多次插针尝试:来自美国患者和护士调查的见解。

Anna Kiger, Michele Acito
{"title":"多次插针尝试:来自美国患者和护士调查的见解。","authors":"Anna Kiger, Michele Acito","doi":"10.7748/nm.2025.e2147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Needle insertion, for example for venepuncture or intravenous (IV) cannulation, is a common intervention experienced by patients. However, up to half of venepuncture and IV cannulation procedures fail on the first attempt, resulting in further attempts. Multiple needle insertion attempts can lead to pain and other complications for patients and can take up staff time and increase equipment costs for hospitals, so it is important to ensure that needle insertion practices and outcomes are optimised. This article reports the results of a US survey that aimed to provide an insight into patients' and nurses' perspectives on and experiences of needle insertion. The results show that multiple needle insertion attempts are common and that associated complications have a detrimental effect on patients' satisfaction with the procedure. The results also suggest that patients and nurses are interested in alternatives to needle insertion, such as ultrasound guided IV cannulation or needle-free blood collection. Nurse leaders should be aware of these technologies and consider the implementation of sustainable initiatives to evolve practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":74325,"journal":{"name":"Nursing management (Harrow, London, England : 1994)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multiple needle insertion attempts: insights from a US survey of patients and nurses.\",\"authors\":\"Anna Kiger, Michele Acito\",\"doi\":\"10.7748/nm.2025.e2147\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Needle insertion, for example for venepuncture or intravenous (IV) cannulation, is a common intervention experienced by patients. However, up to half of venepuncture and IV cannulation procedures fail on the first attempt, resulting in further attempts. Multiple needle insertion attempts can lead to pain and other complications for patients and can take up staff time and increase equipment costs for hospitals, so it is important to ensure that needle insertion practices and outcomes are optimised. This article reports the results of a US survey that aimed to provide an insight into patients' and nurses' perspectives on and experiences of needle insertion. The results show that multiple needle insertion attempts are common and that associated complications have a detrimental effect on patients' satisfaction with the procedure. The results also suggest that patients and nurses are interested in alternatives to needle insertion, such as ultrasound guided IV cannulation or needle-free blood collection. Nurse leaders should be aware of these technologies and consider the implementation of sustainable initiatives to evolve practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74325,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nursing management (Harrow, London, England : 1994)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nursing management (Harrow, London, England : 1994)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7748/nm.2025.e2147\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing management (Harrow, London, England : 1994)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7748/nm.2025.e2147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

针头插入,例如静脉穿刺或静脉(IV)插管,是患者常见的干预措施。然而,多达一半的静脉穿刺和静脉置管程序在第一次尝试时失败,导致进一步的尝试。多次尝试插入针头可能会导致患者疼痛和其他并发症,并可能占用工作人员的时间并增加医院的设备成本,因此确保针头插入做法和结果得到优化非常重要。这篇文章报告了一项美国调查的结果,该调查旨在深入了解患者和护士对针头插入的看法和经验。结果表明,多次插针尝试是常见的,相关并发症对患者对手术的满意度有不利影响。结果还表明,患者和护士对针头插入的替代方法感兴趣,例如超声引导的静脉插管或无针采血。护士领导应该意识到这些技术,并考虑实施可持续的举措来发展实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Multiple needle insertion attempts: insights from a US survey of patients and nurses.

Needle insertion, for example for venepuncture or intravenous (IV) cannulation, is a common intervention experienced by patients. However, up to half of venepuncture and IV cannulation procedures fail on the first attempt, resulting in further attempts. Multiple needle insertion attempts can lead to pain and other complications for patients and can take up staff time and increase equipment costs for hospitals, so it is important to ensure that needle insertion practices and outcomes are optimised. This article reports the results of a US survey that aimed to provide an insight into patients' and nurses' perspectives on and experiences of needle insertion. The results show that multiple needle insertion attempts are common and that associated complications have a detrimental effect on patients' satisfaction with the procedure. The results also suggest that patients and nurses are interested in alternatives to needle insertion, such as ultrasound guided IV cannulation or needle-free blood collection. Nurse leaders should be aware of these technologies and consider the implementation of sustainable initiatives to evolve practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信