Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
AIM: To introduce a novel conceptual framework that differentiates peripheral intravenous catheters according to their dwell time and therapeutic purpose, in order to improve the suitability of material choice, safety and cost-effectiveness. DESIGN: Concept based on clinical guidelines, expert consensus and recent peer-reviewed evidence. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted in PubMed on November 25, 2024, using defined keywords related to peripheral intravenous catheters, device complications and duration of use. This search was supplemented by manual screening of references from relevant articles. METHODS: The analysis followed the SANRA quality criteria for narrative reviews. Evidence and recommendations from clinical guidelines, randomised trials and qualitative studies were synthesised using the Australian Clinical Care Standards to structure the proposed classification into 'procedural' and 'therapy' catheters. RESULTS: Procedural catheters are used for less than 24 h, typically during procedures or short treatments, and are mainly linked to immediate risks like insertion failure and local trauma. Therapy catheters, defined as devices used beyond 24 h or expected to remain while the patient sleeps, carry cumulative risks, including delayed complications such as phlebitis, occlusion and infection. The framework supports more nuanced decisions on device choice, insertion site and maintenance. CONCLUSION: This framework introduces a practical differentiation between short- and longer-term peripheral venous catheters, addressing a major oversight in existing guidelines and supporting context-sensitive vascular access decisions. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Tailoring catheter management to expected dwell time may reduce complications and costs, enhance workflow, and improve patient comfort. IMPACT: By addressing the lack of temporal distinction in current practice, this framework offers a simple yet transformative tool applicable across care settings, with the potential to improve patient outcomes, resource utilisation and costs. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This project is a concept analyses; no patient or public contribution was necessary.
Drugeon et al. (Mon,) studied this question.