IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v28y2019i19-20p3492-3504.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk factors for a difficult intravenous access: A multicentre study comparing nurses' beliefs to evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Michela Piredda
  • Jacopo Fiorini
  • Gabriella Facchinetti
  • Valentina Biagioli
  • Anna Marchetti
  • Fabio Conti
  • Laura Iacorossi
  • Diana Giannarelli
  • Maria Matarese
  • Maria Grazia De Marinis

Abstract

Aims and objectives To summarise the evidence about patient‐related risk factors for difficult intravenous access in adults, and at identifying nurses' beliefs and their consistency with evidence. Background Peripheral intravenous cannulation is a common procedure for nurses, but rates of failure at first attempt of peripheral intravenous cannulation range 10%–40%. Nurses' beliefs about difficult intravenous access factors might influence their clinical practice more than current evidence. Design The study included a literature review of the evidence on patient‐related risk factors for difficult intravenous access, the development of an instrument to investigate nurses' beliefs about this topic and a cross‐sectional multicentre survey on clinical nurses. Methods The quality of the studies included was evaluated through the Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross‐Sectional Studies. A synthesis of evidence for each risk factor was produced. A survey instrument was developed including 26 risk factors, which were then rated by nurses as perceived predictors of difficult intravenous access. The STROBE guidelines for study reporting were followed. Results Four hundred and fifty clinical nurses working in four hospitals in Italy were surveyed. Nurses' beliefs were in line with evidence in considering body mass index, drug abuse, lymphadenectomy and chemotherapy as difficult intravenous access factors. Beliefs about difficult intravenous access factors were influenced by nurses' work experience and frequency of peripheral intravenous cannulation. Nurses also identified as risk factors for difficult intravenous access oedema, thrombophlebitis, hypovolaemia, skin lesions and irritant therapies, which have been minimally investigated by research. Conclusions An overall congruence between nurses' beliefs and evidence about risk factors for difficult intravenous access was found. With their expertise, nurses may fill the knowledge gap of clinical evidence and open new paths for clinically meaningful research. Relevance to clinical practice Nurses' beliefs about difficult intravenous access factors can be influenced by their work experience and clinical setting. Integrating nurses' beliefs with scientific evidence can increase the quality of care.

Suggested Citation

  • Michela Piredda & Jacopo Fiorini & Gabriella Facchinetti & Valentina Biagioli & Anna Marchetti & Fabio Conti & Laura Iacorossi & Diana Giannarelli & Maria Matarese & Maria Grazia De Marinis, 2019. "Risk factors for a difficult intravenous access: A multicentre study comparing nurses' beliefs to evidence," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(19-20), pages 3492-3504, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:19-20:p:3492-3504
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14941
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14941
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14941?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michela Piredda & Valentina Biagioli & Beatrice Barrella & Ilaria Carpisassi & Roberta Ghinelli & Diana Giannarelli & Maria Grazia De Marinis, 2017. "Factors affecting difficult peripheral intravenous cannulation in adults: a prospective observational study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(7-8), pages 1074-1084, April.
    2. Åsa Engström & Angelica Forsberg, 2019. "Peripheral intravenous catheter difficulty – A clinical survey of registered nurse and critical care nurse performance," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(3-4), pages 686-694, February.
    3. Jacopo Fiorini & Giulia Venturini & Fabio Conti & Emanuele Funaro & Rosario Caruso & Mari Kangasniemi & Alessandro Sili, 2019. "Vessel health and preservation: An integrative review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(7-8), pages 1039-1049, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paulo Santos-Costa & Liliana B. Sousa & Fredericus H.J. van Loon & Anabela Salgueiro-Oliveira & Pedro Parreira & Margarida Vieira & João Graveto, 2020. "Translation and Validation of the Modified A-DIVA Scale to European Portuguese: Difficult Intravenous Access Scale for Adult Patients," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-11, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tao Wei & Xu‐ying Li & Zhi‐ping Yue & Yong‐yi Chen & Yi‐ren Wang & Zhong Yuan & Qin Lin & Yan Tan & Si‐yi Peng & Xing‐feng Li, 2019. "Catheter dwell time and risk of catheter failure in adult patients with peripheral venous catheters," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(23-24), pages 4488-4495, December.
    2. Sercan Yalçınlı & Funda Karbek Akarca & Özge Can & Alper Şener & Cemile Akbinar, 2019. "Factors affecting the first‐attempt success rate of intravenous cannulation in older people," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(11-12), pages 2206-2213, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:19-20:p:3492-3504. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.