Idoneidad de los apósitos de fijación de la vía venosa periférica según el perfil del paciente en urgencias

Abstract

Objectives: To identify the most suitably designed dressings and devices to secure peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) in different types of patients. To evaluate the traction force the dressings could withstand and times they are able to keep the PVC in place in the emergency department. Material and methods: Quasi-experimental descriptive observational study with inferential statistics to compare variables. We studied the designs of devices and dressings for securing PVCs in the emergency department (Omnifix, Tegaderm, Oper Dres, Steri-strip, and stopcocks) and special adaptations devised by the authors: A (Tegaderm), A1 (Tegaderm + Steristrip), A2 (Tegaderm + Oper Dres), B (Omnifix), C (Omnifix doubled). Results: Participants carried out 520 tests on models of human patients to simulate standard, hairy, and hairy-sweaty skin. Costs were as follows: A, 0.15; A1, 0.35; A2, 0.18; B, 0.005; C, 0.01. The times in seconds required to apply the dressings were as follows: (A, 15; A1, 25; A2, 20; B, 20; C, 35). The dressings withstood the following traction forces in grams: lengthwise, A, 760; B, 1694; C, 1530); perpendicular (A, 785; B, 1450; C, 3290), and transversal (A, 760; A1, 1220; A2, 1510; B, 1720; C, 2255). Conclusion: Design C was able to withstand greater forces in the traction tests. Extra surgical tape significantly improved resistance to traction when a stopcock was used. Using a Steri-strip with the Tegaderm device increased resistance to traction, although the improvement was less than that obtained with the Omnifix. The Tegaderm plus Omnifix design was significantly more resistant to traction than the Tegaderm by itself at only a slightly higher cost; the combination design, therefore, may be more recommendable. However, our results for resistance, cost, and application time showed that the Omnifix (desing B) is the best choice for securing a PVC.