ditto

Victoria Sallese
VAT
Johns Hopkins Hospital

----- Original Message -----
From: Raye Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Saturday, February 4, 2006 11:04 am
Subject: RE: INS standard # 37

> i 
> i learned that discharge planning starts at the time of admission.
> sounds like a lot of the problems are caused by poor planning and 
> thatssomething that is a case management issue. why would someone 
> startdischarge planning on the day of discharge on a friday 
> afternoon.  dont
> blame the LTCF or the payer for that. perhaps more time and money 
> shouldbe spent at the front end with good case management.
> 
> >>> "Chris Cavanaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 02/03/06 11:19 PM >>>
> Wonderful, I would love to be that nurse---where do I get the 
> $15000 to
> buy
> an US machine, and do you know which nursing homes will pay more than
> $275
> for a PICC line placement?  That is the going rate in Florida, and no
> LTC
> facility will pay more than that when they know they can get it 
> for that
> price. 
> 
> Chris Cavanaugh, CRNI
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Kokotis, Kathy
> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 5:57 PM
> To: Martha Pike; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: INS standard # 37
> 
> You all want to know what is going to happen in alternate care sites
> like
> nursing homes
> 
> You are not going to like it
> 
> This is how American business works or capitalism.  The LTC is 
> forced by
> the
> hospital to take a patient with no line therefore they eat the 
> cost of
> the
> line or they force their pharmacy to eat the cost.  The pharmacy 
> sends a
> nurse to do the line with no high tech tools.  The patient veins get
> worse
> and worse each year.  Soon the pharmacy will make a decision based on
> cost
> loss ratio's.  The final answer as each company cannot buy a 
> machine is
> the
> independent contractor who comes equipped and charges by the job.
> 
> Life will be full of high-tech independent contractors in the 
> future who
> do
> nursing homes, hospitals, skilled care, home care, etc.  Hospitals 
> willalso
> be full of new infusion nurses but they will not be low tech.  
> They will
> not
> do peripheral IV's and dressing changes.  I see it everyday.  My 
> visionwill
> be 75% complete in five years.  The high tech VAD nurse is my ultimate
> goal.
> I started this in 1996 and I will not stop until it is done.  I 
> believein
> the last seven days I will have created another 15 new high tech PICC
> nurses.  These are hospitals that don't even do PICC lines or do lines
> in
> radiology.  It is all about the money savings.  My vision of the 
> futureis a
> high tech PICC nurse that services every facility in the United States
> that
> is an employee or outside contractor.  High tech does mean US and MST
> 
> Kathy
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Martha Pike
> Sent: Wed 2/1/2006 2:24 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: INS standard # 37
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the long term facility (LTCF)care reality:
> LTCF requests that referral sources send patients with appropriate 
> line for therapy.
> We provide them with specifics in writing.
> Hospital does no discharge planning until day of discharge. (Hour 
> of 
> discharge?)
> Hospital has no early VAD assessment process.
> Neither radiology or the IV Team has staff available to place the 
> PICC stat on Friday afternoon at 3 pm.
> LTCF requests that patient remain in the hospital until the PICC 
> is 
> placed.
> Hospital administration threatens the LTCF administration that 
> they 
> will receive no more referrals in the future unless they take this 
> patient right now.
> (OR in some cases they actually lie about the type of line the 
> patient is coming with.)
> An 83 year old patient with a long history of medical problems and 
> multiple previous IV therapies arrives in LTCF with a peripheral 
> IV 
> for four weeks of vanco and no veins.
> IV gets phlebitic - LTC nurse cannot restart it. They ask the on-
> call 
> IV agency to place a peripheral because they think that will be 
> less 
> expensive. Of course that does not work either and the on-call IV 
> nurse recommends a PICC.
> Depending on coverage, the LTCF may have to absorb the entire cost 
> of 
> inserting the PICC and the cost of the xray, or they may have to 
> absorb the total cost of transportation back and forth to the 
> hospital with no reimbursement. The cost of inserting the PICC can 
> deplete the entire reimbursement they receive from the third party 
> payor for more than a week of the patient's stay in the facility. 
> In 
> some cases they facility will never  break even on this admission.
> So.... LTCFs insist on contracts with the LTC pharmacy provider 
> that 
> includes PICC insertion at a rate that is one-third to one-half of 
> what the pharmacy's subcontractor PICC insertion agency charges 
> for a 
> PICC insertion. Pharmacy has to absorb the extra cost.
> Pharmacy does not want to / cannot afford to absorb the additional 
> cost of ultrasound.
> On-call IV agency would like to use it, but cannot figure out how 
> to 
> get reimbursed - or how to pay the initial costs of buying the 
> machines.Most agencies would need multiple machines due to 
> geographic issues. 
> The "central office" is most often an hour or two away from either 
> the nurse's home or the patient.
> So yes, it's certainly best practice, but there are still many 
> obstacles and it's going to take us awhile to catch up in 
> alternate 
> sites...
> /Martha
> 
> 
> On Jan 31, 2006, at 7:38 AM, Chris Cavanaugh wrote:
> 
> > Great Kathy, but LTC facilities in FL do not ask, some do, and 
> some 
> > may get
> > a line, but I am very busy with those who don't. The company I 
> work 
> > for
> > contracts with over 100 nurses to cover most of the nursing 
> homes 
> > in the
> > state---if I have the US today to place 1 or 2 lines, how do I 
> get 
> > it to
> > another nurse? Or do you suggest they buy 100 of them so we can 
> > each have
> > one? Nursing homes will not even pay an extra 10 cents for a 
> > quality diaper,
> > so I do not see them buying a $15000 US machine, or paying us 
> more 
> > than the
> > $275 to place a line.  Option care is different, smaller 
> territory, 
> > nurses
> > as employees, can go back and forth from the office. We all work 
> > from our
> > homes and our supplies are shipped to us. I am sure we are not 
> the 
> > only
> > group who works this way.
> >
> > Chris Cavanaugh, CRNI
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [owner-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Behalf Of Kokotis, Kathy
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 11:25 PM
> > To: Chris Cavanaugh; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: INS standard # 37
> >
> > Option Care in Sacramento only places PICC lines with portable 
> > ultrasound in
> > the home and nursing home as well as Roger in Las Vegas does the 
> > same.   I
> > can name you many others that have come to the plate.  I am sure 
> > some of you
> > are on this list.   What am I missing?  It is not an option.  I 
> > believe it
> > is all about the patient or am I so wrong. Please don't start my 
> > line.  I
> > personally choose to have all my VAD's done with US, and MST.  I 
> > guess this
> > time Kokotis is controversial.  Sleep on it.  How do you want 
> your 
> > line
> > placed?  Do unto others as they do unto you.
> >
> > As a sidenote those nursing homes should be insisting patients 
> > leave with an
> > appropriate device as they do not get paid for a line.
> >
> > Kathy
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Chris Cavanaugh
> > Sent: Mon 1/30/2006 4:24 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: FW: INS standard # 37
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > That is wonderful for your group of patients in CA, however, it 
> is 
> > not a
> > reality for patients in FL. They get pushed out of hospitals 
> every 
> > day with
> > a PIV, to both home and LTC. Many LTC facilities contract with 
> > independent
> > contractor nurses who work through pharmacies to place lines.  
> They 
> > LTC
> > facility pays the pharmacy, who pays us. They would never be 
> able 
> > to handle
> > the cost increase for US, nor would US be an option, since we 
> work 
> > from our
> > homes and have supplies shipped to us, there is no "central 
> > location" to go
> > get an US machine.
> >
> > Chris Cavanaugh, CRNI
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [owner-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Behalf Of Cole, Darilyn - MET
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 3:43 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: INS standard # 37
> >
> > Our skilled nursing facility and home care companies will not 
> accept a
> > patient with an order like that until the hospital places a 
> PICC, 
> > hospital
> > absorbs the cost.  If a SNF patient needs a PICC after the 
> > admission they
> > call us and we go there to place it, dragging along our US 
> device, SNF
> > absorbs the cost.
> >
> > We place many PICCs for home care patients in our Out Patient 
> Infusion> Center.  Doctors are doing more home referrals from the 
> office 
> > these days
> > but they know that the PICC must be placed in the hospital 
> setting so
> > patient comes here first.  I have a rule though, no line is 
> placed 
> > until
> > home care is arranged.  Learned that one the hard way. We are 
> > reimbursed for
> > this service.
> >
> >
> > Darilyn Cole,  RN CRNI
> > IV Therapy Dept.
> > Methodist Hospital
> > 7500 Timberlake Way
> > Sacramento, CA 95823
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chris Cavanaugh
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 12:08 PM
> > To: 'Kokotis, Kathy'; 'Bev and Tim Royer'; 'CAROLYN'; 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: INS standard # 37
> >
> >
> > In a perfect world, or in a controlled setting like an 
> outpatient 
> > center or
> > hospital, sure all PICC lines could and should be placed with US 
> > and MST.
> > However---what should we do with our LTC and homecare patients 
> who are
> > discharged from the hospital for 5-6 weeks of Vancomycin or 
> other 
> > antibiotic
> > with a peripheral IV?  Send them back to the hospital for a line 
> to be
> > placed?  And who will pay for that?  The nursing home?  
> Insurance? The
> > hospital or home care agency?  The reality is none of the above.
> >
> > Not every patient who needs a PICC line is in a hospital, or has 
> > been in
> > one. We need to stop forgetting about alternate infusion sites 
> such 
> > as LTC
> > and homecare when we get on our MST/US soapbox.
> >
> >
> > Chris Cavanaugh, CRNI
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [owner-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Behalf Of Kokotis, Kathy
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 1:55 PM
> > To: Bev and Tim Royer; CAROLYN; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: INS standard # 37
> >
> > I do not know if anyone read my last paper in the LITE spectrum 
> but 
> > I did
> > address the two papers with looking at complications rates of 
> MST & 
> > US and
> > upper arm placement vs nursing traditional insertions.  How did 
> I 
> > do this.
> > IR used upper arm and MST and ultrasound and nursing used 
> > traditional tools.
> > Phlebitis rates, thrombosis rates were higher for nursing group
> > significantly.
> >
> > If INS does not understand to this day that upper arm basilic 
> > placement has
> > a lower rate of complications and that usage of portable 
> ultrasound is
> > highly recommended and evidence based in the AHRQ government 
> safety 
> > report
> > than how can I defend practice that is so out of date.  I can 
> > defend what we
> > do not easily as INS is not reading the literature
> >
> > My soap box is over.  Get with the times.  By the way from my 
> > figures 45% of
> > PICC lines are placed in nursing with MST and 100% in radiology 
> > with MST.
> > You do the math.  The doctors are right and more patient focused.
> > Ultrasound is used 15% in nursing insertions and doctors use 
> fluoro or
> > ultrasound in 100% of cases.  I don't know about INS but 
> standard 
> > of care
> > dictates the usage of US or MST or all PICC lines should be send to
> > radiology to be placed.  What do you think of that one?
> > kathy
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Bev and Tim Royer
> > Sent: Sun 1/29/2006 10:02 AM
> > To: 'CAROLYN'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: INS standard # 37
> >
> >
> > When looking at this standard it is important to note that
> > Paragraphs II & III A and B which come before paragraph C state:
> > A    "Site selection criteria should be established in 
> organizational> policies and procedures and practice guidelines."
> > B    "Site selection should be determined per manufacturer's 
> > labeled uses(s)
> > and directions for device insertions."
> >
> > To me, as a clinician, I am covered under paragraphs A & B if 
> > placing in the
> > upper arm using ultrasound imaging.
> >
> > Currently there is very little scientific evidence based 
> practice 
> > published
> > on the topic of comparing antecubital and upper placement of 
> > PICCs.  Most
> > manuscripts, address increase in successful PICC line placement 
> > rates in the
> > upper arm using micro-introducer and ultrasound imaging 
> > technology.  Only
> > antedotally is it mentioned that there is a decrease in 
> mechanical 
> > phlebitis
> > and an increase in patient and nursing satisfaction not having 
> the 
> > PICC
> > placed in the region around the antecubital fossa.
> >
> > The use of micro-introducers and ultrasound imaging with nursing 
> is 
> > still
> > only a small percent of the total number of PICCs placed by 
> > nursing.  There
> > are many facilities and agencies that place PICCs using the 
> > traditional
> > approach of sight and feel and place in the antecubital fossa 
> > regional and
> > report that they have good outcomes.  Nurses are good at what 
> they do.
> >
> > Antedotal evidence is OK and is considered but it is not 
> considered 
> > rigorous
> > scientific study.  Outcome data analysis carries a little more 
> > weight and
> > should be published more than it is in this area.  However, like 
> > everybody
> > else in our field, our time is so involved in patient care and 
> > management
> > that publishing is low on our priority list.  Best would be 
> > research in this
> > area involving a more rigorous scientific study comparing both 
> > areas of
> > placement (antecubital fossa vs upper arm).  Again our time is 
> > limited at
> > work and the time involved in getting an approved study through 
> the 
> > IRB at
> > the facilities we work at and the time necessary to carry out 
> the 
> > study is
> > very involved and time consuming.  Nursing Research is not a 
> high 
> > priority
> > for many institutions.
> >
> > We all need to be tracking our data on PICCs and complications 
> and 
> > have the
> > data published.
> >
> > Bottom line here - "The Infusion Nursing Standards of Practice", 
> > revised
> > 2006 edition, cannot put a standard in that is not backed up by 
> > rigorous
> > scientific study even though antedotally we see better outcomes. 
> 
> > It has
> > been published over and over again that nurses can place PICC 
> lines 
> > safely
> > in the antecubital fossa region.
> >
> > Timothy Royer, BSN, CRNI
> > Nurse Manager / Vascular Access / Diagnostic Service
> > VA Puget Sound Health Care System
> > Seattle / Tacoma, WA
> >
> > Disclaimer - This are my personal beliefs and do not represent the
> > institution I work at.
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [owner-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Behalf Of CAROLYN
> > Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 7:40 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: INS standard # 37
> >
> >
> > # 37 Site Selection - Practice Criteria:  II Peripheral-Midline 
> and 
> > III PICC
> > it states:
> >
> > Site selection should be routinely initiated in the region of the
> > antecubital fossa; veins that should be considered for 
> cannulation 
> > are the
> > basilic, median cubital, cephalic, and the brachial.
> >
> > When we use ultrasound we are hardly ever placed in the 
> antecubital 
> > fossa
> > because of the larger catheters being required, increase in 
> > antecubital
> > complications because of movement and of course patient comfort.
> >
> > What are the legal implications of this in court by not using the
> > antecubital for placement?       Thanks
> >
> > Upgrade Your Email - Click here!
> > <? 
> > RunPromo&El=&SG=&RAND=19301&pa
> > rtner=hbtools>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to