肿瘤患者的外围插入中心导管(PICC)线路:患者满意度、结果和成本比较——印度癌症三级护理研究所的经验

Shubhangi Jaid, Vaishali Sawant, Prriya B Eshpuniyani, S. Shetty, R. Deshpande, Anupama Borkar, Madhuri Dighe
{"title":"肿瘤患者的外围插入中心导管(PICC)线路:患者满意度、结果和成本比较——印度癌症三级护理研究所的经验","authors":"Shubhangi Jaid, Vaishali Sawant, Prriya B Eshpuniyani, S. Shetty, R. Deshpande, Anupama Borkar, Madhuri Dighe","doi":"10.5530/ijmedph.2022.2.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Long term venous access is needed in patients suffering from cancer for administering drugs, chemotherapy, blood collection, transfusions etc. Central venous catheters introduced in the 1980s have been a boon for these patients minimizing their need for repeated trauma. Of the various types of central venous access devices (CVAD’s) available, in developing countries like India, some of the limiting factors to decide what type of CVAD is used are the cost involved and the necessary training for the maintenance of the device. Our aim was to review our experience of PICC (Peripherally inserted central catheter) lines over 3 years, to analyze conditions for which PICC lines were used, catheter indwelling period, incidence and types of complications, reasons for removal and quality of life of these patients. We also attempted to compare costs of PICC lines with Chemoport management in our institute. Total 100 patients were followed up for 3 consecutive years, of which 75 were solid tumours and 25 were haematological. The median age was 33 years (Range 2 –77 ). The average duration of indwelling catheter is ranged 2 days–12 months. PICC line was found to be more cost-effective than Chemoport insertion in the overall scenario. 21% of patients had complications related to the management of PICC lines. The overall quality of life was maintained well with PICC line. Conclusion: PICC lines in oncology patients are reasonably safe for long lasting CVAD with acceptable incidence of complications. They are also cost effective compared to Chemoports in developing countries.","PeriodicalId":90863,"journal":{"name":"International journal of medicine and public health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICC) Lines in Oncology Patients: Patient Satisfaction, Outcomes and Cost Comparison – Experience of an Indian Tertiary Cancer Care Institute\",\"authors\":\"Shubhangi Jaid, Vaishali Sawant, Prriya B Eshpuniyani, S. Shetty, R. Deshpande, Anupama Borkar, Madhuri Dighe\",\"doi\":\"10.5530/ijmedph.2022.2.17\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Long term venous access is needed in patients suffering from cancer for administering drugs, chemotherapy, blood collection, transfusions etc. Central venous catheters introduced in the 1980s have been a boon for these patients minimizing their need for repeated trauma. Of the various types of central venous access devices (CVAD’s) available, in developing countries like India, some of the limiting factors to decide what type of CVAD is used are the cost involved and the necessary training for the maintenance of the device. Our aim was to review our experience of PICC (Peripherally inserted central catheter) lines over 3 years, to analyze conditions for which PICC lines were used, catheter indwelling period, incidence and types of complications, reasons for removal and quality of life of these patients. We also attempted to compare costs of PICC lines with Chemoport management in our institute. Total 100 patients were followed up for 3 consecutive years, of which 75 were solid tumours and 25 were haematological. The median age was 33 years (Range 2 –77 ). The average duration of indwelling catheter is ranged 2 days–12 months. PICC line was found to be more cost-effective than Chemoport insertion in the overall scenario. 21% of patients had complications related to the management of PICC lines. The overall quality of life was maintained well with PICC line. Conclusion: PICC lines in oncology patients are reasonably safe for long lasting CVAD with acceptable incidence of complications. They are also cost effective compared to Chemoports in developing countries.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90863,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of medicine and public health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of medicine and public health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5530/ijmedph.2022.2.17\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of medicine and public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5530/ijmedph.2022.2.17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

癌症患者需要长期静脉通路,以便用药、化疗、采血、输血等。20世纪80年代引入的中心静脉导管对这些患者来说是一个福音,最大限度地减少了他们对反复创伤的需求。在印度等发展中国家可用的各种类型的中心静脉接入设备中,决定使用哪种类型的中心血管接入设备的一些限制因素是所涉及的成本和设备维护的必要培训。我们的目的是回顾我们3年来使用PICC(外周插入中心导管)线的经验,分析PICC线的使用条件、导管留置期、并发症的发生率和类型、移除原因和这些患者的生活质量。我们还试图将中国人保生产线的成本与我们研究所的Chemoport管理进行比较。共有100名患者接受了连续3年的随访,其中75名为实体瘤,25名为血液学。中位年龄为33岁(范围为2-77岁)。留置导管的平均持续时间为2天至12个月。在总体情况下,PICC线被发现比Chemoport插入更具成本效益。21%的患者有与PICC系统管理相关的并发症。使用PICC线路,患者的整体生活质量得到了很好的保持。结论:肿瘤患者的PICC线治疗长期CVAD是相当安全的,并发症发生率可接受。与发展中国家的化学港口相比,它们也具有成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICC) Lines in Oncology Patients: Patient Satisfaction, Outcomes and Cost Comparison – Experience of an Indian Tertiary Cancer Care Institute
Long term venous access is needed in patients suffering from cancer for administering drugs, chemotherapy, blood collection, transfusions etc. Central venous catheters introduced in the 1980s have been a boon for these patients minimizing their need for repeated trauma. Of the various types of central venous access devices (CVAD’s) available, in developing countries like India, some of the limiting factors to decide what type of CVAD is used are the cost involved and the necessary training for the maintenance of the device. Our aim was to review our experience of PICC (Peripherally inserted central catheter) lines over 3 years, to analyze conditions for which PICC lines were used, catheter indwelling period, incidence and types of complications, reasons for removal and quality of life of these patients. We also attempted to compare costs of PICC lines with Chemoport management in our institute. Total 100 patients were followed up for 3 consecutive years, of which 75 were solid tumours and 25 were haematological. The median age was 33 years (Range 2 –77 ). The average duration of indwelling catheter is ranged 2 days–12 months. PICC line was found to be more cost-effective than Chemoport insertion in the overall scenario. 21% of patients had complications related to the management of PICC lines. The overall quality of life was maintained well with PICC line. Conclusion: PICC lines in oncology patients are reasonably safe for long lasting CVAD with acceptable incidence of complications. They are also cost effective compared to Chemoports in developing countries.
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信