Select Page

Re: Use of IV venflon catheter

Home Forums Infexion Connexion Re: Use of IV venflon catheter

 | Click to Receive Email Notifications of Posts
  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #71937
    Lee, Rosie
    Participant

    Author:
    Lee, Rosie

    Position:

    Organisation:

    State:

    Hello

    Recently I have been made aware of this practice following implementation of Aseptic Technique Policy. It appears in our theatres the Anaesthetists use the BD Venflon(tm) intravenous catheter with integrated injection port and valve for medication and this stays in the patient. I am told the caps are either being left open in Theatres for quick access by Anaesthetists or they popp off very frequently. In recovery nurses are observed continuing to use this to administer medication. I see this as a huge risk for contamination and a breach of AT principles.

    The BD representative states that this type of catheter is not used in other states of Australia but is common in UK and Europe. Is this correct?

    Have you come across this in your hospitals? If so have you ceased the use or do you advocate using the side extension tubing which has a hub that can be scrubbed?

    Regards
    Rosie Lee | Coordinator | Infection Prevention & Management
    Royal Perth Hospital
    Level 6, South Block, Wellington Street PERTH WA 6000
    T: (08) 9224 2805 | F: (08) 9224 1989
    E: rosie.lee@health.wa.gov.au
    http://www.rph.health.wa.gov.au | http://www.healthywa.wa.gov.au
    [cid:image003.png@01CFD191.167DCCC0]

    MESSAGES POSTED TO THIS LIST ARE SOLELY THE OPINION OF THE AUTHOR, AND DO NOT REPRESENT THE OPINION OF ACIPC.

    The use of trade/product/commercial brand names through the list is discouraged by ACIPC. If you wish to discuss specific reference to products or services by brand or commercial names, please do this outside the list.

    Archive of all messages are available at http://aicalist.org.au/archives – registration and login required.

    Replies to this message will be directed back to the list. To create a new message send an email to aicalist@aicalist.org.au

    To send a message to the list administrator send an email to aicalist-request@aicalist.org.au.

    You can unsubscribe from this list be sending ‘signoff aicalist’ (without the quotes) to listserv@aicalist.org.au

    #71940
    Tim Spencer
    Participant

    Author:
    Tim Spencer

    Position:

    Organisation:

    State:

    Hi Rosie,

    You are correct. The BD Venflon IV cannula has been widely used throughout
    Europe and the UK (well it was when I was there many years ago). Is it the
    Pro Safety or the standard ported cannula?

    This style of ported cannula has been around since the early 1980’s, so
    despite the recent addition of a safety aspect, it is still old technology
    (in regards to the port aspect).

    A ported cannula has significantly increased infection rates due to the
    inability to correctly scrub the hub or decontaminate the injection port, as
    well as port cap failure.

    Here is an Australian publication from NT in 2013 that may help in product
    purchase changes – Tay, S et al. Functional evaluation and practice survey
    to guide purchasing of intravenous cannulae, BMC Anesthesiology 2013, 13:49
    http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2253/13/49

    There has also been reports from the UK of the ports failing – H. Adler, R.
    Cunningham, R. Parimkayala Valve failure in an injection port, Irish Journal
    of Medical Science June 2011, Volume 180, Issue 2, p 615

    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11845-010-0622-z

    These ported styles of cannula were likely introduced due to the higher
    number of UK physicians coming to work in WA (possibly due to clinician
    preference only) and have high infection and poor compliance rates, due to
    the difficult nature of port location. These are primarily placed in OT only
    (as you describe) and are not used in the general wards areas as far as I am
    aware.

    Although this may be a ‘convenient option’ for clinicians, it is not in the
    best interest of the patient, due to the higher risks associated with these
    types of cannulae.

    From the BD Europe website;
    http://www.bd.com/europe/safety/en/products/infusion/bdv_prosafety.asp

    * BD VialonT – Proven easy insertion and longer in dwell times1-4

    1) Maki D, Ringer M. Risk Factors for Infusion-related Phlebitis with
    Small Peripheral Venous Catheters. Annals of Internal Medicine. (1991); 114:
    845-854.

    2) Gaukroger PB, Roberts JG, Manners TA. Infusion Thrombophlebitis: A
    Prospective Comparison of 645 VialonR and TeflonR Canulae in Anesthetic and
    Postoperative Use. Anesthesia and Intensive Care.August (1988); 16(3).

    3) Stanley M, Meister E, Fuschuber K. Infiltration During Intravenous
    Therapy in Neonates: Comparison of TeflonR and VialonR Catheters. Southern
    Medical Journal.September (1992); 85(9); 883-886.

    4) McKee JM, Shell JA, Warren TA, Campbell VP. Complications of
    Intravenous Therapy: A Randomized Prospective Study–Vialon vs. Teflon.
    Journal of Infusion Nursing. September (1989); 12: 288-2.

    Considering the ongoing changes in technology and increased focus on device
    and patient outcomes, these references are very old and dated. I agree with
    you that this as a huge risk for contamination and a breach of AT
    principles.

    The BD Nexiva cannula would seem to be a far better alternative (for patient
    and clinician), and still offering a safety option, various access points
    and improved securement.

    Timothy R. Spencer, RN, APN, DipAppSci, Bach.Health, ICCert, VA-BC.

    Independent Vascular Access Consultant
    President, Australian Vascular Access Society
    Conjoint Lecturer, South West Sydney Clinical School | Faculty of Medicine |
    University of NSW

    Director-at-Large, Vascular Access Certification Corporation (VACC)

    Representative – WoCoVA Global Strategic Committee
    M: +1 (623) 326 8889 (USA)

    M: +61 (0)409 463 428 (AU)
    E: tim.spencer68@icloud.com

    “Be a yardstick of quality. Some people aren’t used to an environment where
    excellence is expected.” – Steve Jobs

    Of Lee, Rosie

    Hello

    Recently I have been made aware of this practice following implementation of
    Aseptic Technique Policy. It appears in our theatres the Anaesthetists use
    the BD VenflonT intravenous catheter with integrated injection port and
    valve for medication and this stays in the patient. I am told the caps are
    either being left open in Theatres for quick access by Anaesthetists or they
    popp off very frequently. In recovery nurses are observed continuing to use
    this to administer medication. I see this as a huge risk for contamination
    and a breach of AT principles.

    The BD representative states that this type of catheter is not used in other
    states of Australia but is common in UK and Europe. Is this correct?

    Have you come across this in your hospitals? If so have you ceased the use
    or do you advocate using the side extension tubing which has a hub that can
    be scrubbed?

    Regards

    Rosie Lee | Coordinator | Infection Prevention & Management
    Royal Perth Hospital

    Level 6, South Block, Wellington Street PERTH WA 6000
    T: (08) 9224 2805 | F: (08) 9224 1989
    E: rosie.lee@health.wa.gov.au
    http://www.rph.health.wa.gov.au |
    http://www.healthywa.wa.gov.au

    MESSAGES POSTED TO THIS LIST ARE SOLELY THE OPINION OF THE AUTHOR, AND DO
    NOT REPRESENT THE OPINION OF ACIPC.

    The use of trade/product/commercial brand names through the list is
    discouraged by ACIPC. If you wish to discuss specific reference to products
    or services by brand or commercial names, please do this outside the list.

    Archive of all messages are available at http://aicalist.org.au/archives
    registration and login required.

    Replies to this message will be directed back to the list. To create a new
    message send an email to aicalist@aicalist.org.au

    To send a message to the list administrator send an email to
    aicalist-request@aicalist.org.au .

    You can unsubscribe from this list be sending ‘signoff aicalist’ (without
    the quotes) to listserv@aicalist.org.au

    MESSAGES POSTED TO THIS LIST ARE SOLELY THE OPINION OF THE AUTHOR, AND DO NOT REPRESENT THE OPINION OF ACIPC.

    The use of trade/product/commercial brand names through the list is discouraged by ACIPC. If you wish to discuss specific reference to products or services by brand or commercial names, please do this outside the list.

    Archive of all messages are available at http://aicalist.org.au/archives – registration and login required.

    Replies to this message will be directed back to the list. To create a new message send an email to aicalist@aicalist.org.au

    To send a message to the list administrator send an email to aicalist-request@aicalist.org.au.

    You can unsubscribe from this list be sending ‘signoff aicalist’ (without the quotes) to listserv@aicalist.org.au

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • The forum ‘Infexion Connexion’ is closed to new topics and replies.