• Amadeus Lešnik, Mario Gorenjak, Sandi Žumer, Valerija Zorčič, Žarko Mišanović, Marko Majhenič, Anja Podstenšek, Matevž Toplak, Urška Fekonja, and Andrej Markota.
• Medical Emergency Department, University Medical Centre Maribor, Ljubljanska 5, Maribor 2000, Slovenia.
• Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Jun 1; 44: 128-131.

BackgroundIn some patients securing the peripheral intravenous cannula (PIVC) with a standard adhesive dressing can be difficult because of sweat or other body fluids. The aim of our study was to evaluate the use of tissue adhesives alone as a means to secure PIVCs inserted in the emergency department.MethodsWe performed a prospective interventional pilot study from November 2019 to May 2020 in a medical emergency department of an urban tertiary hospital. Patients were randomized to two groups: tissue adhesives (TA) or adhesive dressing (AD) group. After randomization we followed them until day 4.ResultsThere were no significant differences between TA and AD groups in the rate of unplanned removal of PIVCs in the first 72 h (57.1% vs. 45.8%, p = 0.29), the rate of unplanned removal of PIVCs in the ED (0% vs. 2.1%, p = 1.00), the rate of unplanned removal of PIVC in the first 24 h (42.8% vs. 35.4%, p = 0.52), as well as in the rate of phlebitis (7.1% vs. 14.6%, p = 0.34) and the rate of any blood-stream infection (0% vs. 0%, p = 1.00).ConclusionWe did not observe any significant differences when PIVCs inserted in the emergency department were secured with tissue adhesives alone, compared to standard adhesive dressings. We observed a high rate of unplanned removal of PIVCs, necessitating further research to determine more reliable ways of securing PIVCs.Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

21 keywords...

hide…