-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
A pilot trial of bordered polyurethane dressings, tissue adhesive and sutureless devices compared with standard polyurethane dressings for securing short-term arterial catheters.
- Melannie Edwards, Claire M Rickard, Ivan Rapchuk, Amanda Corley, Nicole Marsh, Amy J Spooner, Gabor Mihala, and John F Fraser.
- Critical Care Research Group, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. melannie.edwards@health.qld.gov.au.
- Crit Care Resusc. 2014 Sep 1;16(3):175-83.
ObjectivesTo improve arterial catheter (AC) securement and reduce AC failure; to assess feasibility of a large randomised controlled trial.Design, Setting And ParticipantsA four-arm, parallel, randomised, controlled, non-blinded pilot trial with 195 intensive care patients taking part, in a tertiary referral hospital in Brisbane, Australia from May to November 2012.InterventionsStandard polyurethane (SPU) dressing (controls); bordered polyurethane (BPU) + SPU dressing; tissue adhesive (TA) + SPU dressing; and sutureless securement device (SSD) + SPU dressing (no sutures used).Main Outcome MeasuresAC failure, ie, complete dislodgement, occlusion (monitor failure, inability to infuse or fluid leaking), pain or infection (local or blood).ResultsMedian AC dwell time was 26.2 hours and was comparable between groups. AC failure occurred in 26/195 patients (13%). AC failure was significantly worse with SPU dressings (10/47 [21%]) than with BPU + SPU dressings (2/ 43 [5%]; P = 0.03), but not significantly different to TA + SPU (6/56 [11%]; P = 0.18) or SSD + SPU (8/49 [16%]; P = 0.61). The dressing applied at AC insertion lasted until AC removal in 68% of controls; 56% of BPU + SPU dressings; 73% of TA + SPU dressings; and 80% of SSD + SPU dressings (all P > 0.05). There were no infections or serious adverse events. Patient and staff satisfaction with all products was high. Median costs (labour and materials) for securement per patient were significantly higher in all groups compared with the control group (SPU, $3.48 [IQR, $3.48-$9.79]; BPU + SPU, $5.07 [IQR, $5.07-$12.99]; SSD + SPU, $10.90 [IQR, $10.90-$10.90]; TA + SPU, $17.70 [IQR, $17.70-$38.36]; all P < 0.01).ConclusionAC failure occurred significantly less often with BPU + SPU dressings than with SPU dressings. TA + SPU and SSD + SPU dressings should be further investigated and compared with BPU + SPU dressings as controls. The novel approach of TA + SPU dressings appeared safe and feasible.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.