Safety, Efficacy, and Patient Satisfaction with Initial Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters Compared with Usual Intravenous Access in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients: A Randomized Phase II Study
1
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate whether routine insertion of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) at admission to a hospice-palliative care (HPC) unit is acceptable in terms of safety and efficacy and whether it results in superior patient satisfaction compared to usual intravenous (IV) access.Materials and Methods Terminally ill cancer patients were randomly assigned to two arms: routine PICC access and usual IV access arm. The primary endpoint was IV maintenance success rate, defined as the rate of functional IV maintenance until the intended time (discharge, transfer, or death).Results A total of 66 terminally ill cancer patients were enrolled and randomized to study arms. Among them, 57 patients (routine PICC, 29; usual IV, 28) were analyzed. In the routine PICC arm, mean time to PICC was 0.84 days (range, 0 to 3 days), 27 patients maintained PICC with function until the intended time. In the usual IV arm, 11 patients maintained peripheral IV access until the intended time, and 15 patients underwent PICC insertion. The IV maintenance success rate in the routine PICC arm (27/29, 93.1%) was similar to that in the usual IV arm (26/28, 92.8%, p=0.958). Patient satisfaction at day 5 was better in the routine PICC arm (97%, ‘a little comfort’ or ‘much comfort’) compared with the usual IV arm (21%) (p <0.001). Conclusion Routine PICC insertion in terminally ill cancer patients was comparable in safety and efficacy and resulted in superior satisfaction compared with usual IV access. Thus, routine PICC insertion could be considered at admission to the HPC unit.
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate whether routine insertion of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) at admission to a hospice-palliative care (HPC) unit is acceptable in terms of safety and efficacy and whether it results in superior patient satisfaction compared to usual intravenous (IV) access.Materials and Methods Terminally ill cancer patients were randomly assigned to two arms: routine PICC access and usual IV access arm. The primary endpoint was IV maintenance success rate, defined as the rate of functional IV maintenance until the intended time (discharge, transfer, or death).Results A total of 66 terminally ill cancer patients were enrolled and randomized to study arms. Among them, 57 patients (routine PICC, 29; usual IV, 28) were analyzed. In the routine PICC arm, mean time to PICC was 0.84 days (range, 0 to 3 days), 27 patients maintained PICC with function until the intended time. In the usual IV arm, 11 patients maintained peripheral IV access until the intended time, and 15 patients underwent PICC insertion. The IV maintenance success rate in the routine PICC arm (27/29, 93.1%) was similar to that in the usual IV arm (26/28, 92.8%, p=0.958). Patient satisfaction at day 5 was better in the routine PICC arm (97%, ‘a little comfort’ or ‘much comfort’) compared with the usual IV arm (21%) (p <0.001). Conclusion Routine PICC insertion in terminally ill cancer patients was comparable in safety and efficacy and resulted in superior satisfaction compared with usual IV access. Thus, routine PICC insertion could be considered at admission to the HPC unit.
참고문헌 (14)
- Cleeland CS, "Cancer-related symptoms", Semin Radiat Oncol, 10, pp.175~190 (2000)
- Walshe LJ, "Complication rates among cancer patients with peripherally inserted central catheters", J Clin Oncol, 20, pp.3276~3281 (2002)
- Ng PK, "Peripherally inserted central catheters in general medicine", Mayo Clin Proc, 72, pp.225~233 (1997)
- Lundh Hagelin C, "Quality of life in terminal care : with special reference to age, gender and marital status", Support Care Cancer, 14, pp.320~328 (2006)
- 이국진, "Patient’s Factors at Entering Hospice Affecting Length of Survival in a Hospice Center", Cancer Research and Treatment, 47(1), pp.1~8 (2015), 대한암학회[DOI]
- Llobera J, "Terminal cancer. duration and prediction of survival time", Eur J Cancer, 36, pp.2036~2043 (2000)
- Park K, "Safety, efficacy, and patient-perceived satisfaction of peripherally inserted central catheters in terminally ill cancer patients : a prospective multicenter observational study", Support Care Cancer, 24, pp.4987~4992 (2016)
- 박권오, "Safety and Efficacy of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients: Single Institute Experience", Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care, 17(3), pp.179~184 (2014), 한국호스피스완화의료학회[DOI]
- Yamada R, "Patient-reported usefulness of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in terminally ill cancer patients", J Pain Symptom Manage, 40, pp.60~66 (2010)
- McGee DC, "Preventing complications of central venous catheterization", N Engl J Med, 348, pp.1123~1133 (2003)
- Gunst M, "Peripherally inserted central catheters may lower the incidence of catheter-related blood stream infections in patients in surgical intensive care units", Surg Infect(Larchmt), 12, pp.279~282 (2011)
- Cheong K, "High rate of complications associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters in patients with solid tumours", Intern Med J, 34, pp.234~238 (2004)
- Yap YS, "Reducing the risk of peripherally inserted central catheter line complications in the oncology setting", Eur J Cancer Care(Engl), 15, pp.342~347 (2006)
- Mermel LA, "Prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections", Ann Intern Med, 132, pp.391~402 (2000)