negative impacts of peripheral intravenous catheter site placement, pain relief for insertion, complications, consumer engagement, and routine versus clinically indicated removal of these devices on consumers and the health care system. Managing these impacts in relation to research–practice gaps and conflicting evidence remains challenging. Moreover, consumer experiences and outcomes concerning these challenges are unclear. Inclusion criteria: This review will consider quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies on consumer experiences and outcomes in acute health care. The quantitative component will consider outcomes of pain, satisfaction, anxiety, and distress. The qualitative component will consider consumer experiences, including perceptions, preferences, perspectives, attitudes, expectations, and satisfaction. Methods: This study will follow JBI’s methodology of the convergent segregated approach for mixed method systematic reviews. A search of 12 databases will be conducted for peer-reviewed published articles, theses, and dissertations. There will be no age, date, or language limitations. Review registration number: PROSPERO (CRD42023410214).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumer experience and outcomes of insertion, removal, and management practices of short and midline peripheral intravenous catheters in acute health care: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

Nelson,

Coventry,

Baker

2024

JBI Evidence Synthesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effectiveness and Safety of Measures to Prevent Infections and Other Complications Associated With Peripheral Intravenous Catheters: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Dobrescu,

Constantin,

Pinte

et al. 2024

Clinical Infectious Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) contribute substantially to the global burden of infections. This systematic review assessed 24 infection prevention and control (IPC) interventions to prevent PIVC-associated infections and other complications. Methods We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, WHO Global Index Medicus, CINAHL and reference lists for controlled studies, from January 1, 1980–March 16, 2023. We dually selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and rated the certainty of evidence (COE). For outcomes with three or more trials, we conducted Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses. Results 105 studies met our prespecified eligibility criteria, addressing 16 of the 24 research questions; no studies were identified for eight research questions. Based on findings of low to high COE, wearing gloves reduced the risk for overall adverse events related to insertion compared to no gloves (one non-randomised controlled trial [RCT]; adjusted risk ratio [RR]: 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.33–0.85), and catheter removal based on defined schedules potentially resulted in a lower phlebitis/thrombophlebitis incidence (10 RCTs; RR: 0.74, 95% credible interval 0.49–1.01) compared to clinically indicated removal in adults. In neonates, chlorhexidine reduced the phlebitis score compared to non-chlorhexidine-containing disinfection (one RCT; 0.14 versus 0.68, p = 0.003). No statistically significant differences were found for other measures. Conclusions Despite their frequent use and concern about PIVC-associated complications, this review underscores the urgent need for more high-quality studies on effective IPC methods regarding safe PIVC management. In the absence of valid evidence, adherence to standard precaution measures and documentation remain the most important principles to curb PIVC complications.

show abstract

Comparison of clinically indicated replacement and routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Chen

et al. 2022

Front. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIt is unknown whether clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) increases the risks of PIVC-associated complications and infections compared to routine replacement of PIVCs.MethodsWe searched PubMed, the Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, and Clinicaltrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compare the safety outcomes of routine replacement and clinically indicated replacement of PIVCs were included for meta-analysis. The primary outcome was the incidence of phlebitis, and secondary outcomes included the risks of occlusion, local infection, infiltration, catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI), and accidental removal of the PIVC.ResultsA total of 9 RCTs involving 10 973 patients were included in this meta-analysis, of whom 5,546 and 5,527 were assigned to the study group (clinically indicated replacement of PIVCs) and control group (routine replacement of PIVCs every 72–96 h), respectively. The incidence of phlebitis in the study group was significantly higher than that in the control group [risk ratio (RR), 1.20; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01–1.44, P = 0.04, I2 = 49%]. In addition, the study group was associated with a higher risk of occlusion (RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.08–1.95, P = 0.01, I2 = 82%) and infiltration (fluid leaks) (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.06–1.53, P = 0.01, I2 = 72%) than the control group. However, no significant differences were observed in the risks of local infection (RR, 1.75; 95% CI, 0.38–8.16, P = 0.48, I2 = 0%) and CRBSI (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.08–4.68, P = 0.64, I2 = 0%) between the study and control groups.ConclusionThe clinically indicated replacement of PIVCs may increase the risks of PIVC-associated phlebitis, infiltration, and occlusion compared to the routine replacement of PIVCs, but did not increase the risk of PIVC-associated infections. Based on these findings, routine replacement of PIVCs every 72–96 h maybe a preferred option than clinically indicated replacement of PIVCs.Systematic review registration[www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42022302021].

show abstract

The safety of clinically indicated replacement or routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: A randomized controlled study

Cited by 4 publications

References 11 publications

Consumer experience and outcomes of insertion, removal, and management practices of short and midline peripheral intravenous catheters in acute health care: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

Consumer experience and outcomes of insertion, removal, and management practices of short and midline peripheral intravenous catheters in acute health care: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

Effectiveness and Safety of Measures to Prevent Infections and Other Complications Associated With Peripheral Intravenous Catheters: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Comparison of clinically indicated replacement and routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About