thank you for the article info!
we are currently using heparin for all central lines
flushes also (Children hospital).
When I took a VAD class about 4 years old (taught by
Marcia Ryder), I think (if I remembered correctly) she
mentioned that hep-locked central lines had lower
infection rates.

--- Nancy Moureau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> What do you think of Darcy Doellman's research
> article in the JPEN that
> showed reduced infection rate with lines flushed
> with heparin vs saline?
>  
> 
> The Impact of Needleless Connector Device Design on
> Central Venous Catheter
> Occlusion in Children: A Prospective, Controlled
> Trial 
> 
> Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, Vol.
> 30, No. 2, 2006 85-90  
> C 2006 American Society for
> <http://jpen.aspenjournals.org/misc/terms.shtml>
> Parenteral and Enteral
> Nutrition
> Susan Schilling, RN*, Darcy Doellman, RN, BSN*,
> Nancy Hutchinson, RN and
> Brian R. Jacobs, MD 
> 
> >From the * Division of Home Health Care, Infectious
> Diseases, and Critical
> Care Medicine, Cincinnati Children's Hospital
> Medical Center, Cincinnati,
> Ohio 
> 
> Background: Intraluminal occlusion is common in
> children with central venous
> catheters (CVCs). Although multiple factors
> predispose CVCs to occlusion,
> reflux of blood is frequently implicated. We
> hypothesized that use of either
> a single-valve or positive-pressure-valve needleless
> connector device would
> reduce CVC occlusion rates in comparison to a
> standard device. We further
> hypothesized that saline would be as effective as
> heparinized saline flush
> in preventing occlusion and infection. Methods: CVC
> lumens were
> prospectively capped with 1 of 3 needleless
> connector devices in a 4-group
> design. Group 1 lumens were capped with a standard
> device, group 2 with a
> single-valve device, group 3 with a
> positive-pressure-valve device flushed
> with heparinized saline, and group 4 with a
> positive-pressure-valve device
> flushed with saline. Data were obtained regarding
> occlusion and infection
> rates and user satisfaction. Results: Three hundred
> sixty children with 599
> CVC lumens completed the study. Complete occlusion
> occurred in 19/150
> (12.7%) lumens in group 1 in comparison to 2/150
> (1.3%) in group 2, 5/149
> (3.4%) in group 3, and 6/150 (4%) in group 4 (p <
> .05). There was a trend
> toward a 2-fold greater infection rate in group 4.
> User satisfaction was
> higher in groups 2, 3, and 4 than group 1 (p < .05).
> Conclusions: CVCs
> capped with a single-valve or
> positive-pressure-valve needleless connector
> device have lower complete catheter occlusion rates
> than those capped with a
> standard device. Heparinized saline flush affords no
> advantages over saline
> in reducing occlusion rate; however, there was a
> trend toward lower
> infection rate with the use of heparinized saline. 
> 
> Nancy Moureau, BSN, CRNI
> PICC Excellence, Inc.
> 888-714-1951
>  <http://www.piccexcellence.com/>
> www.piccexcellence.com 
>  <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Kokotis, Kathy
> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 5:22 PM
> To: Chris Cavanaugh; Denise Macklin; venous
> Subject: RE: Radiology
> 
> 
> Power ports are already being used for CT and MRI
>  
> By the year 2010 all Vascular access devices will be
> power injectable.  It
> will be a standard in the industry
>  
> By the year 2010 heparin for central lines will no
> longer be used.
> Facilities will be heparin free
>  
> But than I believe techs will be cross trained to do
> vascular access
> procedures as there will be no new nurses to end the
> shortage
>  
> Kathy
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
>  
> Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail and any
> attachments are intended only
> for the use of those to whom it is addressed and may
> contain information
> that is confidential and prohibited from further
> disclosure under law. If
> you have received this e-mail in error, its review,
> use, retention and/or
> distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not
> the intended recipient,
> please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
> destroy all copies of the
> original message and any attachments.[v1.0] 
> 
> 
>   _____  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Chris Cavanaugh
> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 7:28 AM
> To: 'Denise Macklin'; 'venous'
> Subject: RE: Radiology
> 
> 
> Denise, you are absolutely correct.  My focus has
> been MRI, not CT, however,
> I would not be surprised that what I have found in
> MRI departments mirrors
> what you have seen.  There are many MRI techs who
> have no idea what a "power
> PICC" is.  There are departments who have no nursing
> backup, techs only and
> they have rules not to touch a central line.  These
> patients will always get
> a PIV, or a butterfly just for the contrast, then it
> is removed.  Some
> departments have radiology nurses who come into MRI
> when needed.  Rarely is
> there an MRI with a dedicated nurse.   When there is
> a nurse, the contrast
> injections, either by hand or power injectors can be
> done through the
> central line.  The nurses do seem more knowledgeable
> regarding Power PICCs,
> in general, though some have never seen one.  I am
> sure the Power Ports will
> never be used-too confusing for staff that do not
> access ports now.  Ports
> are NEVER used for hand or power injection in the
> MRI area.  As far as
> accessing the Power PICC, mostly I have seen the
> connection through whatever
> end cap is on the Power PICC.  Rarely have I seen it
> removed.  I have never
> seen them replaced.  It is also very rare that the
> saline flush of the power
> injector is followed by a heparin flush, I have only
> been in one MRI
> department that had heparin flushes available.  I
> addressed these and some
> other safety issues in my talk at AVA. 
> Chris Cavanaugh, CRNI
>   _____  
> 
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Denise Macklin
> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:39 PM
> To: venous
> Subject: Radiology
> You may respond to me privately, but I bet many on
> the list would be
> interested.  I have found in my travels that
> radiology departments are doing
> many different things when it comes to infusing
> contrast into power piccs
> for CT scans etc.  Some infuse through the
> connector, some take it off and
> mainline, some change the connectors others do not. 
> If you would like to
> share what procedure your radiology department is
> currently using, I am
> putting together some data on this topic.  
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Reply via email to