AIM: To investigate patient experiences with peripherally inserted venous catheters, namely PICC lines and Midlines, as well as the influence of socio-demographic variables, length of stay, comorbidity and complications on these experiences.
DESIGN: The study had a descriptive, multicentre, cross-sectional design.
METHODS: We used a questionnaire to investigate patient experiences (N = 359).
RESULTS: Patients experiences were not optimal on each of the items in the questionnaire. Nevertheless, few respondents would have preferred a traditional peripheral venous catheter instead. Moreover, free-text answers indicated that patients were very satisfied with their catheter. Results also indicate that the hospitals have different approach when selecting a PICC line or a Midline as route of choice. The only factor associated with patient experiences was “complications.”
CONCLUSION: Even though patients reported of several disadvantages with the PICC line/Midline, findings indicate that they would have chosen this again. PICC lines and Midlines are beneficial from the patients’ perspective, even though they have disadvantages.
Reference:Leonardsen, A.L., Lunde, E.M., Smith, S.T. and Olsen, G.L. (2020) Patient experiences with peripherally inserted venous catheters- A cross-sectional, multicentre study in Norway. Nursing Open. 7(3), p.760-767. doi: 10.1002/nop2.448. eCollection.