We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Ultrasonographic Guidance to Improve First-Attempt Success in Children With Predicted Difficult Intravenous Access in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Annals of Emergency Medicine 2019 July
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We determine whether ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement improves the rate of first-attempt success by 20% for children with predicted difficult intravenous access. Secondary objectives included determining whether ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement reduces the attempt number, improves time to access or parental satisfaction, or affects intravenous line survival and complications.
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial conducted in an urban tertiary care pediatric emergency department that enrolled a convenience sample of children requiring an intravenous line and who were predicted to have difficult intravenous access according to a previously validated score. Participants were randomized to traditional or ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement on first attempt and stratified by aged 0 to 3 versus older than 3 years.
RESULTS: One hundred sixty-seven patients were enrolled and randomized to traditional intravenous line or to a care bundle with a multidisciplinary team trained to place ultrasonographically guided intravenous lines. First-attempt success was increased in the ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement arm (n=83) compared with the traditional intravenous line arm (n=84) (85.4% versus 45.8%; relative risk 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5 to 2.4). There were fewer attempts in the ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement arm than in the traditional intravenous line arm (median 1 versus 2; median difference 1; 95% CI 0.8 to 1.2) and a shorter time from randomization to intravenous line flush (median 14 minutes [interquartile range 11 to 20] versus 28 minutes [interquartile range 16 to 42]). A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated that ultrasonographically guided intravenous lines survived longer than traditional ones (median 7.3 days [95% CI 3.7 to 9.5] versus 2.3 days [95% CI 1.8 to 3.3]). There was no difference in complications between the groups. Parents were more satisfied with ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement.
CONCLUSION: Ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement in children with predicted difficult intravenous access improved first-attempt success and intravenous line longevity when conducted by a team of trained providers.
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial conducted in an urban tertiary care pediatric emergency department that enrolled a convenience sample of children requiring an intravenous line and who were predicted to have difficult intravenous access according to a previously validated score. Participants were randomized to traditional or ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement on first attempt and stratified by aged 0 to 3 versus older than 3 years.
RESULTS: One hundred sixty-seven patients were enrolled and randomized to traditional intravenous line or to a care bundle with a multidisciplinary team trained to place ultrasonographically guided intravenous lines. First-attempt success was increased in the ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement arm (n=83) compared with the traditional intravenous line arm (n=84) (85.4% versus 45.8%; relative risk 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5 to 2.4). There were fewer attempts in the ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement arm than in the traditional intravenous line arm (median 1 versus 2; median difference 1; 95% CI 0.8 to 1.2) and a shorter time from randomization to intravenous line flush (median 14 minutes [interquartile range 11 to 20] versus 28 minutes [interquartile range 16 to 42]). A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated that ultrasonographically guided intravenous lines survived longer than traditional ones (median 7.3 days [95% CI 3.7 to 9.5] versus 2.3 days [95% CI 1.8 to 3.3]). There was no difference in complications between the groups. Parents were more satisfied with ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement.
CONCLUSION: Ultrasonographically guided intravenous line placement in children with predicted difficult intravenous access improved first-attempt success and intravenous line longevity when conducted by a team of trained providers.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app