Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T03:41:46.580Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Peripheral Teflon Catheters: Factors Determining Incidence of Phlebitis and Duration of Cannulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Oliver A. Cornely ,
U. Bethe ,
Regina Pauls  and
D. Waldschmidt
Oliver A. Cornely*
Affiliation:
Department I of Internal Medicine, Cologne University Hospital, Cologne, Germany
U. Bethe
Affiliation:
Department I of Internal Medicine, Cologne University Hospital, Cologne, Germany
Regina Pauls
Affiliation:
Department I of Internal Medicine, Cologne University Hospital, Cologne, Germany
D. Waldschmidt
Affiliation:
Department I of Internal Medicine, Cologne University Hospital, Cologne, Germany
*
Department I of Internal Medicine, Cologne University Hospital, 50924 Cologne, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Catheter-related phlebitis is a frequent problem in the clinical setting. Risk factors for catheter-related phlebitis were assessed at a single tertiary-care institution where no routine change policy for peripheral intravenous catheters is in place.

Methods:

In a nonrandomized, observational trial, peripheral intravenous Teflon catheters were inserted in patients with a diagnosis of leukemia, lymphoma, solid tumor, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, other serious infection, or autoimmune disorder. Underlying disease, age, white blood cell count at the time of insertion, physician placing the catheter, catheter bore, duration of cannulation, reason for removal of the catheter, and visual inspection of the insertion site were recorded.

Results:

Four hundred twelve catheters were inserted in 175 patients. The number of catheterizations per episode varied between 1 and 7. Three hundred sixty-four (88.3%) catheter placements were evaluable. The mean duration of cannulation was 4.2 days. The overall incidence of phlebitis was 12.9%. Catheters in leukopenic patients showed a longer duration of cannulation compared with catheters in nonleukopenic patients, but no difference regarding the phlebitis rate.

Conclusion:

Findings in this study partly contrast with data reported in the literature. In particular, leukopenia, female gender, prolonged duration of cannulation, antibiotics, and choice of insertion site could not be shown to be risk factors.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 23 , Issue 5 , May 2002 , pp. 249 - 253
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Pearson, ML. Guideline for prevention of intravascular device-related infections: Part I. Intravascular device-related infections: an overview. Am J Infect Control 1996;24:262–277.Google ScholarPubMed
2.Lai, KK. Safety of prolonging peripheral cannula and i.v. tubing use from 72 hours to 96 hours. Am J Infect Control 1998;26:66–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Bregenzer, T, Conen, D, Sakmann, P, Widmer, AF. Is routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters necessary? Arch Intern Med 1998;158:151–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Hughes, WT, Armstrong, D, Bodey, GP, et al. 1997 guidelines for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with unexplained fever. Clin Infect Dis 1997;25:551–573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Widmer, A, Francioli, P. Infektionen durch periphere Katheter. Swiss-NOSO 1997;4:22–24.Google Scholar
6.Ena, J, Cercenado, E, Martinez, D, Bouza, E. Cross-sectional epidemiology of phlebitis and catheter-related infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1992;13:15–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Maki, DG, Ringer, M. Evaluation of dressing regimens for prevention of infection with peripheral intravenous catheters: gauze, a transparent Polyurethane dressing, and an iodophor-transparent dressing. JAMA 1987;258:2396–2403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Maki, DG, Ringer, M. Risk factors for infusion-related phlebitis with small peripheral venous catheters: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1991;114:845–854.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Maki, DG, Weise, CE, Sarafin, HW. A semiquantitative culture method for identifying intravenous-catheter-related infection. N Engl J Med 1977;296:1305–1309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Tager, IB, Ginsberg, MB, Ellis, SE, et al. An epidemiologic study of the risks associated with peripheral intravenous catheters. Am J Epidemiol 1983;118:839–851.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Tully, JL, Friedland, GH, Baldini, LM, Goldmann, DA. Complications of intravenous therapy with steel needles and Teflon catheters: a comparative study. Am J Med 1981;70:702–706.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Band, JD, Maki, DG. Steel needles used for intravenous therapy: morbidity in patients with hematologic malignancy. Arch Intern Med 1980;140:31–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Collin, J, Collin, C, Constable, FL, Johnston, ID. Infusion thrombophlebitis and infection with various cannulas. Lancet 1975;2:150–153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Khawaja, HT, Campbell, MJ, Weaver, PC. Effect of transdermal glyceryl trinitrate on the survival of peripheral intravenous infusions: a double-blind prospective clinical study. Br J Surg 1988;75:1202–1205.Google ScholarPubMed
15.Larson, E, Hargiss, C. A decentralized approach to maintenance of intravenous therapy. Am J Infect Control 1984;12:177–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Tomford, JW, Hershey, CO, McLaren, CE, Porter, DK, Cohen, DI. Intravenous therapy team and peripheral venous catheter-associated complications: a prospective controlled study. Arch Intern Med 1984;144:1191–1194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Pearson, ML. Guideline for prevention of intravascular device-related infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996;17:438–473.Google ScholarPubMed
18.Van Wijngaerden, E, Bobbaers, H. Intravascular catheter related bloodstream infection: epidemiology, pathogenesis and prevention. Acta Clin Belg 1997;52:9–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed