Reducing Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Use in Adult Acute Care: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Giles Barrington, Lauren E Thurlow, Sarah Wiggs, Sundy Ni-Yen Yang, Suzanne Bumpstead, Bibesh Pokhrel, Viet Tran, Diana Egerton-Warburton, Lisa Kuhn
{"title":"Reducing Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Use in Adult Acute Care: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Giles Barrington, Lauren E Thurlow, Sarah Wiggs, Sundy Ni-Yen Yang, Suzanne Bumpstead, Bibesh Pokhrel, Viet Tran, Diana Egerton-Warburton, Lisa Kuhn","doi":"10.1111/1742-6723.70357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are the most frequently inserted invasive device in acute care, yet up to 52% remain unused, exposing patients to avoidable risks and increasing healthcare costs. Despite growing awareness of inappropriate PIVC use, unnecessary insertion persists, driven by cultural and organisational norms and risk-averse practices. Interventions to reduce PIVC use have been implemented, but their effectiveness and sustainability have not been systematically synthesised. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251033201). Searches of CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science identified studies reporting interventions to reduce PIVC insertion, unused PIVCs, and common complications. Data were extracted for intervention characteristics and PIVC outcomes. Implementation strategies were mapped to Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains for summative analysis. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed when appropriate. Twelve studies were included from emergency departments and inpatient settings across high-income countries. Most reported reductions in PIVC insertion and unused catheters, with improvements in secondary outcomes including phlebitis and bloodstream infections. Sustainability of practice change was demonstrated in two multi-year follow-up studies. Interventions showed a significant trend for increasing complexity over time, with recent strategies incorporating multi-modal, theory-informed approaches. Meta-analysis showed substantial heterogeneity, limiting pooled estimate interpretation, while methodological limitations restricted causal inference. Multi-modal interventions addressing behavioural, organisational, and contextual determinants appear most effective for reducing PIVC insertion rates and unnecessary PIVC use. Future research should evaluate sustainability, cost-effectiveness, and scalability using implementation science frameworks.</p>","PeriodicalId":11604,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","volume":"38 5","pages":"e70357"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13620191/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.70357","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are the most frequently inserted invasive device in acute care, yet up to 52% remain unused, exposing patients to avoidable risks and increasing healthcare costs. Despite growing awareness of inappropriate PIVC use, unnecessary insertion persists, driven by cultural and organisational norms and risk-averse practices. Interventions to reduce PIVC use have been implemented, but their effectiveness and sustainability have not been systematically synthesised. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251033201). Searches of CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science identified studies reporting interventions to reduce PIVC insertion, unused PIVCs, and common complications. Data were extracted for intervention characteristics and PIVC outcomes. Implementation strategies were mapped to Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains for summative analysis. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed when appropriate. Twelve studies were included from emergency departments and inpatient settings across high-income countries. Most reported reductions in PIVC insertion and unused catheters, with improvements in secondary outcomes including phlebitis and bloodstream infections. Sustainability of practice change was demonstrated in two multi-year follow-up studies. Interventions showed a significant trend for increasing complexity over time, with recent strategies incorporating multi-modal, theory-informed approaches. Meta-analysis showed substantial heterogeneity, limiting pooled estimate interpretation, while methodological limitations restricted causal inference. Multi-modal interventions addressing behavioural, organisational, and contextual determinants appear most effective for reducing PIVC insertion rates and unnecessary PIVC use. Future research should evaluate sustainability, cost-effectiveness, and scalability using implementation science frameworks.

减少外周静脉导管在成人急症护理中的使用:一项系统综述。
外周静脉导管(pivc)是急性护理中最常插入的侵入性设备,但高达52%的外周静脉导管仍未使用,使患者面临可避免的风险,并增加了医疗成本。尽管越来越多的人意识到不适当的PIVC使用,但在文化和组织规范以及风险规避实践的驱动下,不必要的插入仍然存在。已经实施了减少PIVC使用的干预措施,但其有效性和可持续性尚未得到系统的综合。按照PRISMA指南进行了系统评价,并在PROSPERO注册(CRD420251033201)。对CINAHL、MEDLINE、Scopus和Web of Science的搜索发现了报告干预措施以减少PIVC插入、未使用的PIVC和常见并发症的研究。提取干预特征和PIVC结果的数据。实施战略被映射到实施研究领域的统一框架,以进行总结性分析。适当时进行随机效应荟萃分析。从高收入国家的急诊科和住院环境中纳入了12项研究。大多数报告减少了PIVC插入和未使用导管,改善了包括静脉炎和血流感染在内的次要结局。实践变化的可持续性在两个多年的随访研究中得到了证明。随着时间的推移,干预措施显示出日益复杂的显著趋势,最近的策略结合了多模式、理论知情的方法。荟萃分析显示了实质性的异质性,限制了汇总估计解释,而方法上的局限性限制了因果推理。针对行为、组织和环境决定因素的多模式干预措施似乎对降低PIVC插入率和不必要的PIVC使用最有效。未来的研究应该利用实施科学框架来评估可持续性、成本效益和可扩展性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Emergency Medicine Australasia
Emergency Medicine Australasia 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
13.00%
发文量
217
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Emergency Medicine Australasia is the official journal of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) and the Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine (ASEM), and publishes original articles dealing with all aspects of clinical practice, research, education and experiences in emergency medicine. Original articles are published under the following sections: Original Research, Paediatric Emergency Medicine, Disaster Medicine, Education and Training, Ethics, International Emergency Medicine, Management and Quality, Medicolegal Matters, Prehospital Care, Public Health, Rural and Remote Care, Technology, Toxicology and Trauma. Accepted papers become the copyright of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书