Venous International Assessment, VIA Scale, Validated Classification Procedure for the Peripheral Venous System

Abstract

The VIA scale is a simple, easy and practical method for classification of the peripheral venous system in terms of vascular access. The practical application of our VIA scale significantly increases the quality of life of patients by increasing the chances of successful venipuncture and cannulation and thus reducing the risk of extravasation and material costs, allowing both an economical and a safe venous assessment tool.

Peripheral intravenous catheter difficulty – A clinical survey of registered nurse and critical care nurse performance

“…In the present study, both groups indicated that the most common problem associated with the performance of PIVC was minimal thin veins. This is consistent with earlier research, which found that visible palpable veins are strong predictors of success with PIVC (Carr 2015, Sebbane et al., ; de la Torre‐Montero et al., ). Hence, in our study, the RNs indicated that the veins were invisible to a significantly higher extent than CCNs.…”

“…According to Lamperti and Pittiruti (), it is crucial to locate and map all superficial veins to promote success with PIVC. Tools have been developed for classifying the level of difficulty according to the quality of the veins (de la Torre‐Montero et al., ), such as categorising veins as good, fair or poor (Webster, Morris, Robinson, & Sanderson, ). Various methods have been introduced to map the veins and promote successful PIVC, such as near‐infrared technology (NIR).…”

Translation and Validation of the Modified A-DIVA Scale to European Portuguese: Difficult Intravenous Access Scale for Adult Patients

“…Construct validity was assessed through convergent and correlational analysis. Convergent validity was assessed using the ENAV scale since it aims to measure the same latent construct as the A-DM scale [ 14 , 20 ]. Both scales correlated significantly with a magnitude of 0.739 ( p < 0.001), attesting to its convergent validity.…”

“…Several variables were collected throughout the study, including patient-related variables (e.g., age, gender, visible vein diameter in millimeters, and body mass index), procedure-related outcomes (e.g., PIVC caliber, time for catheter insertion in minutes, first-attempt success, number of puncture attempts, and complications), and nurse-reported ease of puncture (in Likert scale format, between 1—“not at all difficult” and 7—“extremely difficult”). Moreover, each nurse also scored the Venous International Assessment (VIA) scale [ 20 ] which is also undergoing a translation and validation process to the Portuguese population (hereby referred to as ENAV scale). The ENAV is a “performance status tool” [ 20 ] that allows healthcare professionals to classify the patient’s peripheral intravenous access in five grades based on three comprehensive parameters: (i) the number of observable puncture points; (ii) PIVC size and ease of performing venipuncture; and (iii) risk of extravasation or phlebitis [ 20 ].…”

“…Moreover, each nurse also scored the Venous International Assessment (VIA) scale [ 20 ] which is also undergoing a translation and validation process to the Portuguese population (hereby referred to as ENAV scale). The ENAV is a “performance status tool” [ 20 ] that allows healthcare professionals to classify the patient’s peripheral intravenous access in five grades based on three comprehensive parameters: (i) the number of observable puncture points; (ii) PIVC size and ease of performing venipuncture; and (iii) risk of extravasation or phlebitis [ 20 ]. The risk of difficult intravenous access progressively increases in accordance to each grade.…”