Vein Viewer-assisted Intravenous Catheter Placement in a Pediatric Emergency Department

Department of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Hasbro Children's Hospital, Providence, RI, USA.
Academic Emergency Medicine (Impact Factor: 2.2). 08/2011; 18(9):966-71. DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01155.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV) placement is a common, painful, and frequently difficult procedure in children. The VeinViewer is a device that delineates subcutaneous veins using near-infrared light and video technology. To the best of our knowledge, the benefit of this device for PIV placement in children in the emergency department (ED) has not been studied.
The authors enrolled a prospective, randomized sample of children aged 0 to 17 years who required a nonemergent PIV in a tertiary care pediatric ED. Participants were randomized to standard PIV cannulation (SC) or PIV cannulation with the VeinViewer (VV). The primary outcome measure was time to PIV placement. Secondary outcome measures included number of PIV attempts and pain scores as reported by the child, parent or guardian, and nurse using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS).
A total of 323 patients completed the study: 174 boys and 149 girls. Age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) were not different between groups. There were no differences in time to PIV placement, number of PIV attempts, or pain scores for the overall study group. However, a planned subgroup analysis of children age 0 to 2 years (n = 107) did yield significant results for the geometric mean time to place the PIV (121 seconds [VV] vs. 167 seconds [SC], p = 0.047) and for nurses' perception of pain (median VAS 34 [VV] vs. 46 [SC], p = 0.01).
While no results were significant for the overall study group, subgroup analysis of children age 0 to 2 years suggests that the VeinViewer may decrease the time to PIV placement.

Download full-text


Available from: Bruce M Becker, May 07, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Peripheral intravenous catheterization in children is challenging, and success rates vary greatly. We conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to determine whether the use of ultrasound or near-infrared vascular imaging to guide catheterization would be more effective than the standard approach in achieving successful catheter placement on the first attempt. We enrolled a convenience sample of 418 children in a pediatric emergency department who required peripheral intravenous catheterization between June 2010 to August 2012. We stratified them by age (≤ 3 yr and > 3 yr) and randomly assigned them to undergo the procedure with the standard approach, or with the help of either ultrasound or near-infrared vascular imaging. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had successful placement of a catheter on the first attempt. The rate of successful first attempts did not differ significantly between either of the 2 intervention groups and the standard approach group (differences in proportions -3.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -14.2% to 6.5%, for ultrasound imaging; -8.7%, 95% CI -19.4% to 1.9%, for near-infrared imaging). Among children 3 years and younger, the difference in success rates relative to standard care was also not significant for ultrasound imaging (-9.6%, 95% CI -29.8% to 10.6%), but it was significantly worse for near-infrared imaging (-20.1%, 95% CI -40.1% to -0.2%). Among children older than 3 years, the differences in success rates relative to standard care were smaller but not significant (-2.3%, 95% CI -13.6% to 9.0%, for ultrasound imaging; -4.1%, 95% CI -15.7% to 7.5%, for near-infrared imaging). None of the pairwise comparisons were statistically significant in any of the outcomes. Neither technology improved first-attempt success rates of peripheral intravenous catheterization in children, even in the younger group. These findings do not support investment in these technologies for routine peripheral intravenous catheterization in children., no. NCT01133652. © 8872147 Canada Inc.
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 04/2015; 187(8). DOI:10.1503/cmaj.141012 · 5.81 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Venipuncture is pivotal to a wide range of clinical interventions and is consequently the leading cause of medical injury in the U.S. Complications associated with venipuncture are exacerbated in difficult settings, where the rate of success depends heavily on the patient's physiology and the practitioner's experience. In this paper, we describe a device that improves the accuracy and safety of the procedure by autonomously establishing a peripheral line for blood draws and IV's. The device combines a near-infrared imaging system, computer vision software, and a robotically driven needle within a portable shell. The device operates by imaging and mapping in real-time the 3D spatial coordinates of subcutaneous veins in order to direct the needle into a designated vein. We demonstrate proof of concept by assessing imaging performance in humans and cannulation accuracy on an advanced phlebotomy training model.
    11/2013; 01(01). DOI:10.1142/S2339547813500064
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives In the emergency department (ED), intravenous (IV) catheter placement is one of the most frequent interventions and may be a real challenge in some conditions. Improvement of the success rate with new technology represents a great opportunity. This randomized controlled trial aimed to show the superiority of AccuVein to cannulate veins in adults compared to routine care. Methods After giving written consent, patients were randomized into two groups: routine IV catheter insertion or insertion guided by the AccuVein, which is a hand-held instrument displaying laser light to optimize visualization of veins. The primary outcome was the time to successful placement of catheters. Secondary outcomes included the number of attempts, the rate of failure, technique-related pain, occurrence of movements, and efficiency of IV cannulation as perceived by the operator when using the AccuVein device. Results are given as mean and bootstrapped 95% confidence interval (CI) and percentages. p-valuesof <0.05 were considered significant. Results A total of 266 six patients were included, with 157 randomized to routine cannulation and 115 to AccuVein. Patient characteristics were similar. Time to successful placement of IV catheter (routine, 98seconds, 95% CI=85 to 113seconds; and AccuVein, 119seconds, 95% CI=93 to 154seconds) was not different between groups (p=0.24). Secondary outcomes (failure and pain) did not significantly differ, except for movements, which were more frequent when using the AccuVein device (19.1% vs. 10.2%, p=0.05). Evaluation of the AccuVein by operators was more often negative than positive. Conclusions Use of the AccuVein did not improve IV cannulation in nonselected ED patients.
    Academic Emergency Medicine 08/2014; 21(8). DOI:10.1111/acem.12437 · 2.20 Impact Factor