...
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of Emergency Medicine: Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians and the University Association for Emergency Medicine >Ultrasonographically guided peripheral intravenous cannulation in emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access: a randomized trial.
【24h】

Ultrasonographically guided peripheral intravenous cannulation in emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access: a randomized trial.

机译:超声检查引导急诊患者难以进入静脉的外周静脉插管:一项随机试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We seek to compare ultrasonographically guided peripheral intravenous access to a non-ultrasonographically guided method in a randomized trial of emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access. METHODS: A prospective cohort of patients with difficult intravenous access was established. Patients were randomized to 2 groups: (1) intravenous access obtained through an ultrasonographically guided technique or (2) intravenous access obtained through non-ultrasonographically guided methods. Outcomes measured were number of attempts after enrollment, time to cannulation from enrollment, and patient satisfaction. Groups were compared with nonparametric analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were randomized. Twenty-eight patients were randomized to the ultrasonography group and 31 to the no ultrasonography group. A median of 2 further intravenous attempts was required in each group before successful cannulation, corresponding to a difference of 0 attempts (95% confidence interval [CI] 0 to 1 attempts). Time to cannulation showed a median of 39 minutes in the ultrasonography group compared with 26 minutes for the no ultrasonography group, giving a median increase of 13 minutes for the ultrasonographically guided group (95% CI -5 to 28 minutes). Patients in the ultrasonography group had a median Likert satisfaction score of 8 compared with 7 for the no ultrasonography group, giving a median increase of 1 on this scale in the ultrasonography group (95% CI 0 to 2). CONCLUSION: Ultrasonographically guided peripheral intravenous cannulation did not decrease the number of attempts or the time to successful catheterization, nor did it improve patient satisfaction compared with the group that did not use ultrasonography. Superiority of ultrasonographically guided peripheral intravenous cannulation is not supported by this study.
机译:研究目的:我们试图在急诊科患者难以进行静脉通路的随机试验中,将超声引导下的外周静脉通路与非超声引导下的方法进行比较。方法:建立了一个静脉注射困难患者的前瞻性队列。将患者随机分为2组:(1)通过超声引导技术获得的静脉通道或(2)通过非超声引导方法获得的静脉通道。测得的结果是入选后的尝试次数,入选前插管的时间以及患者的满意度。将各组与非参数分析进行比较。结果:59例患者被随机分组​​。 28例患者被随机分为超声检查组,而31例被分为无超声检查组。在成功插管之前,每组均需要再进行两次静脉内尝试,中位数为0次尝试(95%置信区间[CI]为0至1次尝试)之间的差异。超声检查组中的插管时间中位数为39分钟,而非超声检查组为26分钟,超声引导下组中位时间增加了13分钟(95%CI -5至28分钟)。超声检查组患者的李克特满意度中位数为8,而无超声检查组为7,在超声检查组中,该比例中位数增加1(95%CI为0至2)。结论:与不使用超声检查的组相比,超声引导下的外周静脉插管并没有减少尝试插入导管的次数或成功进行导管的时间,也没有提高患者的满意度。这项研究不支持超声引导下外周静脉插管的优越性。

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