Chemotherapy often requires a central venous access such as a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC-line). The purpose of this study is to describe patients’ experiences with the PICC-line during curative oncological treatment. A quantitative cross-sectional study including 36 questionnaires (response rate 97%) comprising 14 questions was used. The results are presented in four dimensions: information, discomfort, anxiety, and restrictions in daily life. Patients are generally satisfied with their PICC-lines compared with peripheral pinpricks; however, some restrictions regarding dressings, movement, and hygiene routines were reported. Moreover, patients described anxiety using the PICC-line regarding lack of functionality and risk of infection. Therefore, patients need information based on everyday life situations, and nurses’ information skills may significantly increase patient safety and patient satisfaction during curative oncological treatment.
WagnerEHAiello BowlesEJGreeneSM. The quality of cancer patient experience: perspectives of patients, family members, providers and experts. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19:484-489.
2.
MolloyDSmithLNAitchisonT. Cytotoxic chemotherapy for incurable colorectal cancer: living with a PICC-line. J Clin Nurs. 2008;17:2398-2407.
3.
HernándezPRLópesJLMartínJGRivasEB. Care and cost utility indicators for high-flow PICC catheters: a study. Br J Nurs. 2011;20:22-27.
4.
AlpenbergSJoelssonGRosengrenK. Feeling confident in using PICC lines: patients’ experiences of living with a PICC line during chemotherapy treatment. Home Health Care Manag Pract. 2015;27(3):119-125. doi:10.1177/1084822314566300.
5.
PireddaMRocciLGualandiRPetittiTVinceniBDe MarinisMG. Survey on learning needs and preferred sources of information to meet these needs in Italian oncology patients receiving chemotherapy. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2008;12:120-126.
6.
BrowallMGaston-JohanssonFDanielssonE. Postmenopausal women with breast cancer: experiences of the chemotherapy treatment period. Cancer Nurs. 2006;29:34-42.
7.
LuoJSoliminiNLElledgeSK. Principles of cancer therapy: oncogene and non-oncogene addiction. Cell. 2009;138:823-837.
8.
ScottAMWolchokJDLloydJO. Antibody therapy of cancer. Nat Rev. 2012;12:278-287.
9.
HanselTTKropshpferHSingerTMitchellJAGeorgeAJT. The safety and side effects of monoclonal antibodies. Nat Rev. 2010;9:325-338.
10.
NagelSNTeichgräberUKMKauscheSLehmannA. Satisfaction and quality of life: a survey-based assessment in patients with completely implantable venous port system. Eur J Cancer Care. 2012;21:197-204.
11.
SBU; Statens beredning för medicinsk och social utvärdering (Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services). Perifert inlagd central venkateter (Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter, PICC). http://www.sbu.se/upload/Publikationer/Content0/3/PICC_201108.pdf. Accessed October 7, 2014. (In Swedish)
12.
JohanssonEEngervallPBjörvellHHastRBjörkholmM. Patients’ perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a completely implantable subcutaneous port system—results from a randomized study in acute leukemia. Support Care Cancer. 2009;17:137-143.
13.
PolakJFAndersonDHagspielKMungovanJ. Peripherally inserted central venous catheters: factors affecting patient satisfaction. Am J Roentgenol. 1998;170:1609-1611.
14.
GoossensGVrebosMStasMDe WeverIFrederickxL. Central vascular access devices in oncology and hematology considered from a different point of view: how do patients experience their vascular access ports?J Infus Nurs. 2005;28:61-67.
AmerasekeraSSHJonesCMPatelRCleasbyMJ. Imaging of the complications of peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Clin Radiol. 2009;64:832-840.
17.
GallowayM. Insertion and placement of central catheters in the oncology patient. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2010;26:102-112.
18.
ScalesK. Central venous access devices. Part 1: devices for acute care. Br J Nurs. 2010;19:88-92.
19.
ScalesK. Central venous access devices: part 2 for intermediate and long-term use. Br J Nurs. 2010;19:20-25.
20.
CotogniPBarberoCGarrinoC. Peripherally inserted central catheters in non-hospitalized cancer patients: 5-year results of a prospective study. Support Care Cancer. 2014;23:403-409.
21.
WalkerGToddA. Nurse-led PICC insertion: is it cost effective?Br J Nurs. 2013;22:9-15.
22.
AlexandrouEMurgoMCalabriaE. Nurse-led central venous catheter insertion—procedural characteristics and outcomes of three intensive care based catheter placement services. Int J Nurs Stud. 2012;49:162-168.
23.
YacopettiNAlexandrouESpencerTR. Central venous catheter insertion by a clinical nurse consultant or anesthetic medical staff: a single-centre observational study. Crit Care Resusc. 2010;12:90-95.
24.
HorSYGodboldNCollierAIedemaR. Finding the patient in patient safety. Health. 2013;17:567-583.
25.
KralikDVisentinKVan LoonA. Transition: a literature review. J Adv Nurs. 2006;55:320-329.
26.
PolitDFBeckCT. Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012.
27.
BennerP. From Novice to Expert: Excellence and Power in Clinical Nursing Practice. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley; 1984.
28.
PallantJ. SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill; 2010.
OakleyCWrightEReamE. The experiences of patients and nurses with a nurse-led peripherally inserted central venous catheter line service. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2000;4:207-218.
32.
SharpRGrechCFielderAMikocka-WalusACummingsMEstermanA. The patient experience of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC): a qualitative descriptive study. Contemp Nurse. 2014;48:26-35.
33.
McCanceTMcCormackB. Development of a framework for person-centred nursing. J Adv Nurs. 2006;56:472-479.
34.
KoutsopoulouSPapathanassoglouEKatapodiMPatirakiE. A critical review of the evidence for nurses as information providers to cancer patients. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19:749-765.
35.
FridolfssonATrevenaISoderbergI. Transitioner under sjukdomstiden: Sjuksköterskans stödjande funktion för patienter med cancer (Transitions during illness: the nurse’s supporting role for patients with cancer). J Nurs Theory. 2006;15:16-24. (In Swedish)
36.
EldhACEkmanIEhnforsMA. Comparison of the concept of patient participation and patients’ descriptions as related to healthcare definitions. Int J Nurs Terminol Classif. 2010;21:21-32.
37.
AikenLSloaneDMBruyneelL. Nurse staffing and education and hospital mortality in nine European countries: a retrospective observational study. Lancet. 2014;383:1824-1830.
38.
NicholsonJDaviesL. Patients’ experiences of the PICC insertion procedure. Br J Nurs. 2013;22:16-23.
39.
IgnatovAHoffmanOSmithB. An 11-year retrospective study of totally implanted central venous access ports: complications and patient satisfaction. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;35:241-246.
40.
KreisHLoehbergCRLuxMP. Patients’ attitudes to totally implantable venous access port systems for gynecological or breast malignancies. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:39-43.
41.
MøllerTAdamsenL. Hematologic patients’ clinical and psychosocial experiences with implanted long-term central venous catheter: self-management versus professionally controlled care. Cancer Nurs. 2010;33:426-435.
EldhACEhnforsMEkmanI. The phenomena of participation and non-participation in health care-experiences of patients attending a nurse-led clinic for chronic heart failure. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2004;3:239-246.
44.
CronbachL. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16:297-334.
