外周静脉留置针不同拔管时机的随机对照研究

doi:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2020.02.020

中华护理杂志 ›› 2020, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (2): 272-277.DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2020.02.020

外周静脉留置针不同拔管时机的随机对照研究

李旭英,孙红(),魏涛,王蕾,郭彩霞,赵改婷,梅赣红,陈英,张敏,程文兰,王一任,陈利芬,钟卫兰

410013 长沙市湖南省肿瘤医院护理部（李旭英,魏涛）;北京医院/国家老年医学中心/中国医学科学院老年医学研究院护理部（孙红,王蕾）;吉林大学中日联谊医院护理部（郭彩霞）;河北医科大学第二医院儿科（赵改婷）;南昌大学第二附属医院护理部（梅赣红）;广西医科大学附属肿瘤医院护理部（陈英）;西安国际医学中心医院护理部（张敏）;河南省人民医院神经外科（程文兰）;中南大学公共卫生学院（王一任）;中山大学附属第一医院护理部（陈利芬）;贵阳市第一人民医院护理部（钟卫兰）

收稿日期:2019-09-15 出版日期:2020-02-15 发布日期:2020-03-04
通讯作者: 孙红
作者简介:李旭英:女,博士,主任护师,护理部主任,E-mail: lixuying@hnca.org.cn
基金资助:
湖南省卫生计生委项目(20180456)

A multicenter randomized controlled study on removal indication of peripheral venous indwelling needle

LI Xuying,SUN Hong(),WEI Tao,WANG Lei,GUO Caixia,ZHAO Gaiting,MEI Ganhong,CHEN Ying,ZHANG Min,CHENG Wenlan,WANG Yiren,CHEN Lifen,ZHONG Weilan

Received:2019-09-15 Online:2020-02-15 Published:2020-03-04
Contact: Hong SUN

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的比较依据临床指征拔除留置针和常规拔除留置针的效果。方法 2019年3月—7月,采用多中心随机对照研究,选取12所三级甲等综合医院的3 669例患者作为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分为试验组和对照组,试验组依据临床指征拔除留置针,对照组常规拔除留置针,比较两组的外周静脉留置针留置时间、96 h内各导管相关并发症的发生率和整个留置期间各导管相关并发症（静脉炎、堵管、渗液、怀疑感染）发生的风险,其中静脉炎为主要结局指标,其他并发症为次要结局指标。结果共3 642例患者纳入研究,其中试验组1 803例,对照组1 839例。试验组外周静脉留置针留置时间为（85±52） h,对照组留置时间为（71±30） h,两组留置时间比较,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.001）;96 h内,主要结局指标静脉炎的发生率在两组之间的差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,次要结局指标中除堵管有统计学意义（P=0.005）,其余指标的差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）;整个留置期间,两组主要结局指标静脉炎发生风险的差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,次要结局指标中除堵管外,其余指标的差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论依据临床指征更换外周静脉留置针,留置时间更长且不会增加静脉炎、渗液及怀疑感染的发生风险,但堵管的发生风险会增大,如根据临床指征拔管,需加强堵管的监测与评估。

关键词: 留置针, 并发症, 拔管指征, 风险管理, 导管插入术, 外周, 护理

Abstract:

Objective To investigate the clinical safety of pulling peripheral venous indwelling needle according to clinical indications,and compare its effect with conventional indwelling needle extraction. Methods A multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted with a total of 3,669 patients in 12 tertiary general hospitals from March 2019 to July 2019. The patients were randomly allocated into the observation group（group A） and the control group （group B） by the random number table. The puncture methods were consistent between the two groups. Researchers compared the indwelling time,the incidence of catheter-related complications within 96 hours,and the risk ratio of catheter-related complications during the entire indwelling period（phlebitis,occlusion,and infiltration,suspected infection） between two groups,among which phlebitis was the primary outcome indicator and other complications as secondary outcome measures. Results A total of 3,642 patients were enrolled in the study with 1,803 cases in group A and 1,839 cases in group B. The indwelling time of group A was（85±52）h and it was longer than that of （71±30） h in group B with a statistical difference（P<0.001）. Within 96 h of indwelling time,there was no statistical differences in the risk of phlebitis,infiltration and suspected infection between two groups（P>0.05）. During the entire indwelling period,the risk of occlusion in group A was higher than that in group B with a statistical difference（P<0.05）. The other indicators showed no statistical difference. Conclusion The placement of indwelling needle based on clinical indications can prolong the indwelling time without increasing the risk of phlebitis,infiltration and suspected infection,but the risk of occlusion will increase. If the catheter is removed according to clinical indications,monitoring and evaluation of occlusion should be strengthened.

Key words: Peripheral Venous Indwelling Needle, Complication, Indication of Extubation, Risk Management, Catheterization, Peripheral, Nursing Care

李旭英, 孙红, 魏涛, 王蕾, 郭彩霞, 赵改婷, 梅赣红, 陈英, 张敏, 程文兰, 王一任, 陈利芬, 钟卫兰. 外周静脉留置针不同拔管时机的随机对照研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2020, 55(2): 272-277.

LI Xuying, SUN Hong, WEI Tao, WANG Lei, GUO Caixia, ZHAO Gaiting, MEI Ganhong, CHEN Ying, ZHANG Min, CHENG Wenlan, WANG Yiren, CHEN Lifen, ZHONG Weilan. A multicenter randomized controlled study on removal indication of peripheral venous indwelling needle[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 2020, 55(2): 272-277.

图/表 4

表1 两组一般资料的比较[例（百分比,%）]

表2 两组导管相关信息的比较[例（百分比,%）]

表3 96 h内两组导管相关并发症发生率的比较[例（百分率,%）]

表4 两组导管相关并发症发生风险比较[例（百分率,%）]

参考文献 19

[1]	Rickard CM, Ray-Barruel G . Peripheral intravenous catheter assessment:beyond phlebitis[J]. Lancet Haematol, 2017,4(9):e402-e403.
[2]	孙红, 王蕾, 关欣 , 等. 全国部分三级甲等医院静脉治疗护理现状分析[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2014,49(10):1232-1237.
[3]	Marsh N, Webster J, Larson E , et al. Observational study of peripheral intravenous catheter outcomes in adult hospitalized patients:a multivariable analysis of peripheral intravenous catheter failure[J]. J Hosp Med, 2018,13(2):83-89.
[4]	Miliani K, Taravella R, Thillard D , et al. Peripheral venous catheter-related adverse events:evaluation from a multicentre epidemiological study in France (the CATHEVAL Project)[J]. PloS One, 2017,12(1):e168637.
[5]	魏涛, 谭艳, 谌永毅 , 等. 成人外周静脉留置针使用情况调查[J]. 护理学杂志, 2018,33(17):6-9.
[6]	Mermel LA . Short-term peripheral venous catheter-related bloodstream infections:a systematic review[J]. Clin Infect Dis, 2017,65(10):1757-1762.
[7]	Sato A, Nakamura I, Fujita H , et al. Peripheral venous catheter-related bloodstream infection is associated with severe complications and potential death:a retrospective observational study[J]. BMC Infect Dis, 2017,17:434.
[8]	Zingg W, Pittet D . Peripheral venous catheters:an under-evaluated problem[J]. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2009,34(34 Suppl 4):S38-S42.
[9]	国家卫生与计划生育委员会. 静脉治疗护理技术操作规范[J]. 中国护理管理, 2014,14(1):1-4.
[10]	Webster J, Osborne S, Rickard CM , et al. Clinically-indicated re-placement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2015(8):D7798.
[11]	美国静脉输液护理学会. 输液治疗实践标准[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2016,51(10s):1-142.
[12]	Chow S, Shao J, Wang H . Sample size calculations in clinical research[M]. 3nd Ed.NewYork:Chapman & Hall/CRC Biostati-stics Series, 2017.
[13]	Xu L, Hu Y, Huang X , et al. Clinically indicated replacement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters in adults:a nonblinded,cluster-randomized trial in China[J]. Int J Nurs Pract, 2017,23:e12595.
[14]	Van Donk P, Rickard CM, McGrail MR ,et al. Routine replacement versus clinical monitoring of peripheral intravenous catheters in a regional hospital in the home program:a randomized controlled trial[J]. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol, 2009,30(9):915-917.
[15]	Rickard CM, Webster J, Wallis MC , et al. Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous cathe-ters:a randomised controlled equivalence trial[J]. Lancet, 2012,380(9847):1066-1074.
[16]	O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA , et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections[J]. Am J Infect Control, 2011,39(4 Suppl 1):S1-S34.
[17]	Webster J, Osborne S, Rickard CM , et al. Clinically-indicated replacement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2019( 1):CD007798.
[18]	Cicolini G, Manzoli L, Simonetti V , et al. Phlebitis risk varies by peripheral venous catheter site and increases after 96 hours:a large multi-centre prospective study[J]. J Adv Nurs, 2014,70(11):2539-2549.
[19]	Wei T, Li X, Yue Z , et al. Catheter dwell time and risk of catheter failure in adult patients with peripheral venous catheters[J]. J Clin Nurs, 2019,28(23/24):4488-4495.

外周静脉留置针不同拔管时机的随机对照研究

A multicenter randomized controlled study on removal indication of peripheral venous indwelling needle

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 19

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	郝瑞霞, 李育玲, 徐勇, 杨丽洁, 韩雪. 冠心病患者负性情绪智能化改善方案的制订及应用[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1285-1292.
[2]	张继文, 范环, 肖树芹, 杨芳宇, 吴瑛. 独居与非独居老年人居家照护未满足需求的比较研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1293-1298.
[3]	陆金玲, 许勤, 陈丽, 丁玲玉, 花红霞, 徐欣怡. 5种肌肉减少症筛查工具在胃癌患者术前营养评定中的应用比较[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1299-1304.
[4]	燕美琴, 王娇, 刘亦娜, 张慧君, 任永莲. 群组孕期保健模式在妊娠期糖尿病孕妇分娩结局中的效果研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1305-1311.
[5]	黄娜, 周英凤, 李丽, 刘巧艳, 朱佳蕾, 汪玲, 潘秀红, 郭娜菲. 妊娠期糖尿病孕妇血糖管理决策行为及影响因素的研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1312-1317.
[6]	朱淑榕, 魏碧蓉, 郭胜斌, 林颖. 硬膜外分娩镇痛产妇护理支持需求问卷的研制及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1318-1324.
[7]	蒋阳, 沈鸣雁, 冯志仙. 1例镜像综合征并发急性心力衰竭孕妇的护理[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1325-1328.
[8]	申乔乔, 冯现刚, 梁韵仪, 左倩倩, 张正敏, 高钰琳. 围产期哀伤辅导指南的系统评价[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1329-1334.
[9]	金微, 肖琦, 杨凌艳, 曾铁英. 紧急剖宫产术后产妇心理健康问题的研究进展[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1335-1339.
[10]	曹亚雨, 刘惠蓉, 彭玉娇, 杨权, 杨思锐, 陶彦灵, 温贤秀. 肾移植受者手术决策参与满意度的调查研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1340-1345.
[11]	齐晓玖, 王慧婷, 刘宇, 杨晶, 乔红梅, 田家利, 唐丽安, 张素. 临床护士对氧疗安全认知的现状调查[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1346-1351.
[12]	孙文静, 谢莉玲, 黄龙贤, 游海玲, 屈芙蓉, 左燕. 鼻饲患者两种误吸风险预测模型的外部验证及比较[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1352-1356.
[13]	陈虹秀, 杨莘, 胡秀英, 邓宝凤, 马红梅, 张艾灵, 方海云, 石泽亚, 丁福, 王传霞, 亓恒美, 黄沂, 张俊梅, 马秀花, 鲁丽萍, 王申, 沙丽艳, 曹军华. 我国30个省份老年专科护士队伍培养与工作现状调查研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1363-1368.
[14]	王雪瑞, 陈雁, 王清, 夏冬云, 许玲. 基于服务质量差距模型的“互联网+护理服务”质量评价指标研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1369-1376.
[15]	郑丽丽, 吕丹尼, 唐晓敏, 陈丽骊, 张婷, 傅藏藏, 诸纪华, 汪金燕. 3例先天性长段缺失型食管闭锁患儿行胃造瘘术的术后护理[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(9): 1377-1379.