A survey of the use of ultrasound during central venous catheterization

被引:90
作者
Bailey, Peter L.
Glance, Laurent G.
Eaton, Michael P.
Parshall, Bob
McIntosh, Scott
机构
[1] Univ Rochester, Dept Anesthesiol, Rochester, NY 14642 USA
[2] Univ Rochester, Dept Community & Prevent Med, Rochester, NY 14642 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1213/01.ane.0000255289.78333.c2
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Complications during central venous catheterization (CVC) are not rare and can be serious. The use of ultrasound (US) during CVC has been recommended to improve patient safety. We performed a survey to evaluate the frequency of, and factors influencing, US use. METHODS: We conducted an electronic survey of all members of the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to assess the association between the frequency of US use and hospital and physician factors. All tests were two-sided, and a P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of the 4235 members, 1494 responded (response rate = 35.3%). Two-thirds of the respondents never, or almost never, use US, whereas only 15% always, or almost always, use US. Thirty-three percent of the respondents never, or almost never, have US available, whereas 41% stated that US is always, or almost always, available. Availability of US equipment was strongly associated with US use for CVC (adj OR = 18.9; P value < 0.001). The most common reason cited for not using US was "no apparent need for the use of US" (46%). When US was used, rescue or screening approaches were more common (72%) than real-time use (26%). CONCLUSIONS: The use of US during CVC remains limited and is most strongly associated with the availability of equipment. Screening and rescue use of US are more common than real-time guidance. Our survey suggests that current use of US during CVC differs from existing evidence-based recommendations.
引用
收藏
页码:491 / 497
页数:7
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], EVID REP TECHNOL ASS
[2]   THE SITERITE ULTRASOUND MACHINE - AN AID TO INTERNAL JUGULAR-VEIN CANNULATION [J].
ARMSTRONG, PJ ;
CULLEN, M ;
SCOTT, DHT .
ANAESTHESIA, 1993, 48 (04) :319-323
[3]   Should ultrasound guidance be used for central venous catheterisation in the emergency department? [J].
Atkinson, P ;
Boyle, A ;
Robinson, S ;
Campbell-Hewson, G .
EMERGENCY MEDICINE JOURNAL, 2005, 22 (03) :158-164
[4]   Current practice of internal jugular venous cannulation in a university anesthesia department: Influence of operator experience on success of cannulation and arterial injury [J].
Augoustides, JG ;
Diaz, D ;
Weiner, J ;
Clarke, C ;
Jobes, DR .
JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2002, 16 (05) :567-571
[5]   The accuracy of the central landmark used for central venous catheterization of the internal jugular vein [J].
Bailey, PL ;
Whitaker, EE ;
Palmer, LS ;
Glance, LG .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2006, 102 (05) :1327-1332
[6]   Using the Internet to conduct surveys of health professionals: a valid alternative? [J].
Braithwaite, D ;
Emery, J ;
de Lusignan, S ;
Sutton, S .
FAMILY PRACTICE, 2003, 20 (05) :545-551
[7]  
Burmeister LF, 2003, ANESTHESIOLOGY, V99, P1251
[8]   Ultrasound for central venous cannulation: economic evaluation of cost-effectiveness [J].
Calvert, N ;
Hind, D ;
McWilliams, R ;
Davidson, A ;
Beverley, CA ;
Thomas, SM .
ANAESTHESIA, 2004, 59 (11) :1116-1120
[9]  
CALVERT N, 2002, EFFECTIVENESS COST E, P98
[10]   ULTRASOUND-ASSISTED CANNULATION OF THE INTERNAL JUGULAR-VEIN - A PROSPECTIVE COMPARISON TO THE EXTERNAL LANDMARK-GUIDED TECHNIQUE [J].
DENYS, BG ;
URETSKY, BF ;
REDDY, PS .
CIRCULATION, 1993, 87 (05) :1557-1562