Securing All intraVenous devices Effectively in hospitalised patients—the SAVE trial: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Claire M Rickard; Nicole Marsh; Joan Webster; E Geoffrey Playford; Matthew R McGrail; Emily Larsen; Samantha Keogh; David J McMillan; Jennifer A Whitty; Md Abu Choudhury; Kimble R Dunster; Heather Reynolds; Andrea Marshall; Julia Crilly; Jeanine Young; Ogilvie Thom; John Gowardman; Amanda Corley; John F Fraser

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008689

Back

Securing All intraVenous devices Effectively in hospitalised patients—the SAVE trial: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

Securing All intraVenous devices Effectively in hospitalised patients—the SAVE trial: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Claire M Rickard, Nicole Marsh, Joan Webster, E Geoffrey Playford, Matthew R McGrail, Emily Larsen, Samantha Keogh, David J McMillan, Jennifer A Whitty, Md Abu Choudhury, …

BMJ Open, Vol.5(9), e008689

2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008689

Files and links (2)

pdf

PDF - Published Version (Open Access)686.85 kBDownload View

Published VersionPDF - Published Version (Open Access)CC BY-NC V4.0, Open Access

url

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008689View

Published Version

Abstract

peripheral intravenous device (PIV)

Introduction Over 70% of all hospital admissions have a peripheral intravenous device (PIV) inserted; however, the failure rate of PIVs is unacceptably high, with up to 69% of these devices failing before treatment is complete. Failure can be due to dislodgement, phlebitis, occlusion/infiltration and/or infection. This results in interrupted medical therapy; painful phlebitis and reinsertions; increased hospital length of stay, morbidity and mortality from infections; and wasted medical/nursing time. Appropriate PIV dressing and securement may prevent many cases of PIV failure, but little comparative data exist regarding the efficacy of various PIV dressing and securement methods. This trial will investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of 4 methods of PIV dressing and securement in preventing PIV failure. Methods and analysis A multicentre, parallel group, superiority randomised controlled trial with 4 arms, 3 experimental groups (tissue adhesive, bordered polyurethane dressing, sutureless securement device) and 1 control (standard polyurethane dressing) is planned. There will be a 3-year recruitment of 1708 adult patients, with allocation concealment until randomisation by a centralised web-based service. The primary outcome is PIV failure which includes any of: dislodgement, occlusion/infiltration, phlebitis and infection. Secondary outcomes include: types of PIV failure, PIV dwell time, costs, device colonisation, skin colonisation, patient and staff satisfaction. Relative incidence rates of device failure per 100 devices and per 1000 device days with 95% CIs will summarise the impact of each dressing, and test differences between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves (with log-rank Mantel-Cox test) will compare device failure over time. p Values of <0.05 will be considered significant. Secondary end points will be compared between groups using parametric or non-parametric techniques appropriate to level of measurement.

Details

Title: Securing All intraVenous devices Effectively in hospitalised patients—the SAVE trial: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial
Authors: Claire M Rickard (Author) - Griffith University
Nicole Marsh (Author) - Griffith University
Joan Webster (Author) - Griffith University
E Geoffrey Playford (Author) - Griffith University
Matthew R McGrail (Author) - Griffith University
Emily Larsen (Author) - Griffith University
Samantha Keogh (Author) - Griffith University
David J McMillan (Author) - University of the Sunshine Coast - Faculty of Science, Health, Education and Engineering
Jennifer A Whitty (Author) - University of Queensland
Md Abu Choudhury (Author) - Griffith University
Kimble R Dunster (Author) - University of Queensland
Heather Reynolds (Author) - Griffith University
Andrea Marshall (Author) - Griffith University
Julia Crilly (Author) - Griffith University
Jeanine Young (Author) - University of the Sunshine Coast - Faculty of Science, Health, Education and Engineering
Ogilvie Thom (Author) - University of Queensland
John Gowardman (Author) - Griffith University
Amanda Corley (Author) - Griffith University
John F Fraser (Author) - Griffith University
Publication details: BMJ Open, Vol.5(9), e008689; 7
Publisher: B M J Group
Date published: 2015
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008689
ISSN: 2044-6055
Copyright note: Copyright © 2015 The Authors. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Organisation Unit: School of Health - Nursing; University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland; School of Health and Sport Sciences - Legacy; School of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedicine - Legacy; School of Science, Technology and Engineering; Centre for Bioinnovation
Language: English
Record Identifier: 99450053902621
Output Type: Journal article

Metrics

114 File views/ downloads

3219 Record Views

17 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Domestic collaboration
Web Of Science research areas: Medicine, General & Internal

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

Source: InCites