Rethinking Routine Peripheral Intravenous Line Placement

Author(s):  
Tarik Silk ◽  
Joseph Windheim ◽  
Somil Chugh
1998 ◽  
Vol 132 (6) ◽  
pp. 1061-1063 ◽  
Author(s):  
William T. Zempsky ◽  
K.J.S. Anand ◽  
Kevin M. Sullivan ◽  
David Fraser ◽  
Karen Cucina

1998 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOEL A. FEIN ◽  
CHRIS R. BOARDMAN ◽  
SUE STEVENSON ◽  
STEVEN M. SELBST

2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Gentges ◽  
Annette Arthur ◽  
Tessa Stamile ◽  
Michael Figureido

Author(s):  
Anna Clebone

Chapter 4 discusses the dynamic use of ultrasound to guide the placement of a peripheral intravenous (IV) line. Ultrasound can be used to guide placement of multiple types of vascular access. Arteries and veins are sonographically similar in cross section: hyperechoic circles with hypoechoic interiors. Arteries are thicker walled and characteristically pulsatile. Veins are more susceptible to compression. Doppler or color flow can distinguish the amplitude and direction of flow. Skill with placing peripheral ultrasound guided IV lines in patients with difficult IV access can often help the practitioner avoid the need to place a central line, assuming the central line is not needed for other indications.


2006 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 594-597 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Minville ◽  
A. Pianezza ◽  
K. Asehnoune ◽  
S. Cabardis ◽  
N. Smail

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 1092
Author(s):  
Murali B. H. ◽  
Abirami Meenakshi Chandrasekaran ◽  
Meghana Nannapaneni

Background: Children admitted to hospital and ICUs for various reasons like sepsis, respiratory distress, dehydration, shock etc. require an intravenous line for medications and IV fluids. Properly securing an intravenous line is very important. It is equally important to maintain the patency of the intravenous line for longer periods of time. But there is no adequate data regarding factors affecting the duration of patency of an IV line. This study was done to compare effect of limb splinting versus non-splinting with the functional duration of peripheral IV cannula.Methods: This study was done over 3 months between October - December 2018 in pediatric patients (age 6 months to 5 years) admitted to Kempegowda Hospital. Patients were randomised into splint group and non-splint group. In the splint group a firm splint was applied to the joint that was cannulated. No such intervention was done in the non-splint group. Time from IV line placement to removal was measured.Results: Total 438 patients were taken into study. After exclusion 200 patients were given a splint and 200 were not splinted. The median survival time was more in splint group when compared to non-splint group.Conclusions: This study shows that splinting helps to maintain patency of IV line for a more longer duration than non splinting of the joint.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 95 (5) ◽  
pp. 709-712
Author(s):  
Eileen J. Klein ◽  
Richard P. Shugerman ◽  
Kate Leigh-Taylor ◽  
Carol Schneider ◽  
Dawn Portscheller ◽  
...  

Objectives. To evaluate the effectiveness of intradermal buffered lidocaine as analgesia before intravenous line (IV) placement in children. Methods. This was a randomized clinical trial undertaken in the emergency department (ED) of a regional children's hospital. Participants were children 8 to 15 years old, seen in the ED and in need of IV lines. They were enrolled by three ED nurses. Participants were randomized to receive either intradermal buffered lidocaine or no analgesia. Before placement of the IV line, patients recorded the amount of pain they were in (baseline pain) on a visual analog pain scale. The primary outcome measure was amount of pain caused by the initial IV attempt, even if that attempt was unsuccessful. This was recorded by the participant on a visual analog scale. Demographic characteristics, the number of attempts to successful placement, and the time required to place the IV line were also recorded. Differences in pain of initial IV attempt and time to place the IV line were evaluated with the Mann-Whitney U test. Differences in success of IV line placement were evaluated with the χ2 test. Results. Fifty-nine patients completed the study. Thirty received buffered lidocaine, and 29 received no analgesia before IV line placement. There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to baseline pain or demographic characteristics. The median level of pain of the initial IV attempt as measured by the visual analog scale was 2.3 in the buffered-lidocaine group and 4.4 in the no-lidocaine group. Thirty-three percent of patients in the lidocaine group and 28% percent in the no-lidocaine group required more than one IV attempt. The median time to IV line placement was 10 minutes in the lidocaine group and 6 minutes in the no-lidocaine group. Conclusions. Use of intradermal buffered lidocaine is an effective way to diminish the pain of IV line placement in children 8 to 15 years of age. There was no difference in IV success rate in this study; however, larger numbers of patients would be required to detect statistically significant differences. We recommend the routine use of intradermal buffered lidocaine for analgesia before IV line placement in older children in all but emergent situations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document