3 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
This is a prospective, parallel, non-blinded, two-arm randomized controlled trial of intravenous catheter failure evaluating the impact of a built-in guide wire. The objective of this study is to demonstrate that the control ultralong intravenous catheter (IV) without the guide wire is non-inferior to the experimental catheter with the guide wire. After obtaining consent, eligible patients will be randomly allocated to control Arm 1 (ultralong intravenous catheter) or experimental Arm 2 (ultralong intravenous catheter with guide wire) in a ratio of 1:1 via a computer-generated randomization schedule. The participants will be followed to collect data until the catheter is removed.
This study is to demonstrate that the control ultralong intravenous catheter without the guide wire is equivalent to the experimental catheter with the guide wire. The hypothesis of this study is that the 6.35 cm 20G ultralong Ultrasound Guided Peripheral Intravenous (USPIV) will have no difference in survival compared to the 5.71 cm ultralong with wire USPIV.
This comparative treatment study aims to challenge a current clinical practice. Specifically, whether the use of ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter insertion results in lower post insertion failure rates with longer utility time compared to peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC) inserted in the standard manner during the emergency department (ED), observation and in-patient stay. There are two secondary aims to the study: a) determining if ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter insertion results in lower post removal complication rates compared to PIVCs inserted in the standard manner; and b) determining if catheter-to-vein ratio can predict post insertion success of PIVCs and what catheter-to-vein ratio is most successful. In this study, catheter-to-vein ratio is defined as the diameter of the lumen of the vein divided by the outside diameter of the catheter.