Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dora.health.qld.gov.au/qldresearchjspui/handle/1/4115
Title: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Novel Dressing and Securement Techniques in 101 Pediatric Patients
Authors: Milhala, Gabor
Ullman, Amanda 
Chaseling, Brett
Schoutrop, Jason
Mihala, Gabor
Rickard, Claire M.
Mihalia, Gabor
Gibson, Victoria 
Kleidon, T 
Issue Date: 2017
Source: 28, (11), 2017, p. 1548-1556.e1
Pages: 1548-1556.e1
Journal: Journal of Vascular & Interventional Radiology
Abstract: Purpose: To evaluate feasibility of an efficacy trial comparing peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) dressing and securement techniques to prevent complications and failure.Materials and Methods: This pilot, 3-armed, randomized controlled trial was undertaken at Royal Children's Hospital and Lady Cilento Children's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia, between April 2014 and September 2015. Pediatric participants (N = 101; age range, 0-18 y) were assigned to standard care (bordered polyurethane [BPU] dressing, sutureless securement device), tissue adhesive (TA) (plus BPU dressing), or integrated securement dressings (ISDs). Average PICC dwell time was 8.1 days (range, 0.2-27.7 d). Primary outcome was trial feasibility including PICC failure. Secondary outcomes were PICC complications, dressing performance, and parent and staff satisfaction.Results: Protocol feasibility was established. PICC failure was 6% (2/32) with standard care, 6% (2/31) with ISD, and 3% (1/32) with TA. PICC complications were 16% across all groups. TA provided immediate postoperative hemostasis, prolonging the first dressing change until 5.5 days compared with 3.5 days and 2.5 days with standard care and ISD respectively. Bleeding was the most common reason for first dressing change: standard care (n = 18; 75%), ISD (n = 11; 69%), TA (n = 4; 27%). Parental satisfaction (median 9.7/10; P = .006) and staff feedback (9.2/10; P = .002) were most positive for ISD.Conclusions: This research suggests safety and acceptability of different securement dressings compared with standard care; securement dressings may also reduce dressing changes after insertion. Further research is required to confirm clinically cost-effective methods to prevent PICC failure.research; randomized controlled trial. Journal Subset: Biomedical; Peer Reviewed; USA. Special Interest: Evidence-Based Practice. NLM UID: 9203369.PMID: NLM28893464.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2017.07.012
Resources: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,athens&db=ccm&AN=125780186&site=ehost-live
Keywords: Australia;Male;Child, Preschool;Infant, Newborn;Arm -- Blood Supply;Infant;Adolescence;Human;Female;Catheterization, Peripheral -- Equipment and SuppliesCatheterization, Central Venous -- Equipment and Supplies;Validation Studies;Comparative Studies;Evaluation Research;Multicenter Studies;Randomized Controlled Trials;Tissue Adhesives;Bandages and Dressings;Pilot Studies;Equipment Failure;Hemostasis, Surgical -- Methods;Child
Type: Article
Appears in Sites:Children's Health Queensland Publications

Show full item record

Page view(s)

108
checked on Mar 20, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DORA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.