| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2022 | Volume
: 17
| Issue : 3 | Page : 705-708 |
|
|
Comparative evaluation of bacterial growth following removal of peripheral intravenous cannula inserted in an emergency room and in aseptic condition: A prospective randomized double-blind study
Srivalli Natarajan, Pradeep Vathare, Usha Asnani, Sushrut Vaidya, Padmakar Baviskar, Ruchita Balkawade
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, MGM Dental College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Pradeep Vathare
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, MGM Dental College and Hospital, Sector-1, Kamothe, Navi Mumbai - 410 209, Maharashtra
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/jdmimsu.jdmimsu_238_20
|
|
|
Context: Approximately 60% of hospital inpatients annually undergo peripheral intravenous cannulation to receive therapeutic intravenous (IV) medication. About 6.2% of hospital-acquired bacteremia may be directly attributable to peripheral IV cannulation. The setting in which the PICs are inserted may influence the microbial flora around the site of insertion. Aims: The study aims to evaluate and compare the incidence of bacterial growth and assess the local complications like cellulitis and phlebitis following removal of PIC inserted in an emergency room and in aseptic condition. Settings and Design: This was a prospective randomized double-blind Study. Materials and Methods: A total of 50 subjects (Group A n = 25 and Group B n = 25) were randomly divided and evaluated for the incidence of bacterial growth and assessing the cellulitis and phlebitis. Group A underwent removal of PIC inserted in aseptic condition after 72–96 h and Group B underwent removal of PIC inserted in the emergency room after 72–96 h. Statistical Analysis Used: Unpaired t-test and Chi-square test were used for statistical analysis. Results: No (0%) subjects had bacterial growth in Group A and 2 (8%) subjects in Group B had bacterial growth, but the difference was not found to be statistically significant (P = 0.149). On comparison, cellulitis and phlebitis were absent in both the groups. Conclusions: The incidence of bacterial growth and the local complications like cellulitis and phlebitis following removal of PIC inserted in the emergency room and in aseptic condition was nominal. However, strict aseptic precautions should always be followed while inserting a foreign object into the circulatory system.
|
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
