Veinplicity versus heat treatment for vein dilation: A randomised cross-over study.
Adult
Catheterization, Peripheral
/ adverse effects
Cross-Over Studies
Electric Stimulation Therapy
/ adverse effects
England
Female
Forearm
/ blood supply
Humans
Hyperthermia, Induced
/ adverse effects
Male
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
Punctures
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Ultrasonography
Vasodilation
Veins
/ diagnostic imaging
Young Adult
Electric stimulation
administration
cannula
catheterisation
intravenous
peripheral
vascular access devices
Journal
The journal of vascular access
ISSN: 1724-6032
Titre abrégé: J Vasc Access
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100940729
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Sep 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
5
1
2019
medline:
4
9
2019
entrez:
5
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Peripheral intravenous cannulation is one of the most common invasive procedures for hospitalised patients. Patients with difficult venous access require special measures to facilitate cannulation. Veinplicity applies mild electrical stimulation to forearm veins to aid vessel dilation. To assess this new technique, we compared its effect on the veins to that of standard heat treatment. In all, 20 volunteers were randomised to receive either application of heat packs to the forearm and later stimulation with Veinplicity or the same two treatments in reverse order. Ultrasound measurements of the basilic, cephalic and brachial veins were taken at intervals during and after treatment and compared with baseline values. The mean maximum vein diameter increase from baseline was significantly higher with Veinplicity than with heat packs (49.94% ± 23.55% vs 36.26% ± 23.09%, Veinplicity dilates forearm veins more effectively and for a longer time than commonly used heat packs. This new treatment option appears to be a valuable addition to the vascular access toolkit, with the potential to improve first-attempt cannulation rates and spare patients from discomfort, pain and iatrogenic vessel trauma.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Peripheral intravenous cannulation is one of the most common invasive procedures for hospitalised patients. Patients with difficult venous access require special measures to facilitate cannulation. Veinplicity applies mild electrical stimulation to forearm veins to aid vessel dilation. To assess this new technique, we compared its effect on the veins to that of standard heat treatment.
METHODS
METHODS
In all, 20 volunteers were randomised to receive either application of heat packs to the forearm and later stimulation with Veinplicity or the same two treatments in reverse order. Ultrasound measurements of the basilic, cephalic and brachial veins were taken at intervals during and after treatment and compared with baseline values.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The mean maximum vein diameter increase from baseline was significantly higher with Veinplicity than with heat packs (49.94% ± 23.55% vs 36.26% ± 23.09%,
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Veinplicity dilates forearm veins more effectively and for a longer time than commonly used heat packs. This new treatment option appears to be a valuable addition to the vascular access toolkit, with the potential to improve first-attempt cannulation rates and spare patients from discomfort, pain and iatrogenic vessel trauma.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30606085
doi: 10.1177/1129729818818962
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM