Prevention of Vascular Access Device-Associated Hospital Onset Bacteremia and Fungemia: A Review of Emerging Perspectives and Synthesis of Technical Aspects

Significant events impacting healthcare over the last several years have been associated with escalating rates of healthcare-associated infections. This has resulted in increased efforts to reinstitute well-established and evidence-based infection prevention practices, particularly for central line associated bloodstream infections. However, implementation of prevention initiatives beyond central lines has not received the same level of acknowledgement and response as being a considerable risk to patients. This article, authored by infection prevention, infectious disease, and vascular access professionals, provides emerging perspectives and technical aspects associated with the complete lifecycle of a vascular access device. The intent is to provide insight and perspective into enhancing current IP practices in the acute care hospital setting. This will also help prepare hospitals for upcoming broader surveillance and intervention activities aimed at reducing Hospital Onset Bacteremia and Fungemia (HOB) associated with all types of vascular access devices.

Hydrophilic biomaterial intravenous hydrogel catheter for complication reduction in PICC and midline catheters

INTRODUCTION

More than 30% of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and midline catheters experience complications. Most complications are related to thrombotic cellular adherence to catheter materials.

AREAS COVERED

This manuscript outlines PICC and midline catheter complications, the need to reduce complications and how hydrogel catheters may provide a solution to address these unmet needs based on available evidence.

EXPERT OPINION

Patients commonly require PICC or midline catheters for treatment to establish a reliable form of intravenous access. Catheters, while reliable in most cases, are not without complications, including occlusion, thrombosis and infection, each related to cellular adherence to the catheter material. Hydrophilic catheter coatings and composites have been developed to mitigate these thrombotic complications, reduce adherence of blood and bacterial cells to catheters and provide greater patient safety with these devices. Hydrogel materials are highly biocompatible and have been effective in reducing cellular adherence and the formation of biofilms on surfaces. Smooth hydrophilic catheter surfaces are potentially more comfortable for the patient, with reduced friction during insertion and removal. A catheter constructed of hydrophilic biomaterial, a hydrogel composite material, may minimize thrombotic complications in PICC and midline catheters, improving catheter performance and outcomes for patients.

Case report: End of life care via a mid-thigh femoral midline catheter

Maintaining peripheral vascular access represents a major challenge for medical providers and patients leading to the emergence of ultrasound guided vascular access teams. Upper extremity peripheral vascular access options are often limited in the chronically ill patient population with end stage cancer, patients with severe contractures, tracheostomies, and feeding tubes and patients referred for palliative care are just some examples of patients who live with difficult access. The following is a case description of a mid-thigh superficial femoral vein midline catheter for comfort care medications in a patient with exhausted peripheral vasculature on hospice.

Device profile of the Orchid Safety Release Valve for the prevention of accidental catheter dislodgement

INTRODUCTION

More than 4 out of 5 patients in acute care require intravenous catheters. Complications of catheter dislodgement and failure are commonly reported at rates of 15-69% causing interrupted treatment and greater resource consumption when catheter replacement is required.

AREAS COVERED

This manuscript outlines unmet needs in the prevention of catheter dislodgement and how a novel safety release device (Orchid SRV™, Linear Health Sciences) might address these gaps based on available evidence.

EXPERT OPINION

Healthcare initiatives focus on reducing complications and associated costs with the delivery of intravenous treatments. Tension-activated safety release valve devices, attached to intravenous tubing, are a new feature that adds a level of safety to intravenous catheters to reduce mechanical catheter dislodgement when a pull force of greater than 3 pounds is applied. Incorporating a tension-activated accessory into and between existing intravenous tubing and the catheter and extension set protects the catheter from dislodgement. Flow continues until excessive pull force separates and closes the flow pathway in both directions, while the SRV provides a quick replacement to reestablish flow. The safety release valve is used to prevent accidental catheter dislodgement, limit tubing contamination, and avoid more serious complications while maintaining a functional catheter.

Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario (RNAO) best practice guideline on the assessment and management of vascular access devices

INTRODUCTION

Vascular access is the most common invasive procedure performed in health care. This fundamental procedure must be performed in a safe and effective manner. Vascular access devices (VADs) are often the source of infections and other complications, yet there is a lack of clear guidance on VADs for health providers across different settings. A Best Practice Guideline (BPG) was developed by the Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario (RNAO) to provide evidence-based recommendations on the assessment and management of VADs.

METHODS

RNAO BPGs are based on systematic reviews of the literature following the GRADE approach. Experts on the topic of vascular access were selected to form a panel. Systematic reviews were conducted on six research areas: education, vascular access specialists, blood draws, daily review of peripheral VADs, visualization technologies, and pain management. A search for relevant research studies published in English limited to January 2013 was applied to eight databases. All studies were independently assessed for eligibility and risk of bias by two reviewers based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The GRADE approach was used to determine certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

Over 65,000 articles were screened related to the six priority research questions. Of these, 876 full-text publications were examined for relevance, with 174 articles designated to inform nine recommendations in the BPG on the subject areas of: comprehensive health teaching, practical education for health providers, blood draws, daily review of peripheral VADs, visualization technologies, and pain management. In June 2021, the RNAO published the BPG on vascular access, which included the recommendations and other supporting resources.

CONCLUSION

The vascular access BPG provides high quality guidance and updated recommendations, and can serve as a primary resource for health providers assessing and managing VADs.

Rapid Assessment of Vascular Exit Site and Tunneling Options (RAVESTO): A new decision tool in the management of the complex vascular access patients

In the last decade, different standardized protocols have been developed for a systematic ultrasound venous assessment before central venous catheterization: RaCeVA (Rapid Central Vein Assessment), RaPeVA (Rapid Peripheral Vein Assessment), and RaFeVA (Rapid Femoral Vein Assessment). Such protocols were designed to locate the ideal puncture site to minimize insertion-related complications. Recently, subcutaneous tunneling of non-cuffed central venous access devices at bedside has also grown in acceptance. The main rationale for tunneling is to relocate the exit site based on patient factors and concerns for dislodgement. The tool we describe (RAVESTO-Rapid Assessment of Vascular Exit Site and Tunneling Options) defines the different options of subcutaneous tunneling and their indications in different clinical situations in patients with complex vascular access.

Home infusion pharmacy quality improvement for central venous access devices using anti-reflux needleless connectors to reduce occlusions, emergency room visits, and alteplase costs

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

The study's purpose was to measure the impact of anti-reflux needleless connector usage in prevention of intraluminal thrombotic occlusions among central venous catheters, as represented by alteplase usage, in a home infusion patient population.

METHODS

An18-month before-and-after cohort study of a single home infusion intervention was conducted to compare occlusion outcomes with use of two types of needleless connectors-neutral and anti-reflux-in preventing catheter occlusions, which have been reported to occur in 28% of home infusion patients, resulting in treatment delays, increased nursing encounters and emergency room visits, and higher overall pharmacy costs for supplies and alteplase.

RESULTS

A total of 552,707 patient therapy days were studied: 42.5% in the neutral needleless connector group (n = 235,004 therapy days) and 57.5% in the anti-reflux needleless connector group (n = 317,703 therapy days). The rate of alteplase usage with neutral versus anti-reflux needleless connectors was 4.4% versus 2.2% per 1,000 therapy days, with median alteplase use of 112 (95% CI, 89-169) units versus 82 (95% CI, 68-109) units (P < 0.001). Implementation of anti-reflux connectors reduced occlusions and alteplase usage by 48%.

CONCLUSION

Statistical evidence demonstrated that use of anti-reflux needleless connectors with central venous access devices reduced the need for alteplase in the study population. Since 10% of patient occlusions were within 7 days after home infusion admission, future research may indicate that placement of anti-reflux needleless connectors at the time of in-hospital insertion can improve patient outcomes. This quality improvement measure reduced central catheter occlusions, alteplase costs, and the number of required nursing and emergency room visits.

Rapid Assessment of Vascular Exit Site and Tunneling Options (RAVESTO): A new decision tool in the management of the complex vascular access patients

In the last decade, different standardized protocols have been developed for a systematic ultrasound venous assessment before central venous catheterization: RaCeVA (Rapid Central Vein Assessment), RaPeVA (Rapid Peripheral Vein Assessment), and RaFeVA (Rapid Femoral Vein Assessment). Such protocols were designed to locate the ideal puncture site to minimize insertion-related complications. Recently, subcutaneous tunneling of non-cuffed central venous access devices at bedside has also grown in acceptance. The main rationale for tunneling is to relocate the exit site based on patient factors and concerns for dislodgement. The tool we describe (RAVESTO-Rapid Assessment of Vascular Exit Site and Tunneling Options) defines the different options of subcutaneous tunneling and their indications in different clinical situations in patients with complex vascular access.

An integrated system for Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter tip confirmation in oncology and haematology patients

INTRODUCTION

Although there are many methods to confirm vascular device tip, chest x-ray represents the recommended procedure to verify the correct positioning of a central device, but it exposes patients to x-rays, delays treatment, and permits device length to be checked post-procedure.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter positioning through an Integrated System (ultrasound-guided and electrocardiogram confirmation).

METHODS

A case-control study was conducted on a randomized sample of 165 patients, requiring Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter placement for chemotherapy treatment. The case group was composed of patients with vascular device placed through the Integrated System and the control group devices' length was anthropometrically estimated. Chest radiography was performed on both groups to verify tip location.

RESULTS

No cases of primary malposition related to the Integrated System were registered. The vascular devices positioned with the Integrated System were all correctly placed and in 91.8% (n=101) the intra-procedural tip location was comparable to the one identified in the x-ray.

CONCLUSION

The Integrated System represented a simple and efficient method to correctly place vascular device, allowing intra-procedural tip confirmation and avoiding primary malposition. It would eliminate the need for performing chest radiography, reduce costs and time for healthcare professionals and patients.

A retrospective analysis of the clinical effectiveness of subcutaneously tunneled femoral vein cannulations at the bedside: A low risk central venous access approach in the neonatal intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided, subcutaneously tunneled, femoral inserted central catheters (ST-FICCs) in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

METHODS

Following clinical success with ST-FICCs in adults, we expanded this practice to the neonatal population. In an 18-month retrospective cohort analysis (2018-2020) of 82 neonates, we evaluated the clinical outcome for procedural success, completion of therapy, and incidence of early and late complications for insertion of US-guided ST-FICCs in the NICU.

RESULTS

Placement of ST-FICCs were successful in 100% of neonates (n = 82/82) with 94% to the right (n = 77/82) and 6% to the left common femoral veins (n = 5/82). Gestational age ranged 23-39 weeks with median age of 29 weeks. Birthweight ranged from 450 g to >2000 g. Weight at insertion ranged 570 to 3345 g and day of life 1 to 137, with median at day 5. Ultrasound guided femoral vein puncture was recorded on 74 patients, first attempt 63/74 (85%), second attempt 8/74 (11%) and third attempt 3/74 (4%). Catheter french used: 1.9Fr (n = 80/82), 2.6Fr (n = 1/82), and 3-Fr (n = 1/82). Catheter lengths were 8 to 20 cm, average 12cm. Catheter termination confirmed with posterior/anterior and lateral abdominal radiographs with inferior vena cava (IVC) (n = 33/82), IVC/right atrial junction (n = 31/82), or right atrium (n = 18/82). Atrial placements were retracted; no cases of malposition to the lumbar/renal/hepatic veins (n = 0/82). 1528 catheter days ranging 5 to 72 days (average 18). No insertion-related or post-insertion complications. All patients completed prescribed therapy with one catheter.

CONCLUSION

Bedside placement of an ST-FICC is a safe route for central venous access in the NICU, preserving upper extremity vasculature, eliminates risks associated with sedation, fluoroscopy, tunneled and non-tunneled supra-diaphragmatic central venous insertion.

A retrospective analysis of the clinical effectiveness of subcutaneously tunneled femoral vein cannulations at the bedside: A low risk central venous access approach in the neonatal intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided, subcutaneously tunneled, femoral inserted central catheters (ST-FICCs) in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

METHODS

Following clinical success with ST-FICCs in adults, we expanded this practice to the neonatal population. In an 18-month retrospective cohort analysis (2018-2020) of 82 neonates, we evaluated the clinical outcome for procedural success, completion of therapy, and incidence of early and late complications for insertion of US-guided ST-FICCs in the NICU.

RESULTS

Placement of ST-FICCs were successful in 100% of neonates (n = 82/82) with 94% to the right (n = 77/82) and 6% to the left common femoral veins (n = 5/82). Gestational age ranged 23-39 weeks with median age of 29 weeks. Birthweight ranged from 450 g to >2000 g. Weight at insertion ranged 570 to 3345 g and day of life 1 to 137, with median at day 5. Ultrasound guided femoral vein puncture was recorded on 74 patients, first attempt 63/74 (85%), second attempt 8/74 (11%) and third attempt 3/74 (4%). Catheter french used: 1.9Fr (n = 80/82), 2.6Fr (n = 1/82), and 3-Fr (n = 1/82). Catheter lengths were 8 to 20 cm, average 12cm. Catheter termination confirmed with posterior/anterior and lateral abdominal radiographs with inferior vena cava (IVC) (n = 33/82), IVC/right atrial junction (n = 31/82), or right atrium (n = 18/82). Atrial placements were retracted; no cases of malposition to the lumbar/renal/hepatic veins (n = 0/82). 1528 catheter days ranging 5 to 72 days (average 18). No insertion-related or post-insertion complications. All patients completed prescribed therapy with one catheter.

CONCLUSION

Bedside placement of an ST-FICC is a safe route for central venous access in the NICU, preserving upper extremity vasculature, eliminates risks associated with sedation, fluoroscopy, tunneled and non-tunneled supra-diaphragmatic central venous insertion.

Survey of ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous practices: a report of supply usage and variability between clinical roles and departments

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to investigate ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous (UGPIV) supply usage practices by clinicians working in vascular access, in emergency departments (EDs), or in other roles.

METHODOLOGY

In 2019, a voluntary cross-sectional descriptive survey was conducted via SurveyMonkey. Data collected included demographics, practice-oriented information, procedural activities, and supplies used for UGPIV insertions. Frequency distributions and results of Fisher's exact test and one-way analysis of variance were reported using R v.3.5.2.

RESULTS

A total of 26,649 surveys were distributed with a response rate of 5.5% (n = 1475). Forty-eight percent of respondents (n = 709) indicated that they worked in a vascular access role, 310 (21%) worked in an ED, and 455 (31%) categorized their role as other. Clinically meaningful differences existed in all variables for UGPIV procedures and supplies between departments (P < 0.0001) and in all care settings. Using an investigatorconstructed overall metric of supplies used, important differences were demonstrated between personnel supply use in vascular access roles and other roles (P < 0.0001) and personnel in EDs and other roles (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of supplies for UGPIV insertions varies by department. The variability in supply usage for UGPIV insertions revealed by this survey suggests a need for clinical education on guideline application and evaluation of compliance with policies to promote standardization of supplies for UGPIV insertion.

Reaching One Peripheral Intravenous Catheter (PIVC) Per Patient Visit With Lean Multimodal Strategy: the PIV5Rights™ Bundle

Highlights

Lean leadership for process improvement. Prospective comparator multimodal design study. Vascular access specialty team (VAST group 2) versus generalist nursing model (group 1). First stick success of 96%. Statistically significant improvement in dwell time with VAST versus generalist nursing model (89% versus 15% lasting until end of therapy). Projected 2.9 million in savings annually. Peripheral intravenous catheter team centralized proposal to Chief Nursing Officer (CNO) with acceptance based on outcomes. Reduction in cost per bed per year using a vascular access specialty team of $3376.

Abstract

Background: Peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) sales per year exceed that of the number of people in the United States (US), 350 million. With only 37 million US hospital patient admissions per year, these data indicate an average usage of 10 PIVCs per patient admission, suggesting a very high failure, very low success rate, and excess cost associated with PIVC insertions. Patients often complain of multiple catheter insertion attempts, and published data reveal up to 53% of PIVCs fail before therapy ends.

Methods: Hartford Hospital (Hartford, CT) conducted a prospective comparator single-center clinical superiority design study to determine the impact of bundled practices including device insertions using vascular access specialty team (VAST) intravenous trained nurses versus current practice. The study used a 5 step multimodal best practice intervention strategy designated as the PIV5Rights Bundle with an aim to determine if the intervention outcomes and dwell time improved over current PIVC practices. The study group applied a Lean health care standard work process with a Six Sigma design, define, measure, analyze, improve, control approach that included VAST PIVC dwell time, complications, and economic impact compared with current state general nursing practice.

Results: Outcomes of the PIV5Rights Bundle in Group 2 (experimental) using a trained vascular access nursing team for insertion and management achieved a statistically significant result of 89% of catheters achieving end of therapy with a cost saving per bed of $3376 ($1405 versus $4781) per year as compared to standard practice (Group 1; control). Results of Group 1 reflected PIVC dwell time to end of treatment in only 15% of catheters. Prestudy catheter consumption analysis was 4.4 catheters per patient hospital admissions, reflecting waste within labor and supply costs for PIVC insertion and usage. Peripheral intravenous catheter retrospective audits for current practice demonstrated more than 50% catheters failed within the first 24 hours. This application of Lean methodology by Hartford Hospital with infusion therapy resulted in a projected $2.9 million annual savings of $3376 per bed per year for house-wide application.

Conclusions: Implementation of the PIV5Rights™ Bundle with a dedicated VAST proved to be a successful model, both from a patient and financial perspective. The journey to nursing excellence included identification of core measures and best practice evidence for PIVC placements as a procedure that affects nearly every patient entering a hospital. By centralizing ownership of vascular access with the team for insertion, management, and securement, the PIV Five Rights is the right approach to achieve the right results in transformation of hospital infusion therapy practices. Bundled approaches have often been used for central catheter infection reduction. This is the first study the authors have identified focusing on 1 PIVC per patient visit as a result of an evidence-based bundle and VAST.

Review and Case Studies of Midthigh Femoral Central Venous Catheter Placement

Background: Bedside vascular access options have been limited to the short peripheral intravenous, midline catheter, peripherally inserted central catheter, and central venous catheter (CVC) insertion sites such as the jugular, subclavian, and femoral vein. Many patients with limited options for upper extremity, subclavicular, supraclavicular, and cervical limitations have traditionally received a femoral CVC in the inguinal region. This insertion site is considered a high risk for infection because of its location in the inguinal region and associated difficulties with maintaining the dressing integrity. An alternative location was selected for the insertion of a femoral vein central venous catheter in the midthigh to reduce the risk of infection.

Methods: After a multiple-year implementation process, midthigh femoral (MTF) insertions were performed on a select group of patients. The case studies that are included in this report outline the indications, procedures, and other pertinent aspects of the MTF placement. Patients at this institution with contraindications to upper extremity and thoracic catheter insertion received a MTF vein CVC in place of a traditional common femoral vein catheter insertion in the inguinal area. All procedural consents include permission for photography of procedure sites.

Results: All but a single patient completed their therapy without complication; 1 intentional dislodgement by a patient was recorded. There were no MTF catheter-related bloodstream infections and 2 confirmed central line associated bloodstream infections (n = 2 of 100) with the second noted as probable contaminated specimen. Outcomes reflected no procedural complications (eg, expanding hematoma or femoral nerve injury or any other femoral artery or vein injuries) and 1 nonocclusive deep vein thrombosis (n = 1 of 100).

Conclusions: The MTF CVC provides an alternative to traditional common femoral vein catheter placement for nonemergent patients with upper extremity and thoracic contraindications to central line placement.

Management of Central Venous Access Device-Associated Skin Impairment: An Evidence-Based Algorithm

Patients relying on central venous access devices (CVADs) for treatment are frequently complex. Many have multiple comorbid conditions, including renal impairment, nutritional deficiencies, hematologic disorders, or cancer. These conditions can impair the skin surrounding the CVAD insertion site, resulting in an increased likelihood of skin damage when standard CVAD management practices are employed. Supported by the World Congress of Vascular Access (WoCoVA), developed an evidence- and consensus-based algorithm to improve CVAD-associated skin impairment (CASI) identification and diagnosis, guide clinical decision-making, and improve clinician confidence in managing CASI. A scoping review of relevant literature surrounding CASI management was undertaken March 2014, and results were distributed to an international advisory panel. A CASI algorithm was developed by an international advisory panel of clinicians with expertise in wounds, vascular access, pediatrics, geriatric care, home care, intensive care, infection control and acute care, using a 2-phase, modified Delphi technique. The algorithm focuses on identification and treatment of skin injury, exit site infection, noninfectious exudate, and skin irritation/contact dermatitis. It comprised 3 domains: assessment, skin protection, and patient comfort. External validation of the algorithm was achieved by prospective pre- and posttest design, using clinical scenarios and self-reported clinician confidence (Likert scale), and incorporating algorithm feasibility and face validity endpoints. The CASI algorithm was found to significantly increase participants' confidence in the assessment and management of skin injury (P = .002), skin irritation/contact dermatitis (P = .001), and noninfectious exudate (P < .01). A majority of participants reported the algorithm as easy to understand (24/25; 96%), containing all necessary information (24/25; 96%). Twenty-four of 25 (96%) stated that they would recommend the tool to guide management of CASI.

Indications for Peripheral, Midline, and Central Catheters: Summary of the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters Recommendations

Patients admitted to acute care frequently require intravenous access to effectively deliver medications and prescribed treatment. For patients with difficult intravenous access; those requiring multiple attempts; and those who are obese, have diabetes, or have other chronic conditions, determining the vascular access device (VAD) with the lowest risk that best meets the needs of the treatment plan can be confusing. Selection of a VAD should be based on specific indications for that device. In clinical settings, requests for central venous access devices are frequently precipitated simply by failure to establish peripheral access. Selection of the most appropriate VAD is necessary to avoid the potentially serious complications of infection and/or thrombosis. An international panel of experts convened to establish a guide for indications and appropriate use for VADs. This article summarizes the work and recommendations of the panel that created the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters.

The Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC): Results From a Multispecialty Panel Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method

Use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has grown substantially in recent years. Increasing use has led to the realization that PICCs are associated with important complications, including thrombosis and infection. Moreover, some PICCs may not be placed for clinically valid reasons. Defining appropriate indications for insertion, maintenance, and care of PICCs is thus important for patient safety. An international panel was convened that applied the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to develop criteria for use of PICCs. After systematic reviews of the literature, scenarios related to PICC use, care, and maintenance were developed according to patient population (for example, general hospitalized, critically ill, cancer, kidney disease), indication for insertion (infusion of peripherally compatible infusates vs. vesicants), and duration of use (≤5 days, 6 to 14 days, 15 to 30 days, or ≥31 days). Within each scenario, appropriateness of PICC use was compared with that of other venous access devices. After review of 665 scenarios, 253 (38%) were rated as appropriate, 124 (19%) as neutral/uncertain, and 288 (43%) as inappropriate. For peripherally compatible infusions, PICC use was rated as inappropriate when the proposed duration of use was 5 or fewer days. Midline catheters and ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous catheters were preferred to PICCs for use between 6 and 14 days. In critically ill patients, nontunneled central venous catheters were preferred over PICCs when 14 or fewer days of use were likely. In patients with cancer, PICCs were rated as appropriate for irritant or vesicant infusion, regardless of duration. The panel of experts used a validated method to develop appropriate indications for PICC use across patient populations. These criteria can be used to improve care, inform quality improvement efforts, and advance the safety of medical patients.

Evidence-based consensus on the insertion of central venous access devices: definition of minimal requirements for training

There is a lack of standard minimal requirements for the training of insertion techniques and maintenance of central venous access devices (CVADs). An international evidence-based consensus task force was established through the World Congress of Vascular Access (WoCoVA) to provide definitions and recommendations for training and insertion of CVADs. Medical literature published from February 1971 to April 2012 regarding 'central vascular access', 'training', 'competency', 'simulation', and 'ultrasound' was reviewed on Pubmed, BioMed Central, ScienceDirect, and Scopus databases. The GRADE and the GRADE-RAND methods were utilized to develop recommendations. Out of 156 papers initially identified, 83 papers described training for central vascular access placement. Sixteen recommendations are proposed by this task force, each with an evidence level, degree of consensus, and recommendation grade. These recommendations suggest central venous access education include didactic or web-based teaching with insertion procedure, infection prevention, complications, care, and maintenance of devices, along with laboratory models and tools for simulation practice incorporating ultrasound. Clinical competence should be determined by observation during clinical practice using a global rating scale rather than by the number of procedures performed. Ensuring safe insertion and management of central venous devices requires standardized education, simulation practice, and supervised insertions.

Preventing Peripheral Intravenous Line Infections: Recommendations for Healthcare Facilities

Intravascular catheters are indispensable tools in acute care, but with the benefits come the risk of local or systemic Healthcare Acquired Infections (HAIs). In fact, more than 250,000–500,000 intravascular-related bloodstream infections occur in the United States each year with resulting mortality rates of 12%–25%. (Maki, Kluger & Crnich, 2006; CDC, 2002). While bloodstream infections related to the use of peripheral lines may not occur as often as they do with central lines, they do occur.

Although most studies focus on central catheter-related bloodstream infections due to their greater documented prevalence and severity, some studies have evaluated the prevalence of peripheral intravenous catheter-associated bloodstream infections. In 2006 Maki reviewed 200 studies that prospectively examined the risk of Bloodstream Infections (BSIs) associated with intravascular devices over a forty year period. The infection rate with peripheral intravenous catheters was 0.5 per 1000 catheter days.

Though the frequency of peripheral intravenous catheter-associated infections is lower than with other intravascular devices, absolute numbers of patients affected can be significant with more than 330 million peripheral catheters sold each year in the United States (Millennium Research Group, 2006). Some doctors are stressing the need to use a peripheral line versus early placement of a central line with the rationale to reduce infection rates.

Multiple national and international guidelines advocate a number of simple, yet highly effective procedures to reduce risk of central venous catheter infections. Some of these same guidelines should be applied as standards for peripheral catheters. By standardizing protocols across all types of catheter insertions, safety is ensured in reducing infections and ultimately improving patient care.

Central venous catheters in home infusion care: outcomes analysis in 50,470 patients

PURPOSE

Outpatient home infusion therapy is increasing; however, little data exist on the outcomes of patients receiving care. The purpose of this study was to document the natural history of central venous catheters (CVCs) used in home infusion care to determine the rate and type of catheter complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from the Strategic HealthCare Programs National Database from April 1999 to September 2000 were analyzed. Primary study objectives were to identify (i) types of CVCs and principal diagnoses, (ii) type and rate of catheter complications, and (iii) outcomes in managing thrombotic catheter complications. Event rates were calculated per 1,000 catheter days; 50,470 patients representing 2.83 million catheter days met study criteria.

RESULTS

The rates of complications (per 1,000 catheter days) for the most common events were: catheter dysfunction (0.83 total; 0.6 nonthrombotic, 0.23 thrombotic), catheter site infections (0.26), and bloodstream infections (BSIs; 0.19). A total of 4,138 complication events were identified (event rate per 1,000 days: 1.5). The total rates of complications with each catheter type were: midline catheters (4.5), PICCs (2.0), nontunneled central catheters (1.1), tunneled catheters (1.0), and chest ports (0.52). Catheter dysfunction with loss of patency was the most common group of complications. Thrombotic occlusion was the principal cause of catheter dysfunction, occurring in 28% of patients in this group, typically within 7 days of catheter insertion. BSI was reported in 541 patients, generally more than 30 days after catheter insertion. Catheter thrombosis outcomes resulted in therapy interruption (43%), catheter replacement (29%), premature CVC removal (14%), unscheduled emergency room visits (9%), and/or hospitalizations (6%).

CONCLUSION

Catheter dysfunction is the most frequent complication of all CVCs in this population, almost twice that of infections. Outpatient home infusion catheter dysfunction results in delays to therapy, unscheduled hospitalizations, and need for device replacement.

Does it always have to hurt? Premedications for adults and children for use with intravenous therapy

Determining the need for premedication or anesthetic agent use in starting intravenous therapy should be considered a necessary step toward a successful i.v. procedure. This article discusses the types of premedications currently available for adults and children. Discussion of each anesthetic agent, its usage and limitations, and other pertinent information is given. Antianxiety agents are briefly discussed as an adjunct to anesthetics. Relaxation techniques of distraction and biofeedback to aid in the reduction of pain also can provide some degree of success for i.v. procedures. Not all i.v. procedures require premedications or anesthetic agents. Making the correct decision regarding which medication or antianxiety method best suits the patient and the situation can improve the overall success of and satisfaction with i.v. procedures.