Prepackaged central line kits reduce procedural mistakes during central line insertion: a randomized controlled prospective trial

BackgroundCentral line catheter insertion is a complex procedure with a high cognitive load for novices. Providing a prepackaged all-inclusive kit is a simple measure that may reduce the cognitive load. We assessed whether the use of prepackaged all-inclusive central line insertion kits reduces procedural mistakes during central line catheter insertion by novices.MethodsThirty final year medical students and recently qualified physicians were randomized into two equal groups. One group used a prepackaged all-inclusive kit and the other used a standard kit containing only the central vein catheter and all other separately packaged components provided in a materials cart. The procedure was videotaped and analyzed by two blinded raters using a checklist. Both groups performed central line catheter insertion on a manikin, assisted by nursing students.ResultsThe prepackaged kit group outperformed the standard kit group in four of the five quality indicators: procedure duration (26:26 ± 3:50 min vs. 31:27 ± 5:57 min, p = .01); major technical mistakes (3.1 ± 1.4 vs. 4.8 ± 2.6, p = .03); minor technical mistakes (5.2 ± 1.7 vs. 8.0 ± 3.2, p = .01); and correct steps (83 ± 5% vs. 75 ± 11%, p = .02). The difference for breaches of aseptic technique (1.2 ± 0.8 vs. 3.0 ± 3.6, p = .06) was not statistically significant.ConclusionsPrepackaged all-inclusive kits for novices improved the procedure quality and saved staff time resources in a controlled simulation environment. Future studies are needed to address whether central line kits also improve patient safety in hospital settings.

[1]  Simon C. Mathews,et al.  Eradicating Central Line–Associated Bloodstream Infections Statewide , 2012, American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality.

[2]  Nnis System,et al.  National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, Data Summary from January 1990-May 1999, issued June 1999. A report from the NNIS System. , 1999, American journal of infection control.

[3]  Central vein catheterization. Failure and complication rates by three percutaneous approaches. , 1986, Archives of internal medicine.

[4]  R. Reznick,et al.  Comparing the psychometric properties of checklists and global rating scales for assessing performance on an OSCE‐format examination , 1998, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[5]  C. Nikendei,et al.  Peer‐assisted versus faculty staff‐led skills laboratory training: a randomised controlled trial , 2009, Medical education.

[6]  L D Britt,et al.  Central Line Simulation: A New Training Algorithm , 2007, The American surgeon.

[7]  Nasia Safdar,et al.  Reduction in nosocomial infection with improved hand hygiene in intensive care units of a tertiary care hospital in Argentina. , 2005, American journal of infection control.

[8]  Michael K Gould,et al.  Preventing complications of central venous catheterization. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  C. D'Elia,et al.  [Bronchovascular fistula--complication of percutaneous central venous catheter in a neonate]. , 2002, Jornal de pediatria.

[10]  K. Burns,et al.  A critical review of thromboembolic complications associated with central venous catheters , 2008, Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie.

[11]  BMC Medical Education , 2006 .

[12]  J. Sweller,et al.  Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies , 2010, Medical education.

[13]  M. Kollef,et al.  Risk factors for acute adverse events during ultrasound-guided central venous cannulation in the emergency department. , 2010, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[14]  P. Campobasso,et al.  Fatal cardiac tamponade as a late complication of central venous catheterization: a case report. , 1999, European journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie.

[15]  N. Sucu,et al.  Risk factors of catheter-related bloodstream infections in parenteral nutrition catheterization. , 2007, JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition.

[16]  D. Foxcroft,et al.  Central venous access sites for the prevention of venous thrombosis, stenosis and infection in patients requiring long-term intravenous therapy. , 2007 .

[17]  L. Cavanna,et al.  Ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization in cancer patients improves the success rate of cannulation and reduces mechanical complications: A prospective observational study of 1,978 consecutive catheterizations , 2010, World journal of surgical oncology.

[18]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System report, data summary from October 1986-April 1998, issued June 1998. , 1998, American journal of infection control.

[20]  Peter J Pronovost,et al.  Eliminating catheter-related bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit* , 2004, Critical care medicine.

[21]  S. Lindgren,et al.  Complications associated with peripheral or central routes for central venous cannulation , 2012, Anaesthesia.

[22]  H. Baden [Central vein catheterization]. , 1971, Nordisk medicin.

[23]  A. Agarwal Central vein stenosis: current concepts. , 2009, Advances in chronic kidney disease.

[24]  T. Wigmore,et al.  Effect of the implementation of NICE guidelines for ultrasound guidance on the complication rates associated with central venous catheter placement in patients presenting for routine surgery in a tertiary referral centre. , 2007, British journal of anaesthesia.