9 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
Emergency Department Patients who were to get intravenous (IV) access through routine medical care will receive it through trademarked catheter via convenience sample. Patient and clinician experience, including adverse events, will be recorded. A standardized data entry sheet will be collected at time of enrollment, and then daily thereafter while the subject has the IV. The data collected will remain anonymous.
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICCs) are frequently used in hospitalized children who require prolonged vascular access; however, concerns regarding their inappropriate use and contribution to serious complications such as central line associated blood stream infection (CLABSI) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) have triggered exploration of safer alternatives. Long Peripheral Catheters (LPCs) have been recently adopted by some institutions due to fewer complications as compared to PICCs. The investigators hypothesize that LPCs could be safer alternatives to PICCs for medium-term vascular access (5-14 days) in the appropriate cohort of hospitalized pediatric patients. The primary objective of the proposed clinical effectiveness pilot trial is to test the feasibility of a full-scale effectiveness trial comparing PICCs to LPCs in hospitalized pediatric patients. The investigators aim to identify a population in which LPCs are safe and effective alternatives to PICCs for medium-term, non-central vascular access; data that will inform the design of a full-scale effectiveness study. The investigators plan to engage patients and families as advisors in vascular access device selection by understanding their experience with vascular access device placement and maintenance. Over time, use of LPCs should result in decreased inappropriate PICC utilization with a concomitant decrease in serious complications such as CLABSI and VTE.
RATIONALE: Giving chemotherapy drugs through an implanted port reduces the need for multiple needle sticks. It is not yet known whether one type of port is more effective than another in reducing infections and other side effects associated with long-term port use. PURPOSE: This randomized clinical trial is comparing two types of ports in patients with cancer receiving intravenous chemotherapy.
In this research study we want to learn more about a study drug, tetrasodium sodium EDTA (Kitelock™) for maintaining the patency (blood flow) through a central venous catheter. Catheter occlusions such as blood clots have been shown to increase the risk of central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI). This treatment consists of instilling a daily a dose of a solution , similar to heparin or saline lock flushes, into the catheter when it is not in use. The aim is to prevent CLABSI without increasing complications such as catheter breakage.
This clinical trial will compare survival of peripheral intravenous (IV) catheters for patients with a standard IV site dressing alone to patients with standard IV dressing plus Adhezion Biomedical SecurePortIV Catheter Securement Adhesive. Emergency room patients who already have IVs may be considered for inclusion. Eligible patients will be approached and, if they are interested in participating, their informed consent will be obtained. Participation will continue for up to 7 days. During this time, the patient will experience: * Assessment of their currently placed peripheral IV catheter, to assess if it is functioning * Assignment to one of two study groups (standard IV dressing or standard IV dressing plus Adhezion Biomedical SecurePortIV Catheter Securement Adhesive). This is called randomization and group assignment is by chance, like the flip of a coin * Daily assessment of the IV catheter and site for complications (such as infection or phlebitis), removal, and medications being administered.
The study will test a hypothesis that the AccuCath™ System will have a higher rate of successful first attempt peripheral intravenous (PIV) placement, higher completion of therapy, fewer complications, longer dwell times, and higher user satisfaction compared to Conventional IV Catheters.
The study will test a hypothesis that the AccuCath™ System will have a higher rate of successful first attempt peripheral intravenous (IV) placement, higher completion of therapy, fewer complications, longer dwell times, and higher user satisfaction compared to conventional IV catheters.
Patients with difficulty intravenous access frequently have delay of care in emergency departments because Emergency Department (ED) personnel could not establish intravenous (IV) access for diagnostic blood test or treatment. The ultrasound machine or near-infrared devices have been used to improve this situation but no study has ever compared which machine is more efficient. This study is designed to investigate whether the ultrasound or Vein Viewer, which is a near-infrared device, is more efficient.
The study will test a hypothesis that the AccuCath™ System will have a higher rate of successful first attempt peripheral IV placement and higher clinician and patient satisfaction compared to Conventional IV Catheters.