The effect of introducing a nurse-practitioner-led peripherally inserted central venous catheter placement program on the utilization of central venous access device: A retrospective study in Japan

Abstract

Background:

Nurse-led peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) placement teams are common in western hospitals, but they are still in their infancy in Japan. Although implementing a dedicated program may improve ongoing vascular-access management, the direct hospital-level effects of launching a nurse-led PICC team on specific outcomes have not been formally investigated.

Objectives:

To evaluate the effect of introducing a nurse practitioner (NP)-led PICC-placement program on subsequent utilization of centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs) and to contrast the quality of PICC placements conducted by physicians and NPs.

Materials and methods:

Patients who underwent central venous access devices (CVADs) between 2014 and 2020 at a university hospital in Japan were evaluated retrospectively using an interrupted time-series analysis on the trend for monthly CVAD utilization and logistic regression and propensity score-based analyses for PICC-related complications.

Results:

Among 6007 CVAD placements, 2230 PICCs were inserted into 1658 patients (725 by physicians and 1505 by NPs). The monthly number of CICC utilization fell from 58 in April 2014 to 38 in March 2020, while PICC placements by the NP PICC team increased from 0 to 104. The implementation of the NP PICC program reduced the immediate rate (by 35.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 24.1–46.9; p < 0.001) and post-intervention trend (by 2.3; 95% CI: 1.1–3.5; p < 0.001) of monthly CICC utilization. Overall immediate complication rates were lower in the NP group than the physician group (1.5% vs 5.1%; adjusted odds ratio = 0.31; 95% CI: 0.17–0.59; p < 0.001). The cumulative incidences of central line-associated bloodstream infections were comparable between the NP and physician groups (5.9% vs 7.2%; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.53–1.75; p = .90).

Conclusions:

This NP-led PICC program reduced CICC utilization without affecting the quality of PICC placement or complication rate.

Keywords

Catheterization peripheral vascular access devices interrupted time series analysis nurse practitioners

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chopra

Anand

Krein

, et al Bloodstream infection, venous thrombosis, and peripherally inserted central catheters: reappraising the evidence. Am J Med 2012; 125(8): 733–741.

Rubin

Apfelbaum

Tung

. Trends in central venous catheter insertions by anesthesia providers: an analysis of the medicare physician supplier procedure summary from 2007 to 2016. Anesth Analg 2020; 130(4): 1026–1034.

Chopra

Davidson

Collins

. Central venous access devices and approach to device and site selection in adults. UpToDate. Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/central-venous-access-device-and-site-selection-in-adults (accessed 14 December 2022).

Chopra

Flanders

Saint

, et al The Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC): results from a multispecialty panel using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. Ann Intern Med 2015; 163(6 Suppl.): S1–S40.

Hallam

Denton

Weston

, et al UK Vessel Health and Preservation (VHP) Framework: a commentary on the updated VHP 2020. J Infect Prev 2021; 22(4): 147–155.

Pinelli

Little

Kokotis

, et al Assessment of the MAGIC recommendations in context of evolving evidence based on the use of PICC in ICU. J Vasc Access. Epub ahead of print 23 October 2021. DOI: 10.1177/11297298211048019.

The Italian Group of Venous Access Devices (GAVeCeLT) TIGoVAD. GAVeCeLT recommendations 2021 for the indication, implementation, and management of venous access devices, https://www.medicina.univpm.it/sites/www.medicina.univpm.It/files/Raccomandazioni%20GAVeCeLT%202021.pdf (2021, accessed 4 December 2022).

Krein

Kuhn

Ratz

, et al Use of designated nurse PICC teams and CLABSI prevention practices among U.S. hospitals: a survey-based study. J Patient Saf 2019; 15(4): 293–295.

Alexandrou

Spencer

Frost

, et al Central venous catheter placement by advanced practice nurses demonstrates low procedural complication and infection rates—a report from 13 years of service. Crit Care Med 2014; 42(3): 536–543.

10.

Silva

Lagares-Velasco

Fernández-Ruiz

, et al Peripherally inserted central venous catheter placed and maintained by a dedicated nursing team for the administration of antimicrobial therapy vs. another type of catheter: a retrospective case–control study. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin (Engl Ed) 2020; 38(9): 425–430.

11.

Scimò

Vallecorsa

Cini

, et al Vascular access unit: six-years experience report in France. J Vasc Access. Epub ahead of print 25 February 2022. DOI: 10.1177/11297298221080228.

12.

Rejane Rabelo-Silva

Lourenço

Maestri

, et al Patterns, appropriateness and outcomes of peripherally inserted central catheter use in Brazil: a multicentre study of 12 725 catheters. BMJ Qual Saf 2022; 31(9): 652–661. DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2021-013869.

13.

Inoue

Kuriyama

Nishiguchi

, et al Peripherally inserted central venous catheters: survey on the actual use of PICC 2019. Med Nutritionist PEN Lead 2020; 4(1): 53–61.

14.

Sandrucci

Mussa

. Peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Milan, Italy: Springer, 2014.

15.

Sakai

Iwata

Terasawa

. External validation of the Michigan PICC catheter-associated bloodstream infections score (MPC score) for predicting the risk of peripherally inserted central catheter-associated bloodstream infections: a single-center study in Japan. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2023; 44(3): 480–483.

16.

Kontopantelis

Doran

Springate

, et al Regression based quasi-experimental approach when randomisation is not an option: interrupted time series analysis. BMJ 2015; 350: h2750.

17.

Herc

Patel

Washer

, et al A model to predict central-line-associated bloodstream infection among patients with peripherally inserted central catheters: the MPC score. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017; 38(10): 1155–1166.

18.

National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). Bloodstream Infection (BSI) events, https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/pdfs/pscmanual/4psc_clabscurrent.pdf (January 2021, accessed 19 August 2021).

19.

Newey

West

. A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix. Econometrica 1987; 55(3): 703–708.

20.

Cumby

Huizinga

. Testing the autocorrelation structure of disturbances in ordinary least squares and instrumental variables regressions. Econometrica 1992; 60(1): 185–195.

21.

Prais

Winsten

. Trend estimators and serial correlation. Cowles Commission Discussion Paper. Stat. No. 383. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago, 1954. https://cowles.yale.Edu/sites/default/files/files/pub/cdp/s-0383.pdf (accessed 14 December 2022).

22.

Austin

. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behav Res 2011; 46(3): 399–424.

23.

Chopra

Ratz

Kuhn

, et al PICC-associated bloodstream infections: prevalence, patterns, and predictors. Am J Med 2014; 127(4): 319–328.

24.

Hudson

Fielding

Ramsay

. Methodology and reporting characteristics of studies using interrupted time series design in healthcare. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; 19(1): 137.

25.

Chopra

Anand

Hickner

, et al Risk of venous thromboembolism associated with peripherally inserted central catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2013; 382(9889): 311–325.

26.

Irino

Oneyama

Hizuki

, et al Safety of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) insertion by nurse practitioner. J Jpn Soc Nurse Pract 2021; 5(2): 49–57.

27.

Yacopetti

Alexandrou

Spencer

, et al Central venous catheter insertion by a clinical nurse consultant or anaesthetic medical staff: a single-centre observational study. Crit Care Resusc 2010; 12(2): 90–95.

28.

Shekelle

Wachter

Pronovost

, et al Making health care safer II: an updated critical analysis of the evidence for patient safety practices. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 211. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, March 2013. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK133363/pdf/Bookshelf_NBK133363.pdf (accessed 4 December 2022).

29.

Schears

Ferko

Syed

, et al Peripherally inserted central catheters inserted with current best practices have low deep vein thrombosis and central line-associated bloodstream infection risk compared with centrally inserted central catheters: a contemporary meta-analysis. J Vasc Access 2021; 22(1): 9–25.

30.

Spencer

Bardin-Spencer

. Central venous access device insertion by qualified vascular access specialists or other applicable healthcare clinicians. J Assoc Vasc Access 2020; 25(1): 52–55.