Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:33:09.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of and patient-reported complications related to midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2020

Erica H. Lescinskas Open the ORCID record for Erica H. Lescinskas [Opens in a new window] ,
Barbara W. Trautner ,
Sanjay Saint ,
John Colozzi ,
Katherine Evertsz ,
Vineet Chopra  and
Sarah L. Krein
Erica H. Lescinskas*
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
Barbara W. Trautner
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans’ Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas
Sanjay Saint
Affiliation:
Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans’ Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
John Colozzi
Affiliation:
Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans’ Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Katherine Evertsz
Affiliation:
Ben Taub General Hospital, Houston, Texas
Vineet Chopra
Affiliation:
Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans’ Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Sarah L. Krein
Affiliation:
Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans’ Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
*
Author for correspondence: Erica H. Lescinskas, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We conducted a prospective observational study of indications for use and patient experiences with midline catheters (n = 50) compared to peripherally inserted central catheters (n = 63). The primary indication for patients with midline catheters was difficult venous access. Patients with midline catheters reported fewer complications than patients with peripherally inserted central catheters.

Type
Concise Communication
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 41 , Issue 5 , May 2020 , pp. 608 - 610
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This work is classified, for copyright purposes, as a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection within the United States.
Copyright
© 2020 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Paje, D, Conlon, A, Kaatz, S, et al. Patterns and predictors of short-term peripherally inserted central catheter use: a multicenter prospective cohort study. J Hosp Med 2018;13:76–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chopra, V, Anand, S, Hickner, A, et al. Risk of venous thromboembolism associated with peripherally inserted central catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2013;382:311–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chopra, V, O’Horo, JC, Rogers, MA, Maki, DG, Safdar, N. The risk of bloodstream infection associated with peripherally inserted central catheters compared with central venous catheters in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013;34:908–918.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, T, Kingsley, L, DiNucci, S, et al. Safety and utilization of a peripherally inserted central catheters versus midline catheters at a large academic medical center. Am J Infect Control 2016;44:1458–1461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mushtaq, A, Navalkele, B, Kaur, M, et al. Comparison of complications in midlines versus central venous catheters: are midlines safer than central venous lines? Am J Infect Control 2018;46:788–792.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cawcutt, KA, Hankins, RJ, Micheels, TA, Rupp, ME. Optimizing vascular-access device decision-making in the era of midline catheters. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2019;40:674–680.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chopra, V, Kaatz, S, Swaminathan, L, et al. Variation in use and outcomes related to midline catheters: results from a multicenter pilot study. BMJ Qual Safety 2019;28:714–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krein, SL, Saint, S, Trautner, BW, et al. Patient-reported complications related to peripherally inserted central catheters: a multicenter prospective cohort study. BMJ Qual Safety 2019;28:574–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chopra, V, Saint, S, Woller, SC, et al. The Michigan appropriateness guide for intravenous catheters (MAGIC): results from a multispecialty panel using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. Ann Intern Med 2015;163 suppl 6:S1–S40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeVries, M, Lee, J, Hoffman, L, Infection free midline catheter implementation at a community hospital (2 years). Am J Infect Control 2019;47:1118–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar