Lawrence LW, Delclos GL, Felknor SA, Johnson PC, Frankowski RF, Cooper SP, Davidson A, et al.
Infection control and hospital epidemiology. Date of publication 1997 Mar 1;volume 18(3):175-82.
1. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1997 Mar;18(3):175-82. doi: 10.1086/647583.
The effectiveness of a needleless intravenous connection system: an assessment
by injury rate and user satisfaction.
Lawrence LW(1), Delclos GL, Felknor SA, Johnson PC, Frankowski RF, Cooper SP,
Davidson A.
Author information:
(1)Department of Medical Technology, Louisiana State University, New Orleans
70112-2262, USA.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a needleless intravenous (i.v.) connection
system on the rate of reported intravenous-connection-related (IVCR)
percutaneous injuries, and to assess user satisfaction, frequency of use, and
barriers to use.
DESIGN: A pre-post intervention design, with injury incidence rates being
compared 3 years before and 1 year after hospital wide device implementation;
and a cross-sectional descriptive user satisfaction survey.
SETTING: Two tertiary-care teaching hospitals, one general and one pediatric,
located in a large metropolitan medical center.
OUTCOME VARIABLE: All IVCR percutaneous injuries reported to the employee health
services at both hospitals during the years from 1989 to 1991 and 1993.
STUDY POPULATION: Survey participants were selected randomly from licensed
nursing employees at both hospitals.
INTERVENTION: i.v. connection system consisting of blunt plastic cannulas and
compressed latex injection sites.
RESULTS: After device implementation, the IVCR injury rate was reduced 62.4%
(rate ratio [RR], 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI95], 0.27-0.53) at the
general hospital and 70.2% (RR, 0.30; CI95, 0.17-0.53) at the pediatric
hospital. After adjusting for the reduction in injury rate due to factors other
than device implementation, the IVCR injury rate was reduced 54.5% (adjusted RR,
0.46; CI95, 0.32-0.65) at the general hospital and 57.2% (adjusted RR, 0.43;
CI95, 0.24-0.78) at the pediatric hospital. Approximately 94% of survey
respondents (n = 478, response rate = 51%) were satisfied with the device and
recommended continued use. However, needles still were being used for activities
that could have been performed with the needleless system because of
compatibility, accessibility, and other technical problems related to the
device.
CONCLUSIONS: The device was effective in reducing the rate of reported IVCR
percutaneous injuries and users were satisfied with the device, but barriers to
universal use were identified.
DOI: 10.1086/647583
PMID: 9090545 [Indexed for MEDLINE]
