{"title":"临床试验:比较加压盐水输注系统加肝素和不加肝素维持危重病人血管通路","authors":"Mònica Maqueda-Palau , Jaime González-Sánchez","doi":"10.1016/j.enfcli.2024.502187","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To evaluate the efficacy of 0.9% saline solution versus heparinized solution for maintaining the patency of intravascular catheters.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Single-center, randomized, controlled, single-blind clinical trial. Population: patients with intravascular arterial and/or central venous catheters. Variables: age, sex, admission diagnosis, catheter type and location, duration of catheter placement, catheter functionality, reason for removal, antiplatelet treatment, Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (APTT), and International Normalized Ratio (INR) values. Data collection was carried out using an ad hoc questionnaire. SPSS v.26 software was used for statistical analysis, including descriptive analysis (median and IQR), Mann-Whitney U test, variable association (chi-square test), and logistic regression. A p-value <.05 was considered the indicator of a significant difference.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Data were collected from 373 patients, of whom 68,4% were male. Heparin was administered to 202 patients (54,2%) and 0.9% saline to 171 patients (45,8%). A total of 595 catheters were analyzed: 221 (37,1%) arterial catheters, 229 (38,5%) centrally inserted central venous catheters, and 145 (24,4%) peripherally inserted central venous catheters. A total of 51 complications (8,6%) were detected, with a higher incidence in the heparin group (10,4% versus 6,3%). Among all complications, significant differences were observed by catheter type, with an incidence of 11,8% in arterial catheters, compared to 7,4% in centrally inserted central venous catheters and 5,5% in peripherally inserted central venous catheters.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>No significant differences were observed in maintaining catheter patency between systems using heparinized pressurization and those using 0.9% saline solution.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46453,"journal":{"name":"Enfermeria Clinica","volume":"35 4","pages":"Article 502187"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ensayo clínico: comparación de sistemas presurizados de infusión con suero salino con y sin heparina para el mantenimiento de accesos vasculares en el paciente crítico\",\"authors\":\"Mònica Maqueda-Palau , Jaime González-Sánchez\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.enfcli.2024.502187\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To evaluate the efficacy of 0.9% saline solution versus heparinized solution for maintaining the patency of intravascular catheters.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Single-center, randomized, controlled, single-blind clinical trial. Population: patients with intravascular arterial and/or central venous catheters. Variables: age, sex, admission diagnosis, catheter type and location, duration of catheter placement, catheter functionality, reason for removal, antiplatelet treatment, Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (APTT), and International Normalized Ratio (INR) values. Data collection was carried out using an ad hoc questionnaire. SPSS v.26 software was used for statistical analysis, including descriptive analysis (median and IQR), Mann-Whitney U test, variable association (chi-square test), and logistic regression. A p-value <.05 was considered the indicator of a significant difference.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Data were collected from 373 patients, of whom 68,4% were male. Heparin was administered to 202 patients (54,2%) and 0.9% saline to 171 patients (45,8%). A total of 595 catheters were analyzed: 221 (37,1%) arterial catheters, 229 (38,5%) centrally inserted central venous catheters, and 145 (24,4%) peripherally inserted central venous catheters. A total of 51 complications (8,6%) were detected, with a higher incidence in the heparin group (10,4% versus 6,3%). Among all complications, significant differences were observed by catheter type, with an incidence of 11,8% in arterial catheters, compared to 7,4% in centrally inserted central venous catheters and 5,5% in peripherally inserted central venous catheters.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>No significant differences were observed in maintaining catheter patency between systems using heparinized pressurization and those using 0.9% saline solution.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46453,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Enfermeria Clinica\",\"volume\":\"35 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 502187\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Enfermeria Clinica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1130862124001803\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Enfermeria Clinica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1130862124001803","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Ensayo clínico: comparación de sistemas presurizados de infusión con suero salino con y sin heparina para el mantenimiento de accesos vasculares en el paciente crítico
Aim
To evaluate the efficacy of 0.9% saline solution versus heparinized solution for maintaining the patency of intravascular catheters.
Method
Single-center, randomized, controlled, single-blind clinical trial. Population: patients with intravascular arterial and/or central venous catheters. Variables: age, sex, admission diagnosis, catheter type and location, duration of catheter placement, catheter functionality, reason for removal, antiplatelet treatment, Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (APTT), and International Normalized Ratio (INR) values. Data collection was carried out using an ad hoc questionnaire. SPSS v.26 software was used for statistical analysis, including descriptive analysis (median and IQR), Mann-Whitney U test, variable association (chi-square test), and logistic regression. A p-value <.05 was considered the indicator of a significant difference.
Results
Data were collected from 373 patients, of whom 68,4% were male. Heparin was administered to 202 patients (54,2%) and 0.9% saline to 171 patients (45,8%). A total of 595 catheters were analyzed: 221 (37,1%) arterial catheters, 229 (38,5%) centrally inserted central venous catheters, and 145 (24,4%) peripherally inserted central venous catheters. A total of 51 complications (8,6%) were detected, with a higher incidence in the heparin group (10,4% versus 6,3%). Among all complications, significant differences were observed by catheter type, with an incidence of 11,8% in arterial catheters, compared to 7,4% in centrally inserted central venous catheters and 5,5% in peripherally inserted central venous catheters.
Conclusions
No significant differences were observed in maintaining catheter patency between systems using heparinized pressurization and those using 0.9% saline solution.
期刊介绍:
Enfermería Clínica is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that is a useful and necessary tool for nursing professionals from the different areas of nursing (healthcare, administration, education and research) as well as for healthcare professionals involved in caring for persons, families and the community. It is the only Spanish nursing journal that mainly publishes original research. The aim of the Journal is to promote increased knowledge through the publication of original research and other studies that may help nursing professionals improve their daily practice. This objective is pursued throughout the different sections that comprise the Journal: Original Articles and Short Original Articles, Special Articles, Patient Care and Letters to the Editor. There is also an Evidence-Based Nursing section that includes comments about original articles of special interest written by experts.