Success of ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access with skin marking.

OBJECTIVES The most effective technique for ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access (USGPIVA) is unknown. In the traditional short-axis technique (locate, align, puncture [LAP]), the target vessel is aligned in short axis with the center of the transducer. The needle is then directed toward the target under real-time ultrasound (US) guidance. Locate, align, mark, puncture (LAMP) requires the extra step of marking the skin at two points over the path of the vein and proceeding with direct visualization as in LAP. The difference in success between these two techniques was compared among variably experienced emergency physician and emergency nurse operators. METHODS Subjects in an urban academic emergency department (ED) were randomized to obtain intravenous (IV) access using either LAP or LAMP after two failed blind attempts. Primary outcomes were success of the procedure and time to complete the procedure in variably experienced operators. RESULTS A total of 101 patients were enrolled. There was no difference in success between LAP and LAMP, even among the least experienced operators. Of successful attempts, LAMP took longer than LAP (median 4 minutes, interquartile range [IQR] 4-10.5 vs. median 2.9 minutes, IQR 1.6-7; p = 0.004). Only the most experienced operators were associated with higher levels of success (first attempt odds ratio [OR] 6.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2 to 22). Overall success with up to two attempts was 73%. Complications included a 2.8% arterial puncture rate and 12% infiltration rate. CONCLUSIONS LAMP did not improve success of USGPIVA in variably experienced operators. Experience was associated with higher rates of success for USGPIVA.

[1]  M. Stone,et al.  Ultrasonographically guided insertion of a 15-cm catheter into the deep brachial or basilic vein in patients with difficult intravenous access. , 2007, Annals of emergency medicine.

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

[3]  D. Jacobs,et al.  Improved care and reduced costs for patients requiring peripherally inserted central catheters: the role of bedside ultrasound and a dedicated team. , 2005, JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition.

[4]  B. Connolly,et al.  Evaluation of a Unique, Nurse-Inserted, Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Program , 2005, Pediatrics.

[5]  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.

[6]  N. Sandhu,et al.  Mid-arm approach to basilic and cephalic vein cannulation using ultrasound guidance. , 2004, British journal of anaesthesia.

[7]  M. Blaivas,et al.  Short-axis versus long-axis approaches for teaching ultrasound-guided vascular access on a new inanimate model , 2003 .

[8]  M. Gorelick.  Triage Application of Topical Anesthetic for IV Placement in the Pediatric Emergency Department (PED): Comparing a Prediction Model to Nurse Judgment , 2003 .

[9]  E. Snoey,et al.  Ultrasound-guided brachial and basilic vein cannulation in emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access. , 1999, Annals of emergency medicine.

[10]  L. Brody,et al.  Sonographically guided placement of peripherally inserted central venous catheters: review of 355 procedures. , 1998, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  J. Junewick,et al.  Peripherally inserted central venous catheters: US-guided vascular access in pediatric patients. , 1995, Radiology.