Original ResearchUltrasonography-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Access Versus Traditional Approaches in Patients With Difficult Intravenous Access
Introduction
Peripheral intravenous access is commonly performed in the emergency department (ED) to collect blood specimens and to provide a route for intravenous medication and fluid administration. Although this procedure is usually performed by nurses, in cases of difficult access emergency physicians are often called on to perform this task. The landmark technique for peripheral intravenous access has a success rate of 90% for ED patients.1 However, that still leaves many patients who require intravenous access but are difficult to cannulate, often because of obesity, a chronic medical condition, or a history of intravenous drug abuse. Patients who fail peripheral intravenous access will often have an external jugular intravenous line placed or undergo central venous access.
Emergency ultrasonography may provide an opportunity to increase the success rate of peripheral intravenous access. Ultrasonographic guidance for central venous access has been well studied throughout the past 2 decades, with several studies showing an increased success rate or decreased complications compared to the traditional landmark approach.2, 3, 4, 5, 6 However, we know of only 1 observational study that has examined ultrasonographic guidance of peripheral intravenous access.7
Ultrasonographic guidance may improve the rate of successful peripheral intravenous access in patients who have been historically difficult to access, leading to less time spent obtaining intravenous access and greater patient satisfaction. Ultrasonographic guidance may also decrease the number of central venous access attempts and lead to fewer overall complications.
We present a study comparing ultrasonographic-guided peripheral intravenous access versus intravenous access without ultrasonographic guidance in a subset of patients with difficult-to-obtain intravenous access, experienced emergency nurses having failed at least 3 intravenous access attempts. The primary endpoint was successful cannulation. Secondary endpoints included number of percutaneous sticks required, time of procedure, overall patient satisfaction, and complications.
Section snippets
Study Design
This was a prospective, nonblinded, systematically allocated study comparing ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous access with a traditional approach. Patients were systematically allocated to the ultrasonography-guided or the landmark and palpation (control) group based on their presentation to the ED on an odd (ultrasonography) or even (control) day. This study was approved by the institutional review board of the respective institutions, and patients gave informed consent before
Main Results
Results are summarized in the Table. Sixty patients were enrolled: 39 on odd days and 21 on even days. Success rate was greater for the ultrasonographic group (97%) versus the control group (33%), with a difference in proportions of 64% (95% confidence interval [CI] 39% to 71%). The median total time required from first percutaneous puncture until successful cannulation was also significantly less in the ultrasonographic group (4±5.6 minutes versus 15±11.8 minutes, for a difference of 11
Limitations
Despite our attempts at systematic allocation, there were almost twice as many patients enrolled in the ultrasonographic group as there were in the control group. The 3 extra odd days in the study period do not explain all of the difference. We strongly suspect selection bias occurred. We had no mechanism for checking whether eligible patients were always enrolled in the study, which may have biased the results toward a greater difference between ultrasonographic guidance and traditional
Discussion
Intravenous access is commonly required for patients presenting to the ED. All emergency physicians need to be familiar with techniques for obtaining intravenous access. Many emergency physicians are familiar with a subgroup of patients in which intravenous access can be very difficult, usually because of obesity, history of intravenous drug abuse, or some chronic medical condition that can distort the normal vascular anatomy, such as patients who have end-stage renal disease and are receiving
References (14)
- et al.
Prehospital intravenous line placement: a prospective study
Ann Emerg Med
(1989) - et al.
Ultrasound guidance improves the success rate of internal jugular vein cannulation
Chest
(1990) - et al.
Ultrasound guided brachial and basilic vein cannulation in emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access
Ann Emerg Med
(1999) Deep, percutaneous antecubital venipuncture: an alternative to surgical cutdown
Am J Surg
(1983)- et al.
Ultrasound guidance for placement of central venous catheters: a meta-analysis of the literature
Crit Care Med
(1996) - et al.
Ultrasound-assisted cannulation of the internal jugular vein
Circulation
(1993) - et al.
Ultrasound guidance versus the landmark technique for the placement of central venous catheters in the emergency department
Acad Emerg Med
(2002)
Cited by (336)
Ultrasonography and procedures in intensive care medicine
2023, Medicina IntensivaMono- and bi-plane sonographic approach for difficult accesses in the emergency department – A randomized trial
2023, American Journal of Emergency MedicineAugmentation of peripheral venous diameter for ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous line insertion
2023, American Journal of Emergency MedicinePatient selection in ambulatory surgery
2023, Best Practice and Research: Clinical Anaesthesiology
Supervising editor: David T. Overton, MD, MBA
Author contributions: TGC, AKP, and JPF conceived the study, designed the trial, and obtained institutional review board approval. TGC and AKP supervised the conduct of the trial and data collection. WAS provided statistical advice on study design and analyzed the data. TGC drafted the manuscript, and all authors contributed substantially to its revision. TGC takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: The authors report this study did not receive any outside funding or support.
Presented at the Society of Academic Emergency Medicine annual meeting, May 2004, Orlando, FL.
Reprints not available from the authors.