跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT07449455
NCT07449455已完成不适用

Evaluation of the Impact of an Educational Intervention for Staff on the Rate of Peripheral Venous Catheters Inserted and Unused in Emergency Departments.

Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris1 个研究点 分布在 1 个国家目标入组 516 人开始时间: 2024年11月22日最近更新:
干预措施

试验速览

阶段
不适用
状态
已完成
入组人数
516
试验地点
1
主要终点
rate of non-utilization of prescribed and placed PVCs in the emergency department during the emergency stay, before and after an educational intervention

研究概览

简要总结

The placement of peripheral venous catheters (PVC) is a common procedure, estimated at 25 million per year in France according to SF2H in 2005. However, this procedure exposes patients to complications (hematoma, phlebitis, edema, sepsis, hemolysis of samples), is time-consuming, and costly. There is a significant proportion of PVCs placed unnecessarily, estimated between 23.7% and 60.7% according to studies. A study conducted at the Saint-Antoine Emergency Department showed that the best indicator of non-use of PVCs is the physician's prediction of non-utilization.

The investigators expect to achieve a significant reduction in unused PVCs after the intervention, thereby reducing adverse effects associated with PVC placement, freeing up paramedical time, and having a positive ecological and economic impact.

详细描述

The placement of peripheral venous catheters (PVC) is a common practice in various hospital departments in France. It is estimated at 25 million per year in France according to the French Society for Hospital Hygiene (SFHH) in 2005.

According to Gledstone-Brown et al., the prescription of catheters "just in case" has been a longstanding practice in emergency departments (ED), initially motivated to improve patient safety. The recurring issue was the need for an emergency catheter placement once the patient was admitted to a hospital ward. Additionally, the hypothesis that an easily insertable catheter, performed concurrently with a blood draw, could facilitate future assessments or intravenous medication administration seemed appealing.

As a result, a significant proportion of catheters are unnecessarily placed, ranging from 23.7% to 60.7% according to studies. Limm et al. conducted a retrospective study in 2013 focusing on PVCs placed in an Australian ED. Emergency reports of all adult patients with a PVC were reviewed, excluding those with life-threatening emergencies or those with a pre-existing PVC upon arrival. A PVC was considered unused if it was not employed for fluid administration, medication, or contrast product. Out of 3829 patients admitted to the ED over 30 days, 570 (14.9%) received a PVC, of which 284 (49.8% [95% CI, 45.6-54.0%]) remained unused. Neurological or gynecological-obstetric consultation reasons were associated with non-utilization of PVC (OR 2.3 [95% CI, 0.69-3.8] and 2.1 [95% CI, 0.99-40.2], respectively), contrasting with gastrointestinal or respiratory difficulty consultations. A similar study by Craigie et al. in Canada in 2017 found that 48% of PVCs were unused, with orthopedic, cardiovascular, and hematology consultations being associated with non-utilization. Other studies, such as Salvetti et al.'s in Italy and Vandenbos et al.'s in Nice in 2000, reported percentages of unused PVCs at 60.7% and 33.8%, respectively.

Lewindon rightly emphasizes the need for more precise data on PVC placements in EDs to identify patients who do not require them. In 2018, Guilhard et al. conducted a prospective descriptive study focusing on PVC placements in the ED of the University Hospital of Saint-Denis in La Réunion, using a methodology similar to the aforementioned studies. Out of 605 included patients in the study month, 207 (34.2%) had a PVC placed, with 57% remaining unused. The study also highlighted intravenous prescriptions for medications with oral alternatives, including Paracetamol (51%), Ketoprofen (15%), Tramadol (13%), and Phloroglucinol (10%). Additionally, 142 out of 185 (77%) patients hospitalized from the ED had a PVC. However, Mailhe et al. showed in 2020 that 60.5% of them had their PVC removed within 24 hours of admission. This prospective study included 614 patients hospitalized from the ED to the infectious diseases department of the hospital-university institute of Marseille over six months. Results indicated that 509 (82.9%) arrived with a PVC, 260 (51.5%) were deemed unnecessary from the start, and 308 (60.5%) were removed within 24 hours. These findings align with those of Lederle et al. in 1992, who reported that, among 484 patients with a PVC, 168 (35% [95% CI, 31-39%]) had their catheter unused for at least 48 hours in a prospective study spanning six weeks in four hospital wards in the United States.

Catheter placement is time-consuming for nursing teams and uncomfortable for patients. Couteaux et al. demonstrated in 2008, through a one-day cross-sectional analysis in two hospitals of the Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), that vascular punctures (especially venous) were the leading cause of pain among hospitalized patients, with 38% of 671 painful events associated with this procedure. Catheter placement exposes patients to various adverse effects analyzed by Miliani et al. this multicenter prospective observational study (one surgical department and four medical departments in three hospitals in northern France) conducted between June 2013 and June 2014 analyzed the occurrence of adverse effects after PVC placement and up to 48 hours after removal. Among the 815 PVCs analyzed, 164 phlebitis (20.1% [95% CI, 17.4-23.0%]), including 34 manifest ones (grade ≥3 according to Maddox classification, 4.1% [95% CI, 2.9-5.8%]), 144 hematomas at the puncture site (17.7% [95% CI, 15.1-20.5%]), 107 fluid leaks (13.1% [95% CI, 10.9-15.6%]), 31 edemas (3.8% [95% CI, 2.6-5.4%]), and 3 suspicions of catheter-related sepsis (0.4% [95% CI, 0.1-1.1%]) were noted. Finally, a literature review showed that samples taken from a catheter are more often hemolyzed (3.3% to 77% according to studies) than those obtained directly by venous puncture (0% to 3.8%).

研究设计

研究类型
Observational
观察模型
Case Only
时间视角
Prospective

入排标准

年龄范围
18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • Patients ≥ 18 years old
  • Prescription and placement of a PVC and/or blood sample collection without PVC placement during the emergency department stay
  • Patient non-opposition to the use of care data, collected by the investigating physician after informing the patient

排除标准

  • - Patient information impossible (language barrier, neuro-cognitive impairment…)

研究组 & 干预措施

Before intervention

After intervention

干预措施: Medical staff educational intervention (Other)

结局指标

主要结局

rate of non-utilization of prescribed and placed PVCs in the emergency department during the emergency stay, before and after an educational intervention

时间窗: 2 months

A PVC is considered used if the patient has received intravenous therapy (medication, filling solution, or contrast agent) or if a new blood sample has been taken remotely from the catheter placement (while the patient is still being managed in the ED).

次要结局

  • The estimated number of PVCs not placed due to the intervention in the post-intervention phase (the delta between the number of PVCs placed in each phase, relative to the number of visits to the ED).(2 months)
  • The rate of PVC placements performed subsequently in patients for whom a PVC is not initially placed.(2 months)
  • The rate of blood samples taken subsequently in patients for whom a PVC is not initially placed.(2 months)
  • The rate of blood samples taken by direct venipuncture during the initial patient management.(2 months)
  • The rate of orally administered analgesics.(2 months)
  • The rate of hemolyzed blood samples based on the sampling technique (PVC placement or direct venipuncture).(2 months)

研究者

申办方类型
Other
责任方
Sponsor

研究点 (1)

Loading locations...

相似试验