Published 8 July 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a339
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a339

Research

Routine care of peripheral intravenous catheters versus clinically indicated replacement: randomised controlled trial

¹ Centre for Clinical Nursing, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Herston, Qld 4029, Australia, ² Research Centre for Clinical and Community Practice Innovation Griffith University, Centre for Clinical Nursing, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital

Objective To compare routine replacement of intravenous peripheral catheters with replacement only when clinically indicated.

Design Randomised controlled trial.

Setting Tertiary hospital in Australia.

Participants 755 medical and surgical patients: 379 allocated to catheter replacement only when clinically indicated and 376 allocated to routine care of catheter (control group).

Main outcome measure A composite measure of catheter failure resulting from phlebitis or infiltration.

Results 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; £19.71; 24.80; $38.55) than intervention group ($A36.40). The rate of phlebitis in both groups was low (4% in intervention group, 3% in control group).

Conclusion 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.

Registration number Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12605000147684.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

Relevant Article

Improving the safety of peripheral intravenous catheters

Dennis G Maki
BMJ 2008 337: a630. [Extract] [Full Text]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Reduction of hospital acquired Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia by routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters at 72 hours

Judith A. Bowley, et al.
bmj.com, 23 Jul 2008 [Full text]

Realities about intravenous catheters in hospital NHS trusts in England

KAI SUN TSANG
bmj.com, 24 Jul 2008 [Full text]

Potential Consequences of Routine Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Replacement

Jeremy A Stone
bmj.com, 27 Jul 2008 [Full text]

Reducing The Number Of Attempts Taken To Introduce Intravenous Catheter Must Be Our Priliminary Goal To Stop Spreading Hospital Infections.

Kadiyali M Srivatsa
bmj.com, 28 Jul 2008 [Full text]

Catheter associated thrombophlebitis and endothelium.

Fernando Martins do Vale
bmj.com, 29 Jul 2008 [Full text]

A frustrating response to our clinical frustration.

Jonathan Armitage
bmj.com, 21 Aug 2008 [Full text]

Online poll

Find out more>>