We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Risk factors for peripheral intravenous catheter failure: a multivariate analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial.
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 2014 January
OBJECTIVE: To assess the relative importance of independent risk factors for peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) failure.
METHODS: Secondary data analysis from a randomized controlled trial of PIVC dwell time. The Prentice, Williams, and Peterson statistical model was used to identify and compare risk factors for phlebitis, occlusion, and accidental removal.
SETTING: Three acute care hospitals in Queensland, Australia.
PARTICIPANTS: The trial included 3,283 adult medical and surgical patients (5,907 catheters) with a PIVC with greater than 4 days of expected use.
RESULTS: Modifiable risk factors for occlusion included hand, antecubital fossa, or upper arm insertion compared with forearm (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.28-1.68], 1.27 [95% CI, 1.08-1.49], and 1.25 [95% CI, 1.04-1.50], respectively); and for phlebitis, larger diameter PIVC (HR, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.08-2.03]). PIVCs inserted by the operating and radiology suite staff had lower occlusion risk than ward insertions (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.94]). Modifiable risks for accidental removal included hand or antecubital fossa insertion compared with forearm (HR, 2.45 [95% CI, 1.93-3.10] and 1.65 [95% CI, 1.23-2.22], respectively), clinical staff insertion compared with intravenous service (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.30-2.20]); and smaller PIVC diameter (HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.02-1.61]). Female sex was a nonmodifiable factor associated with an increased risk of both phlebitis (HR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.28-2.09]) and occlusion (HR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.30-1.61]).
CONCLUSIONS: PIVC survival is improved by preferential forearm insertion, selection of appropriate PIVC diameter, and insertion by intravenous teams and other specialists.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The original randomized controlled trial on which this secondary analysis is based is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (https://www.anzctr.org.au; ACTRN12608000445370).
METHODS: Secondary data analysis from a randomized controlled trial of PIVC dwell time. The Prentice, Williams, and Peterson statistical model was used to identify and compare risk factors for phlebitis, occlusion, and accidental removal.
SETTING: Three acute care hospitals in Queensland, Australia.
PARTICIPANTS: The trial included 3,283 adult medical and surgical patients (5,907 catheters) with a PIVC with greater than 4 days of expected use.
RESULTS: Modifiable risk factors for occlusion included hand, antecubital fossa, or upper arm insertion compared with forearm (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.28-1.68], 1.27 [95% CI, 1.08-1.49], and 1.25 [95% CI, 1.04-1.50], respectively); and for phlebitis, larger diameter PIVC (HR, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.08-2.03]). PIVCs inserted by the operating and radiology suite staff had lower occlusion risk than ward insertions (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.94]). Modifiable risks for accidental removal included hand or antecubital fossa insertion compared with forearm (HR, 2.45 [95% CI, 1.93-3.10] and 1.65 [95% CI, 1.23-2.22], respectively), clinical staff insertion compared with intravenous service (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.30-2.20]); and smaller PIVC diameter (HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.02-1.61]). Female sex was a nonmodifiable factor associated with an increased risk of both phlebitis (HR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.28-2.09]) and occlusion (HR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.30-1.61]).
CONCLUSIONS: PIVC survival is improved by preferential forearm insertion, selection of appropriate PIVC diameter, and insertion by intravenous teams and other specialists.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The original randomized controlled trial on which this secondary analysis is based is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (https://www.anzctr.org.au; ACTRN12608000445370).
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app