MULTIFILE
Introduction: Peripheral intravenous cannulation is the preferred method to obtain vascular access, but not always successful on the first attempt. Evidence on the impact of the intravenous catheter itself on the success rate is lacking. Faster visualization of blood flashback into the catheter, as a result of a notched needle, is thought to increase first attempt success rate. The current study aimed to assess if inserting a notched peripheral intravenous catheter will increase first attempt cannulation success up to 90%, when compared to inserting a catheter without a notched needle. Design: In this block-randomized trial, adult patients in the intervention group got a notched peripheral intravenous catheter inserted, patients in the control group received a traditional non-notched catheter. The primary objective was the first attempt success rate of peripheral intravenous cannulation. Intravenous cannulation was performed according to practice guidelines and hospital policy. Results: About 328 patients were included in the intervention group and 330 patients in the control group. First attempt success was 85% and 79% for the intervention and control group respectively. First attempt success was remarkably higher in the intervention group regarding patients with a high risk for failed cannulation (29%), when compared to the control group (10%). Conclusion: This study was unable to reach a first attempt success of 90%, although first attempt cannulation success was higher in patients who got a notched needle inserted when compared to those who got a non-notched needle inserted, unless a patients individual risk profile for a difficult intravenous access.
MULTIFILE
Background: Ventilation management may differ between COVID–19 ARDS (COVID–ARDS) patients and patients with pre–COVID ARDS (CLASSIC–ARDS); it is uncertain whether associations of ventilation management with outcomes for CLASSIC–ARDS also exist in COVID–ARDS. Methods: Individual patient data analysis of COVID–ARDS and CLASSIC–ARDS patients in six observational studies of ventilation, four in the COVID–19 pandemic and two pre–pandemic. Descriptive statistics were used to compare epidemiology and ventilation characteristics. The primary endpoint were key ventilation parameters; other outcomes included mortality and ventilator–free days and alive (VFD–60) at day 60. Results: This analysis included 6702 COVID–ARDS patients and 1415 CLASSIC–ARDS patients. COVID–ARDS patients received lower median VT (6.6 [6.0 to 7.4] vs 7.3 [6.4 to 8.5] ml/kg PBW; p < 0.001) and higher median PEEP (12.0 [10.0 to 14.0] vs 8.0 [6.0 to 10.0] cm H2O; p < 0.001), at lower median ΔP (13.0 [10.0 to 15.0] vs 16.0 [IQR 12.0 to 20.0] cm H2O; p < 0.001) and higher median Crs (33.5 [26.6 to 42.1] vs 28.1 [21.6 to 38.4] mL/cm H2O; p < 0.001). Following multivariable adjustment, higher ΔP had an independent association with higher 60–day mortality and less VFD–60 in both groups. Higher PEEP had an association with less VFD–60, but only in COVID–ARDS patients. Conclusions: Our findings show important differences in key ventilation parameters and associations thereof with outcomes between COVID–ARDS and CLASSIC–ARDS. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (identifier NCT05650957), December 14, 2022.
