Clinical acceptability and ease of use of a safety IV catheter system

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaArtículo

2 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

Objective: Occupational risk of transmission of bloodborne pathogens represents a major challenge in prevention. Even though preventive recommendations to avoid needlestick injuries among healthcare workers include the use of needle protective devices, its use in developing countries is not a standard practice. This study aimed to measure, on experienced nurses, perception of performance characteristics and activation of the safety feature of a safety closed IV catheter system (BD Pegasus*), called catheter P, versus a non-safety device (BD Intima II†) called catheter I in healthy volunteers. Method: Fifty-two nurses and 205 healthy volunteers participated in a prospective, randomized, controlled study in a simulated setting. Each nurse performed two insertions of each catheter (one in each forearm) in four study volunteers; the order of insertions was randomly assigned. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the performance of the two catheters regarding Overall Perception of Clinical Acceptability and Ease of Use. Results: Overall acceptance of the device performance characteristics was 90 or more. In all cases, catheter P performed at least as well as catheter I. There were no differences in the insertion success rate between the two devices (93.7 vs. 96.2). Activation of the safety feature of catheter P occurred 99.4. Subjects' perception of pain was similar for both devices. Overall perception of clinical acceptability and ease of use were judged better for catheter P than for catheter I (p=0.006, and p
Idioma originalEnglish (US)
Páginas (desde-hasta)1381-1387
Número de páginas7
PublicaciónCurrent Medical Research and Opinion
DOI
EstadoPublished - ago 1 2012

Huella dactilar

Catheters
Safety
Equipment and Supplies
Nurses
Healthy Volunteers
Blood-Borne Pathogens
Protective Devices
Needlestick Injuries
Pain Perception
Forearm
Developing Countries
Needles
Volunteers
Delivery of Health Care

Citar esto

@article{fb4058b25fcf4f13b8e754fc408e27fb,
title = "Clinical acceptability and ease of use of a safety IV catheter system",
abstract = "Objective: Occupational risk of transmission of bloodborne pathogens represents a major challenge in prevention. Even though preventive recommendations to avoid needlestick injuries among healthcare workers include the use of needle protective devices, its use in developing countries is not a standard practice. This study aimed to measure, on experienced nurses, perception of performance characteristics and activation of the safety feature of a safety closed IV catheter system (BD Pegasus*), called catheter P, versus a non-safety device (BD Intima II†) called catheter I in healthy volunteers. Method: Fifty-two nurses and 205 healthy volunteers participated in a prospective, randomized, controlled study in a simulated setting. Each nurse performed two insertions of each catheter (one in each forearm) in four study volunteers; the order of insertions was randomly assigned. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the performance of the two catheters regarding Overall Perception of Clinical Acceptability and Ease of Use. Results: Overall acceptance of the device performance characteristics was 90 or more. In all cases, catheter P performed at least as well as catheter I. There were no differences in the insertion success rate between the two devices (93.7 vs. 96.2). Activation of the safety feature of catheter P occurred 99.4. Subjects' perception of pain was similar for both devices. Overall perception of clinical acceptability and ease of use were judged better for catheter P than for catheter I (p=0.006, and p",
author = "Angela Ruiz-Sternberg and Alberto Velez-Van-Meerbeke and Jaime Ruiz-Sternberg",
year = "2012",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1185/03007995.2012.707120",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1381--1387",
journal = "Current Medical Research and Opinion",
issn = "0300-7995",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",

}

Clinical acceptability and ease of use of a safety IV catheter system. / Ruiz-Sternberg, Angela; Velez-Van-Meerbeke, Alberto; Ruiz-Sternberg, Jaime.

En: Current Medical Research and Opinion, 01.08.2012, p. 1381-1387.

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaArtículo

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical acceptability and ease of use of a safety IV catheter system

AU - Ruiz-Sternberg, Angela

AU - Velez-Van-Meerbeke, Alberto

AU - Ruiz-Sternberg, Jaime

PY - 2012/8/1

Y1 - 2012/8/1

N2 - Objective: Occupational risk of transmission of bloodborne pathogens represents a major challenge in prevention. Even though preventive recommendations to avoid needlestick injuries among healthcare workers include the use of needle protective devices, its use in developing countries is not a standard practice. This study aimed to measure, on experienced nurses, perception of performance characteristics and activation of the safety feature of a safety closed IV catheter system (BD Pegasus*), called catheter P, versus a non-safety device (BD Intima II†) called catheter I in healthy volunteers. Method: Fifty-two nurses and 205 healthy volunteers participated in a prospective, randomized, controlled study in a simulated setting. Each nurse performed two insertions of each catheter (one in each forearm) in four study volunteers; the order of insertions was randomly assigned. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the performance of the two catheters regarding Overall Perception of Clinical Acceptability and Ease of Use. Results: Overall acceptance of the device performance characteristics was 90 or more. In all cases, catheter P performed at least as well as catheter I. There were no differences in the insertion success rate between the two devices (93.7 vs. 96.2). Activation of the safety feature of catheter P occurred 99.4. Subjects' perception of pain was similar for both devices. Overall perception of clinical acceptability and ease of use were judged better for catheter P than for catheter I (p=0.006, and p

AB - Objective: Occupational risk of transmission of bloodborne pathogens represents a major challenge in prevention. Even though preventive recommendations to avoid needlestick injuries among healthcare workers include the use of needle protective devices, its use in developing countries is not a standard practice. This study aimed to measure, on experienced nurses, perception of performance characteristics and activation of the safety feature of a safety closed IV catheter system (BD Pegasus*), called catheter P, versus a non-safety device (BD Intima II†) called catheter I in healthy volunteers. Method: Fifty-two nurses and 205 healthy volunteers participated in a prospective, randomized, controlled study in a simulated setting. Each nurse performed two insertions of each catheter (one in each forearm) in four study volunteers; the order of insertions was randomly assigned. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the performance of the two catheters regarding Overall Perception of Clinical Acceptability and Ease of Use. Results: Overall acceptance of the device performance characteristics was 90 or more. In all cases, catheter P performed at least as well as catheter I. There were no differences in the insertion success rate between the two devices (93.7 vs. 96.2). Activation of the safety feature of catheter P occurred 99.4. Subjects' perception of pain was similar for both devices. Overall perception of clinical acceptability and ease of use were judged better for catheter P than for catheter I (p=0.006, and p

U2 - 10.1185/03007995.2012.707120

DO - 10.1185/03007995.2012.707120

M3 - Article

SP - 1381

EP - 1387

JO - Current Medical Research and Opinion

JF - Current Medical Research and Opinion

SN - 0300-7995

ER -