You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Research letter
Tape it up: scientific experiment testing the best taping method for intercostal chest drains
  1. Katarzyna Domanska1,
  2. Aidan O'Sullivan2,
  3. Niall Mulcahy2,
  4. Rose Galvin3,
  5. Fergal Cummins4,
  6. Leonard O'Sullivan2
  1. 1 Emergency Department, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
  2. 2 Rapid Innovation Unit – School of Design and Confirm Smart Manufacturing Centre, University of Limerick, Ireland, Limerick, Ireland
  3. 3 School of Allied Health, Faculty of Education and Health Sciences, Ageing Research Centre, Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
  4. 4 Emergency Department, Mid-Western Regional Hospital, Limerick, Ireland
  1. Correspondence to Dr Katarzyna Domanska, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, V94 F858, Ireland; katarzynadomanska{at}rcsi.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2022-213065

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    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.

    Treatment with chest drain fails commonly due to early/accidental removal.1 2 Therefore, securing the drain is vital for success of the procedure.

    This study was designed to determine the most secure method of affixing a chest drain to patients’ skin using a tape (tape used was Sleek tape). Tape is a common type of fixation method for a chest drain but there is no scientific study testing the success rates of different methods. This study aims to fill in this gap in research. Literature review provides a suggestion from BTS (British Thoracic Society) that a ‘mesentery method’ should be used.3 Note that this project deliberately excluded the most common methods of securing chest drain, that is, suture. This was due to designed reduction in confounding bias and testing each material separately.

    This was a laboratory-based comparison …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Handling editor Ceri Battle

    • Contributors AO’S, NM and FC designed and conducted the experiment. KD conducted the literature review, wrote the paper and undertook submission procedures. Professors O’Sullivan and RG reviewed the manuscript and provided advice on necessary changes.

    • Funding This publication has emanated from research supported by Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) under Grant Numbers SFI 16/RC/3918, co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.