Effects of the low-speed continuous infusion catheter technique on double-lumen central venous catheters: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Central venous catheters are widely used in clinical practice, and the incidence of central venous catheter occlusion is between 25 % and 38 %. The turbulence caused by the pulsatile flushing technique is harmful to the vascular endothelium and may lead to phlebitis. The low-speed continuous infusion catheter technique is a new type of continuous infusion that ensures that the catheter is always in a keep-vein-open state by continuous low-speed flushing; hence, avoiding the problem of catheter occlusion. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of the low-speed continuous infusion catheter technique and the routine care of double-lumen central venous catheters. DESIGN: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label trial. SETTING: Patients were recruited from 14 medical institutions in China between February and June 2023. PARTICIPANTS: In total, 251 patients were recruited, with 125 in the intervention group and 126 in the control group. METHODS: Patients who used double-lumen central venous catheters for infusion treatment were selected, and those who met the sampling criteria were randomly divided into intervention and control groups using the random envelope method. The intervention group used the low-speed continuous infusion catheter technique to maintain catheter patency, whereas the control group used routine care with a trial period of 7 days. The primary outcome was the occlusion rate. The secondary outcomes included nursing satisfaction and complication rates of the two groups. RESULTS: After 7 days, the rate of catheter occlusion was 28.0 % (35/125, 95 % confidence interval (CI):0.203, 0.367) in the intervention group and 53.97 % (68/126, 95 % CI: 0.449-0.629) in the control group, with a statistically significant difference (χ2 = 17.488, p < 0.001); at 3 days of intervention, the rate of catheter blockage was 8.0 % (10/125, 95 % CI: 0.039-0.142) in the intervention group and 23.8 % (30/126, 0.167-0.322) in the control group, with a statistically significant difference (χ2 = 11.707, p < 0.001). Nurse satisfaction was significantly higher in the intervention group (115/125, 92.0 %, 95 % CI: 0.858-0.961) than in the control group (104/126, 82.54 %, 95 % CI: 0.748-0.887) (χ2 = 5.049, p = 0.025). There were no statistically significant complication rates in either group (p = 0.622). CONCLUSION: The low-speed continuous infusion catheter technique helps maintain catheter patency, improves nurse satisfaction, and provides a high level of safety. REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200064007, www.chictr.org.cn). The first recruitment was conducted in February. https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=177311.

Analgesic efficacy and safety of nalbuphine versus morphine for perioperative tumor ablation: a randomized, controlled, multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: The study will compare the efficacy and safety of nalbuphine hydrochloride injection and morphine hydrochloride injection for perioperative analgesia in tumor ablation and the differences between the two groups regarding duration of surgery, average daily dose, patient satisfaction with analgesia, quality of life, and other indicators. Furthermore, it will evaluate the clinical application of nalbuphine and morphine for perioperative analgesia in ablation surgery and provides important reference and guidance for clinical practice. METHODS: This is a randomized controlled study. Patients who were diagnosed by clinicians and required tumor ablation are enrolled and randomized to the experimental groups. In the test group, nalbuphine 80 mg + 0.9% normal saline (72 ml) is set in the patient-controlled analgesia pump, which is connected 15 min before ablation under electrocardiogram monitoring and surgery is performed immediately. The doses are as follows: initial,: 0.15 ml/kg,; background:, 0.5 ml/h,; compression:, 2 ml,; and lockout time:, 15 min. If the numeric rating scale is ≥ 4 points, the drug is administered by compression. The control group receives similar treatment under similar conditions as the test group except morphine (80 mg) is administered instead of nalbuphine (80 mg). The primary endpoints are the effective rate of analgesia and the incidence of adverse reactions (nausea and vomiting, dizziness, itching, constipation, hypoxemia, and urinary retention); the secondary endpoints are pain intensity, satisfaction with analgesia, duration of surgery, postoperative hospital stay, average daily dose, uninterrupted completion rate of surgery without complaints of pain, quality of life assessment, and vital signs. DISCUSSION: This study, to the best of our knowledge, is the first randomized controlled trial of nalbuphine patient-controlled analgesia in ablation surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: U.S. Clinical Trials Network Registration No.: NCT05073744 . Registered on 11 October, 2021.

Chinese expert consensus on the nursing management of the totally implantable venous access device.

The totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) has been widely used in clinical nursing work in China. The use of TIVAD has significantly improved the safety of venous access and reduced the pain caused by a repeated puncture; however, it may also bring with it varying degrees of complications associated with the long-term insertion of TIVAD and the maintenance quality of the venous access. Standard maintenance of the venous access for TIVAD is very important for reducing complications and improving the efficacy and patient's quality of life. This consensus briefly describes the fundamental knowledge and operating procedures of TIVAD while focusing on the evaluation and management of perioperative nursing, the observation and treatment of complications, the operation methods, and precautions for maintenance of venous access, as well as health education. This agreement seeks to standardize the nursing care of TIVAD patients in China.