Routine replacement versus clinical monitoring of peripheral intravenous catheters in a regional hospital in the home program: A randomized controlled trial. Does elective re-siting of intravenous cannulae decrease peripheral thrombophlebitis? A randomized controlled study. Routine care of peripheral intravenous catheters versus clinically indicated replacement: randomised controlled trial. Randomised clinical trial of elective re-siting of intravenous cannulae. Developing a Research base for Intravenous Peripheral cannula re-sites (DRIP trial). A randomised controlled trial of hospital in-patients. Routine resite of peripheral intravenous devices every 3 days did not reduce complications compared with clinically indicated resite: a randomised controlled trial. Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial.
This randomized, controlled trial involving 316 patients in the home setting found no difference in the rate of phlebitis and/or occlusion among patients for whom a peripheral intravenous catheter was routinely resited at 72-96 hours and those for whom it was replaced only on clinical indication (76.8 events per 1,000 device-days vs 87.3 events per 1,000 device-days; P = .71). There were no bloodstream infections. Peripheral venous thrombophlebitis (PVT) is a common complication of intravenous cannulation, occurring in about 30% of patients. We evaluated the effect of elective re-siting of intravenous cannulae every 48 hours on the incidence and severity of PVT in patients receiving intravenous fluids/drugs.
                We randomized 42 patients who were admitted for major abdominal surgery to either the control or study group (n = 21 in either group). Informed consent was obtained from all of them. Cannulae in the control group were removed only if the site became painful, the cannula got dislodged or there were signs and symptoms suggestive of PVT, namely pain, erythema, swelling, excessive warmth or a palpable venous cord. Cannulae in the study group were changed and re-sited electively every 48 hours. All the patients were examined every 24 hours for signs and symptoms of PVT at the current and previous sites of infusion.
                The incidence of PVT was 100% (21/21) in the control group and only 9.5% (2/21) in the study group (p < 0.0001). The severity of PVT was also less in the study group compared with that in the control group. Day-wise correlation of the incidence of PVT showed that 82.6% of the episodes of PVT occurred on day 3.
                Elective re-siting of intravenous cannulae every 48 hours results in a significant reduction in the incidence and severity of PVT. We recommend that this should be adopted as standard practice in managing all patients who require prolonged intravenous therapy. To compare routine replacement of intravenous peripheral catheters with replacement only when clinically indicated.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Tertiary hospital in Australia.
                755 medical and surgical patients: 379 allocated to catheter replacement only when clinically indicated and 376 allocated to routine care of catheter (control group).
                A composite measure of catheter failure resulting from phlebitis or infiltration.
                Catheters were removed because of phlebitis or infiltration from 123 of 376 (33%) patients in the control group compared with 143 of 379 (38%) patients in the intervention group; the difference was not significant (relative risk 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.40). When the analysis was based on failure per 1000 device days (number of failures divided by number of days catheterised, divided by 1000), no difference could be detected between the groups (relative risk 0.98, 0.78 to 1.24). Infusion related costs were higher in the control group (mean $A41.02; pound19.71; euro24.80; $38.55) than intervention group ($A36.40). The rate of phlebitis in both groups was low (4% in intervention group, 3% in control group).
                Replacing peripheral intravenous catheters when clinically indicated has no effect on the incidence of failure, based on a composite measure of phlebitis or infiltration. Larger trials are needed to test this finding using phlebitis alone as a more clinically meaningful outcome.
                Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12605000147684. Peripheral venous thrombophlebitis (PVT) represents a considerable source of iatrogenic morbidity, occurring in about 20% of hospital in-patients. The aim of this prospective randomised study was to investigate the effect of elective change of intravenous cannulae on the incidence of PVT in hospital in-patients.
                General medical and surgical inpatients requiring intravenous therapy were randomised into control (n = 26) or study (n = 21) groups. Cannulae in the control group were only removed if the site became painful, the cannula dislodged, or there were signs of PVT. Cannulae in the study group were changed electively every 48 h. All patients were examined daily for signs of PVT.
                Peripheral venous thrombophlebitis developed in 11/26 patients in the control group and 1/21 patients in the study group (P = 0.003). Elective change of cannulae did not significantly increase the total number of cannulae sited (41 cannulae in the control group versus 43 in the study group).
                Elective change of cannulae resulted in a significant reduction in the incidence of infusion phlebitis. The authors recommend that elective re-siting of intravenous cannulae becomes standard practice for all patients requiring intravenous therapy. There is currently no high grade evidence on which to base decisions about the frequency of intravenous cannula re-sites.
                To assess the safety of changing peripheral venous cannulas when clinically indicated.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                A tertiary referral hospital in Brisbane, Australia.
                Two hundred and six hospitalised patients from surgical, medical and orthopaedic wards.
                Peripheral intravenous cannulas were re-sited only when complications occurred (intervention group) or every 3 days (control group).
                The primary endpoint was any unplanned cannula removal, the secondary outcome was cost.
                Forty six patients had unplanned removals in the intervention group compared with 41 in the control group [relative risk 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.81-1.55 (p=0.286)], a non-significant difference. Total duration of peripheral cannulation was similar in both groups (mean 123.3h in the intervention group and 125.9h in the control group: P=0.82) but significantly more re-sites occurred in the control group (167 in intervention group, 202 in the control group: p=0.022). Cost of cannula replacements in the intervention group was AUD$3,183.62 and in the control group AUD$3,837.56 (p=0.006).
                Re-siting peripheral venous cannulas when clinically indicated compared with changing them routinely every 3 days does not lead to more complications and reduces costs. Peripheral intravenous device (IVD) complications were traditionally thought to be reduced by limiting dwell time. Current recommendations are to resite IVDs by 96 hours with the exception of children and patients with poor veins. Recent evidence suggests routine resite is unnecessary, at least if devices are inserted by a specialised IV team. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of peripheral IVD 'routine resite' with 'removal on clinical indication' on IVD complications in a general hospital without an IV team.
                A randomised, controlled trial was conducted in a regional teaching hospital. After ethics approval, 362 patients (603 IVDs) were randomised to have IVDs replaced on clinical indication (185 patients) or routine change every 3 days (177 patients). IVDs were inserted and managed by the general hospital medical and nursing staff; there was no IV team. The primary endpoint was a composite of IVD complications: phlebitis, infiltration, occlusion, accidental removal, local infection, and device-related bloodstream infection.
                IVD complication rates were 68 per 1,000 IVD days (clinically indicated) and 66 per 1,000 IVD days (routine replacement) (P = 0.86; HR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.74-1.43). Time to first complication per patient did not differ between groups (KM with log rank, P = 0.53). There were no local infections or IVD-related bloodstream infections in either group. IV therapy duration did not differ between groups (P = 0.22), but more (P = 0.004) IVDs were placed per patient in the routine replacement (mean, 1.8) than the clinical indication group (mean, 1.5), with significantly higher hospital costs per patient (P < 0.001).
                Resite on clinical indication would allow one in two patients to have a single cannula per course of IV treatment, as opposed to one in five patients managed with routine resite; overall complication rates appear similar. Clinically indicated resite would achieve savings in equipment, staff time and patient discomfort. There is growing evidence to support the extended use of peripheral IVDs with removal only on clinical indication.
                Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) Number ACTRN12608000421336. The millions of peripheral intravenous catheters used each year are recommended for 72-96 h replacement in adults. This routine replacement increases health-care costs and staff workload and requires patients to undergo repeated invasive procedures. The effectiveness of the practice is not well established. Our hypothesis was that clinically indicated catheter replacement is of equal benefit to routine replacement.
                This multicentre, randomised, non-blinded equivalence trial recruited adults (≥18 years) with an intravenous catheter of expected use longer than 4 days from three hospitals in Queensland, Australia, between May 20, 2008, and Sept 9, 2009. Computer-generated random assignment (1:1 ratio, no blocking, stratified by hospital, concealed before allocation) was to clinically indicated replacement, or third daily routine replacement. Patients, clinical staff, and research nurses could not be masked after treatment allocation because of the nature of the intervention. The primary outcome was phlebitis during catheterisation or within 48 h after removal. The equivalence margin was set at 3%. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints were catheter-related bloodstream and local infections, all bloodstream infections, catheter tip colonisation, infusion failure, catheter numbers used, therapy duration, mortality, and costs. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12608000445370.
                All 3283 patients randomised (5907 catheters) were included in our analysis (1593 clinically indicated; 1690 routine replacement). Mean dwell time for catheters in situ on day 3 was 99 h (SD 54) when replaced as clinically indicated and 70 h (13) when routinely replaced. Phlebitis occurred in 114 of 1593 (7%) patients in the clinically indicated group and in 114 of 1690 (7%) patients in the routine replacement group, an absolute risk difference of 0·41% (95% CI -1·33 to 2·15%), which was within the prespecified 3% equivalence margin. No serious adverse events related to study interventions occurred.
                Peripheral intravenous catheters can be removed as clinically indicated; this policy will avoid millions of catheter insertions, associated discomfort, and substantial costs in both equipment and staff workload. Ongoing close monitoring should continue with timely treatment cessation and prompt removal for complications.
                Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.
                Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
The review found no evidence to support changing catheters every 72 to 96 hours. Consequently, healthcare organisations may consider changing to a policy whereby catheters are changed only if clinically indicated. This would provide significant cost savings and would spare patients the unnecessary pain of routine re-sites in the absence of clinical indications. To minimise peripheral catheter-related complications, the insertion site should be inspected at each shift change and the catheter removed if signs of inflammation, infiltration, or blockage are present.