Why the study?
The study aimed to map a global picture of the practice of inserting large-bore peripheral intravenous catheters in parturient women.
Does the use of large-bore peripheral intravenous catheters compared to smaller catheters increase the risk of phlebitis in parturient women?
Does the use of large-bore peripheral intravenous catheters compared to smaller catheters increase the risk of phlebitis in parturient women?
Large-bore peripheral intravenous catheters are frequently used in parturient women despite low rates of blood product administration, and are associated with higher rates of phlebitis.
Large-bore PIVCs may be overused in parturients with higher phlebitis; leaves open optimal access strategies pending prospective trials.
Objective: The aim of the current study was to map a global picture of the practice of inserting large-bore peripheral intravenous catheters in parturient women. Methods: We analysed a sub-set of data from a prospective, multi-centre, international prevalence study, the One Million Global peripheral intravenous catheter study. The obstetric cohort was drawn from 163 maternity units in 35 countries (1477 women, 1577 catheters) and was collected between 1 June 2014 and 31 July 2015. Clinicians at each of the participating sites collected data using tools that had been previously validated. Results are reported as frequencies and proportions. Results: Overall, 42% of all peripheral intravenous catheters were large bore and of all catheters placed in females in obstetric units, 438 (70%) of these were placed in the hand or wrist. The phlebitis rate was higher in the large-bore group (12%) compared with those with smaller catheters (7%). Only 2% of women received blood products, but it was unclear which catheter was used for this purpose. Conclusion: Large-bore peripheral intravenous catheters are overused for vascular access in parturient women. They are painful and may cause vascular damage. If there is no indication, a catheter should not be placed at all.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Webster et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: