Conectar
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of infrared (IR) devices versus the traditional palpation technique for first-attempt success of peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion in adults.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus and CINAHL was conducted on 28 May 2024 and included articles in English or French published from 1st January 2000 onwards.
Eligible studies included RCTs comparing IR devices with the traditional palpation method for PIVC insertion in adults. The primary outcome was first-attempt success. Secondary outcomes included overall success, number of attempts, cannulation time and patient pain. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2 tool, and a random-effects model was applied for meta-analysis.
Five RCTs were included, involving 690 patients and 704 catheters, including 289 PIVCs in patients with Difficult Intravascular Access (DIVA) criteria. First attempt insertion success was similar when using infrared devices (139/331, 42%) and traditional palpation (143/373, 38%) with Risk Ratio (RR) 1.08 (95% CI, 0.69 to 1.70). No significant statistical differences were noted in secondary outcomes: overall insertion success, number of attempts, time to cannulate and patient pain. Clinical and statistical heterogeneity were substantial (primary analysis I 2 = 83%).
Current evidence does not support the systematic use of infrared devices to improve PIVC insertion success, reduce the number of attempts or alleviate patient pain compared with traditional palpation in adults. Further high-quality studies with suitable sample sizes and varied populations are needed to better establish the potential place of infrared devices.
This study highlights the limited benefit of IR devices in routine clinical practice and underscores the need for further research into their use in specialised settings.
No Patient or Public Involvement. This study did not include patient or public involvement in its design, conduct or reporting.
To introduce a novel conceptual framework that differentiates peripheral intravenous catheters according to their dwell time and therapeutic purpose, in order to improve the suitability of material choice, safety and cost-effectiveness.
Concept based on clinical guidelines, expert consensus and recent peer-reviewed evidence.
A literature search was conducted in PubMed on November 25, 2024, using defined keywords related to peripheral intravenous catheters, device complications and duration of use. This search was supplemented by manual screening of references from relevant articles.
The analysis followed the SANRA quality criteria for narrative reviews. Evidence and recommendations from clinical guidelines, randomised trials and qualitative studies were synthesised using the Australian Clinical Care Standards to structure the proposed classification into ‘procedural’ and ‘therapy’ catheters.
Procedural catheters are used for less than 24 h, typically during procedures or short treatments, and are mainly linked to immediate risks like insertion failure and local trauma. Therapy catheters, defined as devices used beyond 24 h or expected to remain while the patient sleeps, carry cumulative risks, including delayed complications such as phlebitis, occlusion and infection. The framework supports more nuanced decisions on device choice, insertion site and maintenance.
This framework introduces a practical differentiation between short- and longer-term peripheral venous catheters, addressing a major oversight in existing guidelines and supporting context-sensitive vascular access decisions.
Tailoring catheter management to expected dwell time may reduce complications and costs, enhance workflow, and improve patient comfort.
By addressing the lack of temporal distinction in current practice, this framework offers a simple yet transformative tool applicable across care settings, with the potential to improve patient outcomes, resource utilisation and costs.
This project is a concept analyses; no patient or public contribution was necessary.
FreshRSS 