Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter (USGPIV) insertion is an effective method to gain vascular access in patients with difficult intravenous access (DIVA). While USGPIV success rates are reported to be high, some studies have reported a concerning incidence of USGPIV premature failures.
Aims:
The purpose of this study was to compare differences in USGPIV and landmark peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV) utilization and failure following a hospital-wide USGPIV training program for nurses.
Methods:
The authors performed a retrospective, electronic medical record review of all USGPIVs and PIVs inserted at a tertiary, urban, academic medical center from September 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019. The primary outcome was differences between USGPIV and PIV time to failure.
Results:
A total of 43,470 short peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) were inserted in 23,713 patients. Of these, 7972 (16.8%) were USGPIV. At 30 days of follow-up, for PIVCs with an indication for removal documented, USGPIVs had higher Kaplan–Meier survival probabilities than PIVs (p < 0.001).
Conclusions:
The use of simulation-based mastery associated with USGPIVs, demonstrated lower failure rates than standard PIVs after 2 days and USGPIVs exhibited improved survival rates in patients with DIVA. These findings suggest that rigorous simulation-based insertion training demonstrates improved USGPIV survival when compared to traditional PIVCs. SBML is an extremely useful tool to ensure appropriately trained clinicians acquire the necessary knowledge and skillset to improve USGPIV outcomes.
MoureauNL. Vessel health and preservation: the right approach for vascular access. Springer Nature, 2019. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-03149-7
2.
AlexandrouE. The One Million global catheters PIVC worldwide prevalence study. Br J Nurs2014; 23(8): S16–S17.
3.
AlexandrouERay-BarruelGCarrPJ, et al. International prevalence of the use of peripheral intravenous catheters. J Hosp Med2015; 10(8): 530–533.
4.
BlauwMFoxmanBWuJ, et al. Risk factors and outcomes associated with hospital-onset peripheral intravenous catheter-associated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Open Forum Infect Dis2019; 6(4): ofz111–ofz116.
5.
CivettaGCortesiSMancardiM, et al. EA-DIVA score (enhanced adult DIVA score): a new scale to predict difficult preoperative venous cannulation in adult surgical patients. J Vasc Access2019; 20(3): 281–289.
6.
WittingMD. IV access difficulty: incidence and delays in an urban emergency department. J Emerg Med2012; 42(4): 483–487.
7.
SmithC. Should nurses be trained to use ultrasound for intravenous access to patients with difficult veins?Emerg Nurse2018; 26(2): 18–24.
8.
DavisEMFeinsmithSAmickAE, et al. Difficult intravenous access in the emergency department: performance and impact of ultrasound-guided IV insertion performed by nurses. Am J Emerg Med2021; 46: 539–544.
9.
FieldsJMPielaNEAuAK, et al. Risk factors associated with difficult venous access in adult ED patients. Am J Emerg Med2014; 32(10): 1179–1182.
10.
WhalenMMaliszewskiBSheinfeldR, et al. Outcomes of an innovative evidence-based practice project: building a difficult-access team in the Emergency Department. J Emerg Nurs2018; 44: 478–482.
11.
Armenteros-YeguasVGárate-EcheniqueLTomás-LópezMA, et al. Prevalence of difficult venous access and associated risk factors in highly complex hospitalised patients. J Clin Nurs2017; 26(23-24): 4267–4275.
12.
Rodriguez-CaleroMAde Pedro-GomezJEMolero-BallesterLJ, et al. Risk factors for difficult peripheral intravenous cannulation. The PIVV2 multicentre case-control study. J Clin Med2020; 9(3): 799.
13.
MoureauNChopraV. Indications for peripheral, midline and central catheters: summary of the MAGIC recommendations. Br J Nurs2016; 25(8): S15–S24.
14.
WhalenMMaliszewskiBBaptisteDL. Establishing a dedicated difficult vascular access team in the Emergency Department: a needs assessment. J Infus Nurs2017; 40(3): 149–154.
15.
BahlAPandurangaduAVTuckerJ, et al. A randomized controlled trial assessing the use of ultrasound for nurse-performed IV placement in difficult access ED patients. Am J Emerg Med2016; 34(10): 1950–1954.
16.
ShokoohiHBonifaceKMcCarthyM, et al. Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access program is associated with a marked reduction in central venous catheter use in noncritically ill emergency department patients. Ann Emerg Med2013; 61(2): 198–203.
17.
AuAKRotteMJGrzybowskiRJ, et al. Decrease in central venous catheter placement due to use of ultrasound guidance for peripheral intravenous catheters. Am J Emerg Med2012; 30(9): 1950–1954.
18.
LiuYTAlsaawiABjornssonHM. Ultrasound-guided peripheral venous access: a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials. Eur J Emerg Med2014; 21(1): 18–23.
19.
SouVMcManusCMifflinN, et al. A clinical pathway for the management of difficult venous access. BMC Nurs2017; 16: 64.
20.
GalenBBaronSYoungS, et al. Reducing peripherally inserted central catheters and midline catheters by training nurses in ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter placement. BMJ Qual Saf2020; 29(3): 245–249.
21.
MooreCKollpainterRAndrewsL, et al. AIUM practice parameter for the use of ultrasound to guide vascular access procedures. J Ultrasound Med2019; 38(3): E4–E18.
22.
StolzLAStolzUHoweC, et al. Ultrasound-guided peripheral venous access: a meta-analysis and systematic review. J Vasc Access2015; 16(4): 321–326.
23.
PandurangaduAVTuckerJ. Patient satisfaction with nurse placed ultrasound guided peripheral IV. Emerg Med Open Access2016; 06(03): 2.
24.
McCarthyMLShokoohiHBonifaceKS, et al. Ultrasonography versus landmark for peripheral intravenous cannulation: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Emerg Med2016; 68(1): 10–18.
25.
KhanMSSabnisVBPhansalkarDS, et al. Use of ultrasound in peripheral venous catheterization in adult emergency and critical care units. Anaesthesia, Pain & Intensive Care2019: Jan 27: 303–310.
26.
GalenBTSouthernWN. Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheters to reduce central venous catheter use on the inpatient medical ward. Qual Manage Healthc2018; 27(1): 30–32.
27.
MorataLOgilvieCYonJ, et al. Decreasing peripherally inserted central catheter use with ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous lines: a quality improvement project in the acute care setting. J Nurs Adm2017; 47(6): 338–344.
28.
FieldsJMDeanAJTodmanRW, et al. The effect of vessel depth, diameter, and location on ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter longevity. Am J Emerg Med2012; 30(7): 1134–1140.
29.
DarginJMRebholzCMLowensteinRA, et al. Ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous catheter survival in ED patients with difficult access. Am J Emerg Med2010; 28(1): 1–7.
30.
MilesGNewcombPSpearD. Comparison of dwell-times of two commonly placed peripheral intravenous catheters: traditional vs. Ultrasound-guided. Open J Nurs2015; 05(12): 1082–1088.
31.
KeyesLEFrazeeBWSnoeyER, et al. Ultrasound-guided brachial and basilic vein cannulation in emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access. Ann Emerg Med1999; 34(6): 711–714.
32.
BahlAHangBBrackneyA, et al. Standard long IV catheters versus extended dwell catheters: a randomized comparison of ultrasound-guided catheter survival. Am J Emerg Med2019; 37(4): 715–721.
33.
ZinggWPittetD. Peripheral venous catheters: an under-evaluated problem. Int J Antimicrob Agents2009; 34Suppl 4: S38–S42.
34.
FieldsJMPielaNEKuBS. Association between multiple IV attempts and perceived pain levels in the emergency department. J Vasc Access2014; 15(6): 514–518.
35.
HelmREKlausnerJDKlempererJD, et al. Accepted but unacceptable: peripheral IV catheter failure. J Infus Nurs2015; 38(3): 189–203.
36.
WallisMCMcGrailMWebsterJ, et al. Risk factors for peripheral intravenous catheter failure: a multivariate analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol2014; 35(1): 63–68.
37.
MarshNWebsterJLarsonE, et al. Observational study of peripheral intravenous catheter outcomes in adult hospitalized patients: a multivariable analysis of peripheral intravenous catheter failure. J Hosp Med2018; 13(2): 83–89.
38.
WittingMDMoayediSHirshonJM, et al. Predicting failure of intravenous access in adults: the value of prior difficulty. J Emerg Med2019; 57(1): 1–5.
39.
AmickAEFeinsmithSEDavisEM, et al. Simulation-based mastery learning improves ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter insertion skills of practicing nurses. Simul Healthc2021; Jan8.
PandurangaduAVTuckerJBrackneyAR, et al. Ultrasound-guided intravenous catheter survival impacted by amount of catheter residing in the vein. Emerg Med J2018; 35(9): 550–5.
42.
BahlAHijaziMChenN-W, et al. Ultralong versus standard long peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomized controlled trial of ultrasonographically guided catheter survival. Ann Emerg Med2020; 76: 134–142.
CampagnaSGonellaSZerlaPA, et al. The risk of adverse events related to extended-dwell peripheral intravenous access. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol2018; 39(7): 875–877.
45.
HopkinsonSGGreenAKHewittBE, et al. Short peripheral catheter dwell time and associated complications: a systematic review. J Infus Nurs2020; 43(4): 200–207.
46.
DeVriesMStrimbuK. Short peripheral catheter performance following adoption of clinical indication removal. J Infus Nurs2019; 42(2): 81–90.
47.
MilesGNewcombPSpearD. The effect of catheter length placed into the vein on peripheral ultrasound-guided catheter survival time: a prospective observational study. J Emerg Nurs2021; 47: 123–130.
48.
WelyczkoN. Peripheral intravenous cannulation: reducing pain and local complications. Br J Nurs2020; 29(8): S12–S19.
49.
BartonA. Vascular access complications in specialised clinical practice: strategies for first insertion success. J Kidney Care2019; 4(6): 300–305.
50.
StuartRLCameronDRScottC, et al. Peripheral intravenous catheter-associated Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: more than 5 years of prospective data from two tertiary health services. Med J Aust2013; 198(10): 551–553.
51.
BarsukJHMcGaghieWCCohenER, et al. Use of simulation-based mastery learning to improve the quality of central venous catheter placement in a medical intensive care unit. J Hosp Med2009; 4(7): 397–403.
52.
BarsukJHMcGaghieWCCohenER, et al. Simulation-based mastery learning reduces complications during central venous catheter insertion in a medical intensive care unit. Crit Care Med2009; 37(10): 2697–2701.
53.
BarsukJHWilcoxJECohenER, et al. Simulation-based mastery learning improves patient and caregiver ventricular assist device self-care skills: a randomized pilot trial. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes2019; 12(10): e005794.
54.
ReedTPirotteMMcHughM, et al. Simulation-based mastery learning improves medical student performance and retention of core clinical skills. Simul Healthc2016; 11(3): 173–180.
55.
BarsukJHCohenERMikolajczakA, et al. Simulation-based mastery learning improves central line maintenance skills of ICU nurses. J Nurs Adm2015; 45(10): 511–517.
56.
BarsukJHCohenERWilliamsMV, et al. Simulation-based mastery learning for thoracentesis skills improves patient outcomes: a randomized trial. Acad Med2018; 93(5): 729–735.
57.
SpencerTRBardin-SpencerAJ. Pre- and post-review of a standardized ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization curriculum evaluating procedural skills acquisition and clinician confidence. J Vasc Access2020; 21(4): 440–448.
