Related Experiment Videos
Comparison of a needleless system with conventional heparin locks
K S Adams1, C L Zehrer, W Thomas
1Department of Nursing, University of Minnesota Hospital and Clinic, Minneapolis.
Background:
Despite the improvements in needle disposal systems, needlesticks to health care workers continue to occur at unacceptably high rates. Needleless systems have been shown to reduce the risk of needlesticks.
Methods:
This pilot study examined the safety of such a system for patients by comparing the rates of intravenous infection-related indicators between a conventional heparin lock and a needleless system. Patients (n = 97) were categorized on the basis of the duration of intravenous placement into 24-, 48-, and 72-hour groups. Within each group, half of the patients received conventional heparin locks and half received the needleless system. Intravenous infection-related indicators included catheter tip culture, adaptor fluid culture, intravenous site erythema, induration and tenderness, and elevated oral temperature.
Results:
Prevalence of one or more indicators was 48% for the conventional and 40% for the needleless system, a difference that was not statistically significant.
Conclusions:
The needleless system appeared to pose no greater risk of infection to patients and nurses preferred it for its reduced risk of potential needlesticks.