Central venous Access device SeCurement And Dressing Effectiveness for peripherally inserted central catheters in adult acute hospital patients (CASCADE): a pilot randomised controlled trial

Trials. 2017 Oct 4;18(1):458. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2207-x.

Abstract

Background: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are commonly used for delivering intravenous therapy. PICC failure is unacceptably high (up to 40%) due to mechanical, infectious and thrombotic complications. Poor securement potentiates all complication types. This randomised controlled trial (RCT) aimed to examine the feasibility of a large RCT of four dressing and securement methods to prevent PICC failure.

Methods: This single-centre pilot RCT included 124 admitted medical/surgical/cancer patients aged ≥ 16 years with a PICC. Interventions were: (i) standard polyurethane dressing and sutureless securement device (SPU + SSD, control); (ii) polyurethane with absorbent lattice pad dressing (PAL + Tape); (iii) combination securement-dressing (CSD); and (iv) tissue adhesive (TA + SPU). All groups except TA + SPU had a chlorhexidine-gluconate (CHG) impregnated disc. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment and safety/acceptability of the interventions. The primary outcome was PICC failure, a composite of PICC removal for local infection, catheter-associated bloodstream infection, dislodgement, occlusion, and/or catheter fracture. Secondary outcomes included individual complications, dressing failure and dwell time, PICC dwell time, skin complications/phlebitis indicators, product costs, and patient and staff satisfaction. Qualitative feedback was also collected.

Results: PICC failure incidence was: PAL + CHG + Tape (1/5; 20%; 17.4/1000 days), SPU + SSD + CHG (control) (4/39; 10%; 9.0/1000 days), TA + SPU (3/35; 9%; 9.6/1000 days), and CSD + CHG (3/42; 7%; 9.4/1000 days). Recruitment to PAL + CHG + Tape was ceased after five participants due to concerns of PICC dislodgement when removing the dressing. CSD + CHG, TA + SPU (TA applied only at PICC insertion time), and control treatments were acceptable to patients and health professionals.

Conclusion: A large RCT of CSD + CHG and TA + SPU (but not PAL + CHG + Tape) versus standard care is feasible.

Trial registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12616000027415 . Registered on 15 January 2016.

Keywords: Catheterization; Central venous; Complications; Dressing and securement methods; Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC); Randomised controlled trials; Vascular access devices.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Anti-Infective Agents, Local / therapeutic use
  • Attitude of Health Personnel
  • Bandages* / adverse effects
  • Catheter Obstruction
  • Catheter-Related Infections / diagnosis
  • Catheter-Related Infections / microbiology
  • Catheter-Related Infections / prevention & control
  • Catheterization, Central Venous / adverse effects
  • Catheterization, Central Venous / instrumentation*
  • Catheterization, Peripheral / adverse effects
  • Catheterization, Peripheral / instrumentation*
  • Catheters, Indwelling*
  • Central Venous Catheters*
  • Chlorhexidine / analogs & derivatives
  • Chlorhexidine / therapeutic use
  • Device Removal
  • Equipment Design
  • Feasibility Studies
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Inpatients*
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Patient Satisfaction
  • Pilot Projects
  • Polyurethanes
  • Queensland
  • Time Factors
  • Tissue Adhesives / adverse effects
  • Tissue Adhesives / therapeutic use*
  • Treatment Failure

Substances

  • Anti-Infective Agents, Local
  • Polyurethanes
  • Tissue Adhesives
  • chlorhexidine gluconate
  • Chlorhexidine