Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access program is associated with a marked reduction in central venous catheter use in noncritically ill emergency department patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE We examine the central venous catheter placement rate during the implementation of an ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access program. METHODS We conducted a time-series analysis of the monthly central venous catheter rate among adult emergency department (ED) patients in an academic urban ED between 2006 and 2011. During this period, emergency medicine residents and ED technicians were trained in ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access. We calculated the monthly central venous catheter placement rate overall and compared the central venous catheter reduction rate associated with the ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access program between noncritically ill patients and patients admitted to critical care. Patients receiving central venous catheters were classified as noncritically ill if admitted to telemetry or medical/surgical floor or discharged home from the ED. RESULTS During the study period, the ED treated a total of 401,532 patients, of whom 1,583 (0.39%) received a central venous catheter. The central venous catheter rate decreased by 80% between 2006 (0.81%) and 2011 (0.16%). The decrease in the rate was significantly greater among noncritically ill patients (mean for telemetry patients 4.4% per month [95% confidence interval {CI} 3.6% to 5.1%], floor patients 4.8% [95% CI 4.2% to 5.3%], and discharged patients 7.6% [95% CI 6.2% to 9.1%]) than critically ill patients (0.9%; 95% CI 0.6% to 1.2%). The proportion of central venous catheters that were placed in critically ill patients increased from 34% in 2006 to 81% in 2011 because fewer central venous catheterizations were performed in noncritically ill patients. CONCLUSION The ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access program was associated with reductions in central venous catheter placement, particularly in noncritically ill patients. Further research is needed to determine the extent to which such access can replace central venous catheter placement in ED patients with difficult vascular access.

[1]  W. Trick,et al.  Prospective cohort study of central venous catheters among internal medicine ward patients. , 2006, American journal of infection control.

[2]  R. Royster,et al.  Central venous catheterization. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  P. Pronovost,et al.  An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  W. Satz,et al.  Ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous access versus traditional approaches in patients with difficult intravenous access. , 2005, Annals of emergency medicine.

[5]  S. Adhikari,et al.  Comparison of Infection Rates Among Ultrasound‐Guided Versus Traditionally Placed Peripheral Intravenous Lines , 2010, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[6]  Daniel McDermott,et al.  Ultrasonographically guided peripheral intravenous cannulation in emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access: a randomized trial. , 2009, Annals of emergency medicine.

[7]  J. Richardson,et al.  Central Line-Associated Blood Stream Infection in the Critically Ill Trauma Patient , 2011, The American surgeon.

[8]  Sanjay Saint,et al.  Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. , 2002, American journal of infection control.

[9]  C. Hollenbeak,et al.  Attributable cost of catheter-associated bloodstream infections among intensive care patients in a nonteaching hospital* , 2006, Critical care medicine.

[10]  K. Boniface,et al.  Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Access in the Emergency Department: Patient-Centered Survey , 2011, The western journal of emergency medicine.

[11]  A. Mariam,et al.  The incidence of complications of central venous catheters at an intensive care unit , 2007, Annals of thoracic medicine.

[12]  K. Boniface,et al.  ED technicians can successfully place ultrasound-guided intravenous catheters in patients with poor vascular access. , 2011, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[13]  J. Feldman,et al.  Ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous catheter survival in ED patients with difficult access. , 2010, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[14]  C. Rey,et al.  Mechanical complications during central venous cannulations in pediatric patients , 2009, Intensive Care Medicine.

[15]  Darren Braude,et al.  Ultrasound-guidance vs. standard technique in difficult vascular access patients by ED technicians. , 2009, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[16]  Gina Maiocco,et al.  Use of Ultrasound Guidance for Peripheral Intravenous Placement in Difficult-to-Access Patients: Advancing Practice With Evidence , 2012, Journal of nursing care quality.

[17]  M. Blaivas,et al.  Emergency nurses' utilization of ultrasound guidance for placement of peripheral intravenous lines in difficult-access patients. , 2004, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[18]  M. Reade.  Central venous catheterization. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  Dan M. Kluger,et al.  The risk of bloodstream infection in adults with different intravascular devices: a systematic review of 200 published prospective studies. , 2006, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[20]  P. Ishimine,et al.  Randomized Controlled Trial of Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Placement Versus Traditional Techniques in Difficult-Access Pediatric Patients , 2009, Pediatric emergency care.

[21]  V. Barnett,et al.  Applied Linear Statistical Models , 1975 .