Periferik İntravenöz Katater İlişkili Flebit: Nokta Prevalans Çalışması

Abstract

Objectives: Phlebitis is the most common complication in patients undergoing peripheral intravenous catheters (PIC). This study was conducted as an observational, one-day and point prevalence study for the purpose of determining the prevalence of PIC-related phlebitis. Materials and Methods: The study was carried out with patients on PIC (n=402) in a training and research hospital. Before starting the study, official permission and ethics committee approval were obtained from relevant institutions. The data in the study were collected via the “PICRelated Phlebitis Data Collection Form” and the “Phlebitis scale”. In the analysis of data, relevant statistical methods were used. After determining the number of beds in the hospital clinics (n=756), nurse teams consisting of two individuals (one observer, one implementer) were created for each clinic. Nurses in the working team were given PIC-Related Phlebitis Training and trained on how to complete forms and the forms were distributed to each patient. Meanwhile, nurses began to collect data. In the data collection process, nurses were provided with counseling on the phone and in clinics. Results: In the study, 69.1% of the patients were hospitalized in internal diseases and surgical clinics and they received antibiotics treatment via PIC. 75.1% had PIC less than 96 hours and it was determined that PIC was mainly applied on the right side of the body and mostly over the forearm and hand. In addition, it was found that the prevalence of phlebitis was 3.98% and 3.98% of patients had developed 1st degree phlebitis. Conclusion: The fact that phlebitis rates were in parallel with the literature and phlebitis cases identified were merely in the first stage is remarkable. In order to prevent phlebitis development and to diagnose phlebitis in early period, it is recommended to evaluate the area of PIC in terms of phlebitis regularly.

Keywords

• Peripheral Intravenous Catheter
• Phlebitis
• Point Prevalence

Abstract

Amaç: Flebit periferik intravenöz kateter (PİK) uygulanan hastalarda en sık görülen komplikasyondur. Bu çalışma, PİK ilişkili flebit prevalansını saptamak amacıyla gözlemsel, bir günlük ve nokta prevalans çalışması olarak yapılmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Araştırma, bir eğitim ve araştırma hastanesinde yatan ve PİK uygulanan hastalar (n=402) ile yürütülmüştür. Araştırmaya başlamadan önce ilgili kurumlardan resmi izin ve etik kurul izni alınmıştır. Araştırmada veriler “PİK İlişkili Flebit Veri Toplama Formu” ve “Flebit skalası” aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde ilgili istatistiksel yöntemler kullanılmıştır. Hastanedeki kliniklere ait yatak sayıları (n=756) belirlendikten sonra, her klinik için biri gözlemci, diğeri uygulayıcı olmak üzere iki kişilik hemşire ekipleri oluşturulmuştur. Çalışma ekibini oluşturan hemşirelere; PİK İlişkili Flebit Eğitimi ve formları nasıl dolduracaklarına dair eğitim verilmiş ve hasta sayısı kadar form dağıtılmıştır. Hemşireler aynı anda verileri toplamaya başlamıştır. Hemşirelere veri toplamaları sırasında telefonla ve klinikleri dolaşarak danışmanlık verilmiştir. Bulgular: Araştırmada hastaların %69,1’inin iç hastalıkları ve cerrahi kliniklerde yattığı ve PİK yoluyla antibiyotik tedavisi aldığı, %75,1’inin PİK’in kalış süresinin 96 saatten az olduğu, PİK uygulama bölgesinin vücudun sağ bölümünden ve en fazla ön kol ve el üstünden uygulandığı belirlenmiştir. Araştırmada flebit prevalansının %3,98 olduğu ve hastaların %3,98’inde 1. derece flebit geliştiği saptanmıştır. Sonuç: Flebit oranlarının literatür ile paralel olması ve saptanan flebit olguların henüz birinci evrede olması dikkat çekicidir. Flebit gelişimini önlemek ve flebiti erken dönemde saptamak amacıyla PİK takılan bölgenin flebit açısından düzenli aralıklarla değerlendirilmesi önerilmektedir

Keywords

• Periferik İntravenöz Kateter
• Flebit
• Nokta Prevalans

References

1. 1.Alexandrou E, Ray-Barruel G, Carr PJ, et al. Use of Short Peripheral Intravenous Catheters: Characteristics, Management, and Outcomes Worldwide. J Hosp Med. 2018;13.
2. 2. McGuire R, Norman E, Hayden I. Reassessing standards of vascular Access device care: a follow-up audit. British Journal of Nursing. 2019;28:4-12.
3. 3. Craven FR, Hirnle JC, Jensen S. Fundamentals of Nursing: Human Health and Function. 7nd ed. China: Wolters Kluwer Healty/Lippincott Williams &Wilkins; 2013. p. 468-533.
4. 4. Potter AP, Perry GA, Stockert AP, et al. Fundamentals of Nursing. 8nd ed. Canada: Mosby an Imprint of Elsevier Inc; 2013. p. 908-911.
5. 5. Souza AEBR, Oliveira JLC, Dias DC, et al. Nursingcarequalıtyınperıpheralıntravenoustherapy: analysısbyındıcators. Cogitare Enferm. 2014;19:478-484.
6. 6. Malach T, Jerassy Z, Rudensky B, et al. Prospective surveillance of phlebitis associated with peripheral intravenous catheters. Am J Infect Control. 2006;34:308-312.
7. 7. New KA, Webster J, Marsh NM, et al. Intravascular device use, management, documentation and complications: a point prevalence survey. Aust Health Rev. 2014;38:345-349.
8. 8. Fernández-Ruiz M, Carretero A, Díaz D, et al. Hospital-wide survey of the adequacy in the number of vascular catheters and catheter lumens. J HospMed. 2014;9:35-41.

9. 9. Keleekai NL, Schuster CA, Murray CL, et al. İmproving nurses’ peripheralıntravenous catheter ınsertion knowledge, confidence, and skills using a simulation-based blended learning program. Simul Health. 2016;11:376- 384.
10. 10. Phillips DL, Gorski L. Manual of I.V. Therapeutics, Evidence-Based Practice for Infusion Therapy. 6nd ed. Philadelphia: F.A. DavisCompany; 2014. p. 545-561.
11. 11. Urbanetto Jde S, Peixoto CG, May TA. Incidence of phlebitis associated with the use of peripheral IV catheter and following catheter removal. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2016;24:e2746.
12. 12. Simin D, Milutinović D, Turkulov V, et al. Incidence, severity and risk factors of peripheral intravenous cannula-induced complications: An observational prospective study. J Clin Nurs. 2018;28:1585-1599.
13. 13. Gorski LA. The 2016 Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice. Home Healthc. Now. 2017;35:10-18.
14. 14. Infusion Nurses Society. Infusion Nursing Standards of Practice. J Infus Nurs. 2006;29(1 Suppl):S1-92.
15. 15. Washington GT, Barrett R. Peripheral phlebitis. J Infusion Nurs. 2012;35:252- 258.
16. 16. Pasalioglu KB, Kaya H. Catheter indwell time and phlebitis development during peripheral intravenous catheter administration. Pak J Med Sci. 2014;30:725-730.
17. 17. Erdoğan BC, Denat Y. The development of phlebitis and infiltration in patients with peripheral intravenous catheters in the neurosurgery clinic and affecting factors. Int J Caring Sci. 2016;9:619-629.
18. 18. McCallum L, Higgins D. Care of peripheral venous cannula sites. Nursing Times. 2011;108:12-15.
19. 19. Groll D, Davies B, Mac Donald J, et al. Evaluation of the psychometric properties of the phlebitis and infiltration scales for the assessment of complications of peripheral vascular Access devices. Infusion Nurses Society. 2010;33:385-390.
20. 20. Salgueiro-Oliveira A, Parreira P, Veiga P. Incidence of phlebitis in patients with peripheral intravenous catheters: the influence of some risk factors. Aust J Adv Nurs. 2012;30:32-39.
21. 21. Beccaria LM, Contrin LM, Werneck AL, et al. Incidence of phlebitis in adult patients. J Nurs UFPE on line. 2018;12:745-752.
22. 22. Mandal A, Raghu K. Study on incidence of phlebitis following the use of pherpheral intravenous catheter. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019;8:2827- 2831.
23. 23. Atay S, Sen S, Cukurlu D. Phlebitis-related peripheral venous catheterization and the associated risk factors. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018;21:827-831.
24. 24. Washington GT, Barrett R. Peripheral phlebitis: a point-prevalence study. J Infus Nurs. 2012;35:252-258.
25. 25. Tosun B, Arslan BK, Özen N. [Phlebitis associated with peripheric venous catheter development and knowledge of nurses on evidence-based practices: point prevalence study]. Turkiye Klinikleri J Nurs Sci. 2020;12:72- 82.
26. 26. O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Am J Infect Control. 2011;39(4 Suppl 1):S1-34.
27. 27. Mattox EA. Complications of Peripheral Venous Access Devices: Prevention, Detection, and Recovery Strategies. Crit Care Nurse. 2017;37:e1-e14.
28. 28. Saini R, Agnihotri M, Gupta A, et al. Epidemiology of infiltration and phlebitis. Nursing and Midwifery Research Journal. 2011;7:22-33.
29. 29. Salma U, Sarker MAS, Zafrin N, et al. Frequency of peripheral intravenous catheter related phlebitis and related risk factors: A prospective study. Journal of Medicine. 2019;20:29-33.
30. 30. Gallant P, Schultz AA. Evaluation of a visual infusion phlebitis scale for determining appropriate discontinuation of peripheral intravenous catheters. J Infus Nurs. 2006;29:338-345.
31. 31. Urbanetto JS, Freitas APC, Oliveira APR, et el. Risk factors for the development of phlebitis: an integrative review of literature. Rev Gaúcha Enferm. 2017;38:e57489.
32. 32. Singh R, Bhandary S, Pun KD. Peripheral intravenous catheter related phlebitis and its contributing factors among adult population at KU Teaching Hospital. Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ). 2008;6:443-447.
33. 33. Dychter SS, Gold DA, Carson D, Haller M. Intravenous therapy: a review of complications and economic considerations of peripheral access. J Infus Nurs. 2012;35:84-91.