Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in an Acute-Care Hospital
Sing Lam, MD;
Rosemary Scannell, RN, BSN;
Diane Roessler, RN, BSN, CNA;
Miriam A. Smith, MD
Arch Intern Med. 1994;154(16):1833-1837.
Abstract
| |
Background
Peripherally inserted central catheterization is a relatively new approach for intravenous therapy in acute-care hospitals. Few studies are available on peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) used in adult patients in an acute-care setting. We examine the natural history and outcome of PICC use in our hospital.
Methods
A retrospective review was undertaken of all hospitalized patients who had PICCs inserted in an acutecare, metropolitan teaching hospital for any reason from July 1991 through July 1992. Patients who had PICCs inserted, used, and then removed in the same hospitalization were evaluated.
Results
A total of 135 PICCs were inserted in 114 patients. Six PICCs (4.4%) were inserted in intensive care unit settings and 129 (95.6%) in general medical or surgical service. The mean duration catheters were in place before removal was 14.1 days. Sixty-three catheters (46.7%) were removed following completion of therapy. The rate of PICC-related infection was 2.2% (three catheters). The occlusion rate was higher for 20-gauge catheters (18.4%) than for 18-gauge catheters (8.2%) (P=.08). When the rate of complications was compared as a function of catheter use (total parenteral nutrition vs any other use), there was no statistically significant difference (P=.12). Overall complications related to catheter insertion and removal were uncommon.
Conclusions
Based on our study, we conclude that the PICC provides a reasonable and safe alternative to other centrally placed venous devices. In addition, the convenience of maintaining a PICC compared with peripheral intravenous access makes this an attractive method for in-hospital use.
(Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:1833-1837)
Author Affiliations
From the Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine (Drs Lam and Smith), and the Department of Nursing (Mss Scannell and Roessler), Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New Hyde Park, NY.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Management of venous port systems in oncology: a review of current evidence
Vescia et al.
Ann Oncol 2008;19:9-15.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Risk of Bloodstream Infection in Adults With Different Intravascular Devices: A Systematic Review of 200 Published Prospective Studies
Maki et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:1159-1171.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Risk of Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection With Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters Used in Hospitalized Patients
Safdar and Maki
Chest 2005;128:489-495.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Venous Thromboembolism Associated With Long-Term Use of Central Venous Catheters in Cancer Patients
Verso and Agnelli
JCO 2003;21:3665-3675.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Complication Rates Among Cancer Patients With Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters
Walshe et al.
JCO 2002;20:3276-3281.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Prospective Evaluation of Risk Factors for Bloodstream Infection in Patients Receiving Home Infusion Therapy
Tokars et al.
ANN INTERN MED 1999;131:340-347.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters for Parenteral Nutrition: A Comparison With Centrally Inserted Catheters
Duerksen et al.
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1999;23:85-89.
ABSTRACT
Efficacy of Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters Placed in Noncentral Veins
Thiagarajan et al.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1998;152:436-439.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Survey of the Use of Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters in Children
Thiagarajan et al.
Pediatrics 1997;99:e4-e4.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Defining the Risks of Subclavian-Vein Catheterization
Haire and Lieberman
NEJM 1994;331:1769-1770.
FULL TEXT
|
