• Emily N Larsen, Amanda Corley, Marion Mitchell, India Lye, Madeleine Powell, Sheena Tom, Gabor Mihala, Amanda J Ullman, Victoria Gibson, Nicole Marsh, Tricia M Kleidon, Ivan L Rapchuk, and Claire M Rickard.
• Alliance for Vascular Access Teaching and Research Group, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia; The Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. Electronic address: e.larsen@griffith.edu.au.
• Aust Crit Care. 2021 Jan 1; 34 (1): 38-46.

BackgroundCritically ill patients in an intensive care setting often require arterial catheters for blood pressure monitoring and arterial blood collection. Arterial catheter failure, which manifests in both mechanical and infective forms, remains common. Dressing and securement inadequacies may impact this failure; however, the best method for dressing and securing arterial catheters is yet to be determined.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to establish the feasibility of a definitive randomised controlled trial comparing methods for dressing and securing arterial catheters and to prevent device failure in an adult intensive care setting.MethodsA pilot, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial was conducted between April 2017 and June 2018. Patients receiving treatment in two adult intensive care units (Queensland, Australia) were eligible for inclusion and were allocated to receive either (i) an integrated securement dressing or (ii) a simple polyurethane dressing (with gauze/foam), applied to their newly inserted arterial catheters.Main Outcome MeasuresPrimary outcomes were (i) feasibility (defined by pre-established criteria: patient eligibility, consent, protocol adherence, retention, and staff acceptability) and (ii) all-cause arterial catheter failure (a composite of local and bloodstream infection, occlusion, dislodgement, infiltration/extravasation, arterial inflammation, thrombosis, and/or inaccurate trace). Secondary outcomes included: failure type, dwell time, dressing adhesion, adverse event profiles, and staff acceptability.ResultsIn total, 109 patients were studied (n = 53 integrated securement dressing; n = 56 simple polyurethane). The feasibility criterion was met by most patients (including rates of consent [86%], protocol adherence [93%], and retention [100%]); however, the criteria for patient eligibility were not met (73%). All-cause device failure did not differ significantly between the integrated securement device group (n = 12/53, 23%) and the simple polyurethane group (n = 6/56, 11%) (hazard ratio = 2.39, 95% confidence interval = 0.89-6.37, p = 0.083).ConclusionsFindings indicate a larger study is feasible, with minor alterations to recruitment methods required. Arterial catheter failure remains unacceptably common; further research to determine optimal dressing/securement practices is urgently needed.Copyright © 2020 Australian College of Critical Care Nurses Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

7 keywords...

hide…