Ultrasound-guidance vs. standard technique in difficult vascular access patients by ED technicians

The effect of vessel depth, diameter, and location on ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter longevity

“…In one study comparing the two techniques, 74% of USGPIVs were 3 placed in the basilic or brachial vein; whereas 86% of traditionally placed IVs were placed in the forearm, hand, or antecubital fossa. 10 Catheters that have to traverse through more subcutaneous tissue or are in atypical locations may be more likely to kink or dislodge suggesting the hypothesis that IV durability is affected by the characteristics of the vessel being cannulated. By analyzing the outcomes of IVs placed under ultrasound guidance, the current study set out to determine the influence of vessel depth, diameter, and location on IV longevity.…”

A Comparative Study on Ultrasound–guided Peripheral Intravenous Access Versus Traditional Blind Percutaneous Approach in Patients With Difficult Intravenous Access

“…Prevalence of obesity in other studies has been reported between 29.4%. [8] and 41.8%. [3] The prevalence of obesity as a major reason for difficult intravenous access may vary from centre to centre and would affect the results in other settings.…”

“…Successful cannulation rates were similar for both traditional and ultrasound-guided approaches; however, US-guided approach was twice as faster, required lesser nurse or doctor intervention, was met with fewer complications and attempts with improved patient satisfaction as compared to the control group. [8] Similarly, Brannam. [10] performed a prospective, observational study in 321 difficult-to-stick patients.…”

“…Studies comparing ultrasound-guided IV access with the traditional blind technique have found that ultrasound-guided IV access was more successful, required less time, reduced number of needle punctures and improved patient satisfaction. [6,7,8] Keyes and Coworkers. [9] evaluated an US-guided approach to percutaneous deep brachial vein or basilic vein cannulation in 101 Emergency Department (ED) patients with difficult IV access.…”

Epert Consensus on a Canadian Internal Medicine Ultrasound Curriculum

“…Three Delphi rounds were conducted to reach a consensus. These 16 topics included measurement of the height of the internal jugular vein, 29,30 inferior vena cava measurement, 31,32 pleural effusion and thoracentesis, 8,33,34 central line insertion and pneumothorax, 3,6,7,35,36 liver and spleen examination, 2,37 ascites and paracentesis, 9,38 the bladder, 14,39,40 cellulitis/abscess/aspirates, 41,42 arterial line insertion, 43 peripheral intravenous access, 44,45 and joint aspiration. 10 Although the evidence for the role of ultrasound in establishing peripheral intravenous access in adults is not as consistent as that in pediatric patients, 46 the group felt that learning this skill is unlikely to be harmful and may improve the care of patients.…”