Comparison of the Effectiveness of Ultrasound-guided Techniques and Infrared Illumination, Compared With the Standard Approach to Peripheral Venous Line Placement in People With Difficult Venous Access

Trial statusRecruiting
Trial phaseNot applicable
Trial typeInterventional
Biological sexAll
Age18+
SponsorPoitiers University Hospital

About this trial

Peripheral venous catheterization (PVC) is the most common invasive procedure in healthcare worldwide. Improving the success rate of PVC on the first attempt is crucial for patients, as it impacts pain, anxiety, the risk of extravasation, rapid access to care, and the patient-provider relationship. For healthcare providers, a higher success rate enhances self-confidence and autonomy, while institutions benefit from improved reputation and reduced costs.

In the Poitiers hosptial, one in ten catheters is used in imaging services, with CT scan departments accounting for 66.3% of catheter usage due to iodinated contrast injections. Literature suggests two techniques to enhance PVC success: ultrasound-guided and infrared illumination methods. These techniques appear effective primarily for patients with difficult venous access. Additionally, the A-DIVA clinical score has been developed to predict first-attempt success rates. However, no studies in Europe have compared the effectiveness of these two techniques in imaging settings or based on the A-DIVA score. This study aims to identify the most effective technique for PVC in patients with difficult venous access.

Eligibility criteria

This trial does not accept healthy volunteers

Qualifiers

Patients aged 18 or over

Patient with a CT scan appointment and a medical prescription requiring a peripheral venous line.

Patient with an A-DIVA score greater than or equal to 2.

Patient able and willing to comply with all study procedures.

Disqualifiers

Arm with arteriovenous fistula

Limb with an orthopaedic or vascular prosthesis

Previous mastectomy, axillary lymph node dissection or homolateral radiotherapy of the arm

Paralysed limb

Trial design

Design model

Parallel

Treatments tested in this trial

  • Infrared peripheral venous technique

    Other intervention

    use a infrared device for venous peripheral visualisation and catheter insertion

  • Ultrasound-guided peripheral venous technique

    Other intervention

    Use the ultrasound-guided technique for venous peripheral visualisation and catheter insertion

  • Landmark technique

    Other intervention

    the gold standard technique with observationnal and palpation

Treatment groups

264 Participants
are divided into 3 treatment groups
Group A: Standard techniqueActive comparator 1 intervention
Group B: Infrared peripheral venous techniqueActive comparator 1 intervention
Group C: Ultrasound-guided peripheral venous techniqueActive comparator 1 intervention

Trial outcomes

Primary outcomes

1

The proportion of patients with a successful catheterization at the first attempt

Success of the cathetherization is defined by a functional cathether without immediate complication : absence of pain expressed by the patient, or visible oedema (absence of signs of diffusion or haematoma)

Time frame
Up to 4 hours

Secondary outcomes

1

Proportion of patients with successful cathetherization at the second attempt (in case of failure of the first attempt)

Success of the cathetherization is defined by a functional cathether without immediate complication : absence of pain expressed by the patient, or visible oedema (absence of signs of diffusion or haematoma)

Time frame
Up to 4 hours
2

The number of attempts

The number of attempts will be assessed by the number of breach of the skin barrier by a catheter

Time frame
Up to 4 hours
3

The maximum pain felt by the patient during the attempts

Maximum pain will be assessed using a numerical rating scale ranging from 0 to 10. Higher score stands for a better outcome.

Time frame
Up to 4 hours
4

Overall satisfaction of the patient

Satisfaction will be assessed using a numerical rating scale ranging from 0 to 10. Higher score stands for a better outcome.

Time frame
Up to 4 hours

Other outcomes

Sponsors and contacts

Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.