首页> 外文期刊>Current medical research and opinion >Evaluation of a new safety peripheral IV catheter designed to reduce mucocutaneous blood exposure
【24h】

Evaluation of a new safety peripheral IV catheter designed to reduce mucocutaneous blood exposure

机译:评估旨在减少粘膜皮肤血液暴露的新型安全性外周静脉导管

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: We evaluated performance and clinical acceptability of a new peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) designed to reduce blood exposure. Methods: A two phased, unblinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted at a clinical research center in New Jersey, USA. In Phase 1, clinicians were asked to evaluate two devices: a PIVC with blood control (BD Insyte Autoguard*BC [Blood Control] Shielded IV Catheter), and a reference conventional PIVC (BD Insyte Autoguard Shielded IV Catheter). In Phase 2, clinicians compared two insertions of the investigational PIVC with blood control (PIVC-BC); one with venous compression and one without. The PIVC-BC was evaluated for superiority to the conventional PIVC with regard to blood exposure and for equivalence in general performance characteristics. Results: Seventy-eight clinicians (mean age: 41.4 years; 89.7% female) and 234 healthy volunteers (mean age: 40.2 years; 61.5% female) were enrolled. Blood leakage occurred significantly more in the conventional PIVC group (39.1%) as compared to the PIVC-BC group (2.0%) (difference: 37.1% [95% CI: 28.8%; 45.15%]). Blood leakage rates for the PIVC-BC with or without use of venous compression were similar, 2.6% and 1.3% respectively (difference: 1.3% [95% CI: -7.8%; 4.7%]). A total of 98.7% of clinicians rated the PIVC-BC as clinically acceptable compared to 89.6% with the reference PIVC (difference: -9.1; 95% CI: -18; -1.5%) and 98.7% agreed it replaced the need for venous compression during catheter insertion (95% CI: 92.8%; 100%). Although the inability to blind clinicians to the investigational product was a potential source of bias, this was unlikely to affect assessments of observed blood leakage. Conclusions: The PIVC with blood control demonstrated reduced blood leakage during insertion and was rated no different for clinical acceptability and insertion performance compared to the conventional PIVC. Clinicians agreed that the new design replaced the need for venous compression to control blood flow during IV catheter insertion.
机译:目的:我们评估了旨在减少血液暴露的新型外周静脉导管(PIVC)的性能和临床可接受性。方法:在美国新泽西州的一个临床研究中心进行了一项为期两阶段,无盲的随机对照试验。在阶段1中,要求临床医生评估两种设备:带血液控制的PIVC(BD Insyte Autoguard * BC [Blood Control] Shielded IV导管)和参考的传统PIVC(BD Insyte Autoguard Shielded IV导管)。在第2阶段,临床医生将两次插入的PIVC与血液控制(PIVC-BC)进行了比较。一种带有静脉压迫,另一种没有静脉压迫。评价了PIVC-BC在血液暴露方面和传统PIVC方面的优越性以及在一般性能特征方面的等效性。结果:招募了78名临床医生(平均年龄:41.4岁;女性89.7%)和234名健康志愿者(平均年龄:40.2岁;女性61.5%)。与PIVC-BC组(2.0%)相比,常规PIVC组(39.1%)发生的漏血明显更多(差异:37.1%[95%CI:28.8%; 45.15%])。使用或不使用静脉加压的PIVC-BC的漏血率相似,分别为2.6%和1.3%(差异:1.3%[95%CI:-7.8%; 4.7%])。共有98.7%的临床医生认为PIVC-BC是临床可接受的,而参考PIVC的这一比例为89.6%(差异:-9.1; 95%CI:-18; -1.5%),而98.7%的人认为它代替了静脉注射导管插入过程中的压缩(95%CI:92.8%; 100%)。尽管盲人临床医生无法使用研究产品是造成偏见的潜在原因,但这不太可能影响对观察到的血液泄漏的评估。结论:具有血液控制功能的PIVC在插入过程中显示出减少的血液泄漏,与常规PIVC相比,其临床可接受性和插入性能没有差异。临床医生一致认为,新设计取代了静脉输液导管插入期间静脉压缩以控制血流的需求。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号