The effect on pain of three different nonpharmacological methods in peripheral intravenous catheterisation in adults

Aims and objectives To compare the effectiveness in reducing pain during peripheral intravenous catheterisation of coughing, blowing into a spirometer and squeezing a stress ball. Background Peripheral intravenous catheterisation is widely performed by nurses; it causes pain and discomfort to patients. Design This was a single‐blind randomized controlled study. Methods The sample of the study consisted of 120 males who came to donate blood. Before the peripheral intravenous catheterisation, the individuals were divided by a simple randomisation method into four groups: a coughing group, a blowing into a spirometer group, a stress ball squeezing group and a control group. During the procedure, the pain levels felt by the individuals were assessed using the visual analog scale by a nurse who was blinded to the procedure. Findings The mean pain of the individuals in the coughing group was found to be 19.5 mm (SD: 13.6), that of the spirometer group was 28.3 mm (SD: 20.2), that of the stress ball group was 32.1 mm (SD: 23.8) and that of the control group was 45.5 mm (SD: 19.5). Statistical analysis showed a significant difference between the mean pain scores of individuals in the control group and those of individuals in the coughing, spirometer and stress ball groups. Conclusion The techniques of squeezing a stress ball, blowing into a spirometer and in particular coughing, depending on the potential mechanism of the Valsalva manoeuvre and diverting attention, are effective techniques in reducing the pain of peripheral catheterisation procedures. Relevance to clinical practice It is important that nurses should be aware of pain and stress experienced by patients during invasive procedures. For this reason, nurses should have knowledge of proven nonpharmacological methods which can reduce pain to a minimum.