RESUMO
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of difficult venous access in complex patients with multimorbidity and to identify associated risk factors. BACKGROUND: In highly complex patients, factors like ageing, the need for frequent use of irritant medication and multiple venous catheterisations to complete treatment could contribute to exhaustion of venous access. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted. METHODS: 'Highly complex' patients (n = 135) were recruited from March 2013-November 2013. The main study variable was the prevalence of difficult venous access, assessed using one of the following criteria: (1) a history of difficulties obtaining venous access based on more than two attempts to insert an intravenous line and (2) no visible or palpable veins. Other factors potentially associated with the risk of difficult access were also measured (age, gender and chronic illnesses). Univariate analysis was performed for each potential risk factor. Factors with p < 0·2 were then included in multivariable logistic regression analysis. Odds ratios were also calculated. RESULTS: The prevalence of difficult venous access was 59·3%. The univariate logistic regression analysis indicated that gender, a history of vascular access complications and osteoarticular disease were significantly associated with difficult venous access. The multivariable logistic regression showed that only gender was an independent risk factor and the odds ratios was 2·85. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of difficult venous access is high in this population. Gender (female) is the only independent risk factor associated with this. Previous history of several attempts at catheter insertion is an important criterion in the assessment of difficult venous access. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The prevalence of difficult venous access in complex patients is 59·3%. Significant risk factors include being female and a history of complications related to vascular access.
Assuntos
Cateterismo Periférico/enfermagem , Cateteres Venosos Centrais , Nível de Saúde , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Cateterismo Periférico/efeitos adversos , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos , Lista de Checagem , Doença Crônica/terapia , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Avaliação das Necessidades , Fatores de Risco , Fatores Sexuais , Estatísticas não ParamétricasRESUMO
Objetivo evaluar los resultados de los catéteres centrales de inserción periférica (PICC) insertados por enfermeras de la unidad de oncología y hematología con técnica ecoguiada en cuanto a éxito en la inserción, incidencias, dispositivos que llegan a fin de tratamiento y supervivencia de los catéteres. Método estudio observacional y prospectivo. Se incluyeron todos los PICC insertados mediante eco-guía a pie de cama en el Hospital Universitario Araba. La técnica se inició en junio de 2010. El estudio finalizó en noviembre de 2011. Se recogieron datos socio-demográficos, características del catéter, éxito en la inserción, duración, incidencias y motivo de retirada. Resultados Se insertaron 165 catéteres, el 95,2% a pacientes de oncología o hematología, 73 de ellos continúan aún en uso. Se obtuvo un éxito en la inserción del 89,7% (IC del 95%: 85,1%- 94,3%). Los días de uso total de los catéteres fueron 16.234 con una mediana de duración de 92 días por PICC. La incidencia más frecuente fue la extracción accidental 0,986/1.000 días de catéter (IC del 95%: 0,970-1,001/1.000). La tasa de trombosis fue de 0,308/1.000 días (IC del 95%: 0,299- 0,317) y la de bacteriemia relacionada con catéter de 0,062/1.000 días de catéter (IC del 95%: 0,058- 0,065).Conclusión la inserción del PICC eco-guiada a pie de cama puede ser realizada por enfermeras entrenadas con una elevada probabilidad de inserción exitosa. El PICC, por su baja tasa de complicaciones y su alta duración media, es un dispositivo válido como acceso venoso central de media y larga duración para pacientes oncológicos y hematológicos (AU)
Objective To evaluate the results of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) inserted by nurses using an ultrasound-guided technique at bed-side. Methods An observational and prospective study was conducted on all the PICC inserted at bed-side by an ultrasound-guided technique at the Araba University Hospital. The technique was introduced in June 2010, and the data collection period ended in November 2011. The main study variables were successful insertion, duration of PICC, incidences related to the catheter, devices reaching end of treatment and reasons for withdrawal. Patient sociodemographic data and PICC technical features were also registered. Results A total of 165 PICC were inserted, 73 are still in use, with 95.2% inserted in patients from oncology or haematology departments. Insertion was successful in the 89.7% (95% CI: 85.1%-94.3%) of the cases. The study included 16,234 catheter days, with a median dwell time of 92 days by PICC. The most frequent incidence was accidental removal in 0.986 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI=0.970-1.001). The thrombosis rate was 0.308 per 1,000 days (95% CI= 0.299-0.317), and the catheter-associated bloodstream infection rate was 0.062 per 1,000 catheter days (95% CI=0.058-0.065).Conclusion Ultrasound-guided PICC insertion can be performed at bedside by trained nurses with a high probability of success. PICC, because of its low complication rate and long indwelling catheter survival, is a suitable central venous device for long-term treatment in oncology and haematology patients (AU)
Assuntos
Humanos , Cateterismo Periférico/enfermagem , Cateterismo Venoso Central/enfermagem , Cirurgia Assistida por Computador/métodos , Estudos Prospectivos , Neoplasias/enfermagem , Neoplasias Hematológicas/enfermagemRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the results of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) inserted by nurses using an ultrasound-guided technique at bed-side. METHODS: An observational and prospective study was conducted on all the PICC inserted at bed-side by an ultrasound-guided technique at the Araba University Hospital. The technique was introduced in June 2010, and the data collection period ended in November 2011. The main study variables were successful insertion, duration of PICC, incidences related to the catheter, devices reaching end of treatment and reasons for withdrawal. Patient sociodemographic data and PICC technical features were also registered. RESULTS: A total of 165 PICC were inserted, 73 are still in use, with 95.2% inserted in patients from oncology or haematology departments. Insertion was successful in the 89.7% (95% CI: 85.1%-94.3%) of the cases. The study included 16,234 catheter days, with a median dwell time of 92 days by PICC. The most frequent incidence was accidental removal in 0.986 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI=0.970-1.001). The thrombosis rate was 0.308 per 1,000 days (95% CI= 0.299-0.317), and the catheter-associated bloodstream infection rate was 0.062 per 1,000 catheter days (95% CI=0.058-0.065). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided PICC insertion can be performed at bedside by trained nurses with a high probability of success. PICC, because of its low complication rate and long indwelling catheter survival, is a suitable central venous device for long-term treatment in oncology and haematology patients.
