Background: Intravenous cannulation enables administration of fluids or drugs by paramedics in prehospital settings. Inappropriate use and poor technique carry risks for patients, including pain and infection. We aimed to investigate the effect of an educational intervention designed to reduce the rate of inappropriate cannulation and to improve cannulation technique.
Method: We used a non-randomised control group design, comparing two counties in the East Midlands (UK) as intervention and control areas. The educational intervention was based on Joint Royal Colleges Ambulance Liaison Committee guidance and delivered to paramedic team leaders who cascaded it to their teams. We analysed rates of inappropriate cannulation before and after the intervention using routine clinical data. We also assessed overall cannulation rates before and after the intervention. A sample of paramedics was assessed post-intervention on cannulation technique with a “model” arm using a predesigned checklist.
Results: There was a non-significant reduction in inappropriate (no intravenous fluids or drugs given) cannulation rates in the intervention area (1.0% to 0%) compared with the control area (2.5% to 2.6%). There was a significant (p<0.001) reduction in cannulation rates in the intervention area (9.1% to 6.5%; OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.03) compared with an increase in the control area (13.8% to 19.1%; OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.90), a significant difference (p<0.001). Paramedics in the intervention area were significantly more likely to use correct hand-washing techniques post-intervention (74.5% vs. 14.9%; p<0.001).
Conclusion: The educational intervention was effective in bringing about changes leading to enhanced quality and safety in some aspects of prehospital cannulation.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Funding This study was funded as part of an educational initiative and evaluation by the NHS East Midlands (East Midlands Strategic Health Authority).
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval That this was an evaluation was agreed by Lincolnshire Teaching PCT Research and Development subgroup, which oversees primary and prehospital research in Lincolnshire. Research ethics (National Research Ethics Service) approval was, therefore, not deemed necessary. Approval for Research Management and Governance was sought and gained from East Midlands Ambulance NHS Trust. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Centre for Clinical and Academic Workforce Innovation, University of Lincoln.
Provenance and Peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.