Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 24, 2025
07:47
The Supraclavicular Fossa Ultrasound View for Central Venous Catheter Placement and Catheter Change Over Guidewire
Published on: December 23, 2014
18.8K
Comparison of 2 Transillumination Technologies to Improve First-Attempt Success at Peripheral Intravenous Catheter
Claudia Maria de Freitas Floriano1,2, Ariane Ferreira Machado Avelar1,2, Maria Angelica Sorgini Peterlini1,2
1Author Affiliation: Escola Paulista de Enfermagem - Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Santo André, São Paulo, Brazil.
Summary
Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and infrared radiation (IR) vein visualization technologies showed similar success rates for first-attempt peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion in children. Both devices aided visualization in difficult cases.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Emergency Medicine
- Medical Device Technology
- Vascular Access
Background:
- Difficult intravenous access (DIVA) is common in children, leading to multiple insertion attempts and patient distress.
- Advanced visualization technologies aim to improve first-attempt success rates for peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion.
- Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and infrared radiation (IR) are two such technologies for vein visualization.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy of LED and IR vein visualization technologies for first-attempt PIVC insertion success in pediatric patients at risk of DIVA.
- To evaluate the impact of these technologies on children with previously identified difficult-to-access vessels or a history of IV therapy complications.
Main Methods:
- A randomized controlled crossover study involving 143 children at a university hospital.
- Participants were randomized to initially use either LED or IR vein visualization for PIVC insertion.
- Statistical analysis included McNemar test, paired t-test, and logistic regression models.
Main Results:
- No statistically significant difference in first-attempt PIVC insertion success was found between LED and IR technologies (P = .720).
- Overall first-attempt success rates were 65.2% (IR) and 44.9% (LED) in Group A, and 55.4% (IR) and 50.0% (LED) in Group B.
- Success rates were higher in patients with difficult-to-see vessels (51.5%) and those with prior IV complications (49.8%) using either device.
Conclusions:
- Both LED and IR vein visualization devices demonstrate comparable effectiveness for improving first-attempt PIVC insertion in children at risk of DIVA.
- These technologies are beneficial for visualizing veins, particularly in pediatric patients with challenging vascular access.
- Further research may explore patient comfort and long-term outcomes associated with these devices.
