Comparison of Traditional and Ultrasound-Guided Techniques for Vascular Access in Patients With Difficult Venous Access in Emergency Department.
NCT ID: NCT07013994
Last Updated: 2025-06-10
Study Results
Results pending
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
Recruitment Status
RECRUITING
Clinical Phase
NA
Total Enrollment
200 participants
Study Classification
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Start Date
2025-06-15
Study Completion Date
2025-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The aim of this clinical trial is to compare the use of ultrasound versus the traditional palpation and visualization technique for vascular punctures, both peripheral venous and arterial punctures for arterial blood gas sampling, in patients presenting to hospital emergency departments. The main questions it seeks to answer are:
Does the use of ultrasound facilitate peripheral venous cannulation in patients with difficult venous access in the emergency department? Does the use of ultrasound facilitate arterial puncture in patients presenting to the emergency department who require arterial blood gases?
The researchers will compare the use of ultrasound with the traditional technique in vascular punctures by emergency department nurses. To determine the differences in the number of attempts needed, the number of professionals needed to perform the technique, the time invested, the pain produced with both techniques, etc., the researchers will compare the use of ultrasound with the traditional technique for vascular punctures by emergency department nurses.
Does the use of ultrasound facilitate peripheral venous cannulation in patients with difficult venous access in the emergency department? Does the use of ultrasound facilitate arterial puncture in patients presenting to the emergency department who require arterial blood gases?
The researchers will compare the use of ultrasound with the traditional technique in vascular punctures by emergency department nurses. To determine the differences in the number of attempts needed, the number of professionals needed to perform the technique, the time invested, the pain produced with both techniques, etc., the researchers will compare the use of ultrasound with the traditional technique for vascular punctures by emergency department nurses.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Patient Experience in Peripheral Venipuncture With and Without Ultrasound
NCT04853290
Peripheral Venous Catheterization
Ultrasonography
Pain
COMPLETED
NA
Pre-hospital Ultrasound Guided Peripheral Venous Catheter Insertion
NCT03709394
Prehospital
COMPLETED
NA
Ultrasound Guided Peripheral Catheterization Increases First-attempt Success Rate
NCT04853264
Peripheral Venous Catheterization
Ultrasonography
COMPLETED
NA
Effect of Ultrasound-guided Insertion on Peripheral Catheters Related Complications.
NCT05284422
Catheter Related Complication
UNKNOWN
NA
Comparison of Different Techniques on First Attempt Success in Difficult Vascular Access Patients
NCT04821362
Vascular Access
COMPLETED
NA
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Introduction It is estimated that 90% of patients attending Emergency Departments (ED) require venipuncture, with short peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC) being the most used invasive devices in healthcare settings. However, there are patients for whom even experienced nurses require more than two attempts to successfully perform the procedure; these patients are classified as having difficult venous access (DIVA). This condition is estimated to occur in 10-24% of adult patients and up to 37% of children. Arterial punctures, often performed to collect blood samples or arterial blood gases (ABG), are similarly common in ED, with first-attempt failure rates reported at approximately 10%.
Failed punctures result in deterioration of the patient's vein and arterial capital, as well as causing pain, stress, and delays in medical care. They also create highly demanding situations for nursing professionals and lead to increased use of human and material resources. To mitigate these issues, certain predisposing factors for DIVA patients have been identified, including obesity, oedema, previous cannulations, and hypotension. Additionally, support tools such as the DIVA scale for pediatric patients and the A-DICAVE scale, validated in 2020 by Dr Salleras, have been developed. The latter is specifically designed for adult patients attending ED. However, no validated scales currently exist for identifying patients at risk of difficult ABG sampling.
Once patients with DIVA are identified, or when difficulties in performing ABG are anticipated, healthcare professionals can employ ultrasound-guided techniques to facilitate these procedures. Ultrasound allows for easier identification of vascular access points, as well as real-time confirmation of puncture success and correct SPVC placement.
Although an increasing number of authors advocate for the use of ultrasound in PIVC placement, existing literature primarily focuses on surgical, anesthetic, or pediatric patients. Consequently, ultrasound-guided techniques are not yet widely adopted, and patients continue to experience the consequences of multiple failed attempts. In the context of ED, studies such as those by Dr Salleras and Rodríguez-Herrera highlight the feasibility and benefits of these techniques. Nevertheless, ultrasound-guided vascular access has not yet been systematically implemented through standardized protocols.
This present study aims to provide evidence on the utility of validated scales for identifying DIVA patients, as well as the benefits of ultrasound-guided vascular punctures in ED. It will consider not only procedural success rates but also the satisfaction of healthcare professionals, patients, and their families.
Hypothesis: The ultrasound-guided puncture facilitates vascular access in patients with difficult vascular conditions, identified using validated scales, who attend Emergency Departments.
Objective: The primary objective of this study is to compare ultrasound-guided techniques with traditional methods for vascular access in DIVA patients identified through validated scales in ED. Additionally, the study will analyze the advantages of incorporating ultrasound-guided techniques into routine clinical practice.
Methodology The study will consist of an open-label RCT to be conducted in Spain, within the ED of a secondary-level hospital. The trial is scheduled to begin in January 2025, with results expected by December 2025.
Design:
The RCT will collect data derived from the procedures performed on patients selected through probabilistic random sampling. The study workflow is outlined in the following flowchart.
Participants The study will recruit DIVA patients identified using the A-DICAVE scale for patients aged \>14 years and the DIVA scale for those aged \<14 years, who attend the ED and require short PIVC or AGB. Inclusion criteria will include signed informed consent and a score of ≥3 on the A-DICAVE scale or ≥4 on the DIVA scale for PIVC.
Sample Size:
The sample size calculation will be based on the minimum sample size formula for mean comparison. Considering data from a similar study conducted in other healthcare settings and assuming a minimal detectable mean difference of 0.52 and a variance of 1.64 ("number of attempts" variable), a minimum sample size of 95 participants was obtained. Accounting for a 20% loss rate, the required sample size increases to 114 participants, with 57 in each group.
For the sample size required for arterial puncture, the calculation will follow data from a study by Género et al, which reported a 34% difference in success rates using ultrasound compared to the traditional technique. To demonstrate a minimum difference of 37% in first-attempt success rates between the two groups, with an alpha error of 0.5%, 90% power, and accounting for a 20% loss rate, the required sample size is 80 participants, with 40 in each group.
Randomization of the Sample:
Random assignment of participants to the Control Group (CG) and the Experimental Group (EG) will be conducted using a simple randomization method. Each participant will have an equal probability of being assigned to either group, minimizing bias and ensuring the equitable distribution of characteristics between the groups. To achieve this, a computer-generated random number sequence will be used. Additionally, random permuted blocks will be created to reduce the predictability of the random sequence, while ensuring an equal number of subjects in each group.
Details of the sample selection, inclusion criteria applied, and methods used for random assignments to CG and EG will be documented. This will ensure participants' right to withdraw their data and guarantee the transparency and replicability of the study.
Statistical Methods:
The data will be analyzed using SPSS software, version 22. Initially, normality tests will be performed to assess the distribution, homogeneity, and comparability of the sample, employing kurtosis, skewness coefficients, and the Shapiro-Wilk test. A descriptive analysis will then be conducted using measures of central tendency and dispersion (SD) for quantitative variables, alongside calculations of the median and interquartile range (IQR). Qualitative variables will be expressed as frequencies (n) and percentages (%).
Subsequently, appropriate statistical tests will be conducted to determine whether the hypothesis can be rejected, analyzing relationships between the different variables. For qualitative variables, the Chi-square test will be used, or Fisher's exact test if values \<5 are observed in the sample. For quantitative variables, the Student's t-test will be applied, or the Mann-Whitney U test in cases where the data do not follow a normal distribution.
In all calculations performed in the study, an alpha error of 0.05 and a beta error of 0.2 will be considered, with a 95% confidence level.
Ethical Considerations:
The study has received approval from the Ethics Committee for Research and Medicines (GASAV/2024/60) and consent from the local healthcare management authorities where the study will be conducted. The research will adhere to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and the World Medical Association's six ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.
The study will comply with the General Data Protection Regulation and Spain's Organic Law 3/2018 on Data Protection, ensuring the confidentiality and anonymity of all participants. The provisions of Law 41/2002 on patient autonomy will also be respected, particularly in cases involving children and patients with cognitive impairments.
Participants will be provided with all necessary information about the study via a Participant Information Sheet and a copy of the informed consent form, which will include the contact details of the principal investigator.
Results Data from the CG will be obtained using the traditional technique, which involves palpation and visualization of veins following the application of a tourniquet to the selected limb for PIVC, and pulse palpation for ABG sampling. For the EG, the ultrasound-guided technique will be employed, beginning with vessel mapping using the RaPeVa technique, identification and measurement of the selected vessel, and an examination of surrounding structures to avoid potential injury. If the practitioner deems it necessary, they may switch techniques, recording the change on the data collection form and accounting for both interventions.
The study design does not allow for blinding of the technique assignment, either for participants or the collaborating nursing professionals. However, an external observer will be responsible for collecting data regarding patient and/or family pain and satisfaction. All data collected will be alphanumerically coded to ensure that analysts remain blinded to the treatment group assignments.
Measurement Instruments
To identify DIVA patients during PIVC catheterization, two scales will be used depending on the patient's age:
* For patients aged ≥14 years, the A-DICAVE scale(11) will be applied. This scale consists of three items: vein visualization (scored 0-2), vein palpation (scored 0-2), and a history of puncture difficulty (scored 0-1). The total score is categorized as follows: easy (0-2 points) and difficult (3-5 points).
* For patients aged \<14 years, the DIVA4 scale(21) will be used. This scale scored 0-10, includes four items: visible vein after tourniquet application (0-2 points), palpable vein after tourniquet application (0-2 points), age (≥3 years: 0 points; 1-2 years: 1 point; \<1 year: 3 points), and history of prematurity with gestational age \<38 weeks (0-3 points). It has been demonstrated that scores \>4 typically indicate the need for multiple punctures to achieve adequate venous access.
To assess the satisfaction levels of professionals, patients, and their families, a 5-point Likert satisfaction scale will be applied. If patients are unable to express their satisfaction, only the response from their family members will be recorded.
Pain assessment will utilize numerical scales (0-10):
* For adults and children aged \>7 years, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)(22) will be used.
* For children aged \<5 years, the FLACC scale (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability) will be applied.
* For adults with cognitive impairments, the PAINAD scale (Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia) will be employed.
Data Collection System
Collaborators will be provided with a data collection form accessible at the point of care. A separate form will be used for each technique (PVC or ABG), ensuring that the data are transferred to a dedicated database specifically prepared for the study. The database will record all relevant variables:
Dependent variables Description Type of technique: Arterial puncture, peripheral venous cannulation with short PIVC Total score in the A-DICAVE scale: From 0 to 10 score in patients below 14 Score in DIVA scale: From 0 to 8 score in patients over 14- Score of every item in the A-DICAVE scale: Score of every item in the scale Success Successful result (Yes/No) Number of attempts: Number of punctures attempts to achieve cannulation Numbers of nurses attempting Number of nurses to achieve cannulation Time taken in the technique: Time in minutes taken for the procedure Cannulation zone Pace of insertion of the catheter (hand, forearm, flexure, arm) Catheter gauge: Measurement in gauges of the used catheter Pain: EAV scales (oriented patient), FLACC (pediatric patient) or PAINAD (disorientated patient) Permanence of the vascular access: Permanence time of the catheter Secondary effects Type of effects (extravasation, phlebitis, obstruction, others) Patient satisfaction: Level of satisfaction ( 5-point Likert scale) Family satisfaction: Level of satisfaction of the family (5-point Likert scale) Professional satisfaction: Level of satisfaction of the professional who applied the technique (5-point Likert scale) Independent variables Description Age Years Gender: Male, female, nonbinary Reason of the consultation: Reason for the assistance according to nursing record Emergency zone: Assigned emergency zone Triage level: Classification SET (I , II, III, IV, V) Predisposing factors of DIVA: Factors such as addiction, obesity, old age among others Procedure variables: Description Type of technique: Traditional, ultrasound guided or directed Tube placement: Longitudinal, transversal, none Confusion variables: Description Medication given :Medication used through the access Dilution volume: Volume in ml of the medication dilution Time of administratio:n Taken time in minutes of the administration Conscience level: Glasgow scale Agitation: Yes/No
Failed punctures result in deterioration of the patient's vein and arterial capital, as well as causing pain, stress, and delays in medical care. They also create highly demanding situations for nursing professionals and lead to increased use of human and material resources. To mitigate these issues, certain predisposing factors for DIVA patients have been identified, including obesity, oedema, previous cannulations, and hypotension. Additionally, support tools such as the DIVA scale for pediatric patients and the A-DICAVE scale, validated in 2020 by Dr Salleras, have been developed. The latter is specifically designed for adult patients attending ED. However, no validated scales currently exist for identifying patients at risk of difficult ABG sampling.
Once patients with DIVA are identified, or when difficulties in performing ABG are anticipated, healthcare professionals can employ ultrasound-guided techniques to facilitate these procedures. Ultrasound allows for easier identification of vascular access points, as well as real-time confirmation of puncture success and correct SPVC placement.
Although an increasing number of authors advocate for the use of ultrasound in PIVC placement, existing literature primarily focuses on surgical, anesthetic, or pediatric patients. Consequently, ultrasound-guided techniques are not yet widely adopted, and patients continue to experience the consequences of multiple failed attempts. In the context of ED, studies such as those by Dr Salleras and Rodríguez-Herrera highlight the feasibility and benefits of these techniques. Nevertheless, ultrasound-guided vascular access has not yet been systematically implemented through standardized protocols.
This present study aims to provide evidence on the utility of validated scales for identifying DIVA patients, as well as the benefits of ultrasound-guided vascular punctures in ED. It will consider not only procedural success rates but also the satisfaction of healthcare professionals, patients, and their families.
Hypothesis: The ultrasound-guided puncture facilitates vascular access in patients with difficult vascular conditions, identified using validated scales, who attend Emergency Departments.
Objective: The primary objective of this study is to compare ultrasound-guided techniques with traditional methods for vascular access in DIVA patients identified through validated scales in ED. Additionally, the study will analyze the advantages of incorporating ultrasound-guided techniques into routine clinical practice.
Methodology The study will consist of an open-label RCT to be conducted in Spain, within the ED of a secondary-level hospital. The trial is scheduled to begin in January 2025, with results expected by December 2025.
Design:
The RCT will collect data derived from the procedures performed on patients selected through probabilistic random sampling. The study workflow is outlined in the following flowchart.
Participants The study will recruit DIVA patients identified using the A-DICAVE scale for patients aged \>14 years and the DIVA scale for those aged \<14 years, who attend the ED and require short PIVC or AGB. Inclusion criteria will include signed informed consent and a score of ≥3 on the A-DICAVE scale or ≥4 on the DIVA scale for PIVC.
Sample Size:
The sample size calculation will be based on the minimum sample size formula for mean comparison. Considering data from a similar study conducted in other healthcare settings and assuming a minimal detectable mean difference of 0.52 and a variance of 1.64 ("number of attempts" variable), a minimum sample size of 95 participants was obtained. Accounting for a 20% loss rate, the required sample size increases to 114 participants, with 57 in each group.
For the sample size required for arterial puncture, the calculation will follow data from a study by Género et al, which reported a 34% difference in success rates using ultrasound compared to the traditional technique. To demonstrate a minimum difference of 37% in first-attempt success rates between the two groups, with an alpha error of 0.5%, 90% power, and accounting for a 20% loss rate, the required sample size is 80 participants, with 40 in each group.
Randomization of the Sample:
Random assignment of participants to the Control Group (CG) and the Experimental Group (EG) will be conducted using a simple randomization method. Each participant will have an equal probability of being assigned to either group, minimizing bias and ensuring the equitable distribution of characteristics between the groups. To achieve this, a computer-generated random number sequence will be used. Additionally, random permuted blocks will be created to reduce the predictability of the random sequence, while ensuring an equal number of subjects in each group.
Details of the sample selection, inclusion criteria applied, and methods used for random assignments to CG and EG will be documented. This will ensure participants' right to withdraw their data and guarantee the transparency and replicability of the study.
Statistical Methods:
The data will be analyzed using SPSS software, version 22. Initially, normality tests will be performed to assess the distribution, homogeneity, and comparability of the sample, employing kurtosis, skewness coefficients, and the Shapiro-Wilk test. A descriptive analysis will then be conducted using measures of central tendency and dispersion (SD) for quantitative variables, alongside calculations of the median and interquartile range (IQR). Qualitative variables will be expressed as frequencies (n) and percentages (%).
Subsequently, appropriate statistical tests will be conducted to determine whether the hypothesis can be rejected, analyzing relationships between the different variables. For qualitative variables, the Chi-square test will be used, or Fisher's exact test if values \<5 are observed in the sample. For quantitative variables, the Student's t-test will be applied, or the Mann-Whitney U test in cases where the data do not follow a normal distribution.
In all calculations performed in the study, an alpha error of 0.05 and a beta error of 0.2 will be considered, with a 95% confidence level.
Ethical Considerations:
The study has received approval from the Ethics Committee for Research and Medicines (GASAV/2024/60) and consent from the local healthcare management authorities where the study will be conducted. The research will adhere to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and the World Medical Association's six ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.
The study will comply with the General Data Protection Regulation and Spain's Organic Law 3/2018 on Data Protection, ensuring the confidentiality and anonymity of all participants. The provisions of Law 41/2002 on patient autonomy will also be respected, particularly in cases involving children and patients with cognitive impairments.
Participants will be provided with all necessary information about the study via a Participant Information Sheet and a copy of the informed consent form, which will include the contact details of the principal investigator.
Results Data from the CG will be obtained using the traditional technique, which involves palpation and visualization of veins following the application of a tourniquet to the selected limb for PIVC, and pulse palpation for ABG sampling. For the EG, the ultrasound-guided technique will be employed, beginning with vessel mapping using the RaPeVa technique, identification and measurement of the selected vessel, and an examination of surrounding structures to avoid potential injury. If the practitioner deems it necessary, they may switch techniques, recording the change on the data collection form and accounting for both interventions.
The study design does not allow for blinding of the technique assignment, either for participants or the collaborating nursing professionals. However, an external observer will be responsible for collecting data regarding patient and/or family pain and satisfaction. All data collected will be alphanumerically coded to ensure that analysts remain blinded to the treatment group assignments.
Measurement Instruments
To identify DIVA patients during PIVC catheterization, two scales will be used depending on the patient's age:
* For patients aged ≥14 years, the A-DICAVE scale(11) will be applied. This scale consists of three items: vein visualization (scored 0-2), vein palpation (scored 0-2), and a history of puncture difficulty (scored 0-1). The total score is categorized as follows: easy (0-2 points) and difficult (3-5 points).
* For patients aged \<14 years, the DIVA4 scale(21) will be used. This scale scored 0-10, includes four items: visible vein after tourniquet application (0-2 points), palpable vein after tourniquet application (0-2 points), age (≥3 years: 0 points; 1-2 years: 1 point; \<1 year: 3 points), and history of prematurity with gestational age \<38 weeks (0-3 points). It has been demonstrated that scores \>4 typically indicate the need for multiple punctures to achieve adequate venous access.
To assess the satisfaction levels of professionals, patients, and their families, a 5-point Likert satisfaction scale will be applied. If patients are unable to express their satisfaction, only the response from their family members will be recorded.
Pain assessment will utilize numerical scales (0-10):
* For adults and children aged \>7 years, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)(22) will be used.
* For children aged \<5 years, the FLACC scale (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability) will be applied.
* For adults with cognitive impairments, the PAINAD scale (Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia) will be employed.
Data Collection System
Collaborators will be provided with a data collection form accessible at the point of care. A separate form will be used for each technique (PVC or ABG), ensuring that the data are transferred to a dedicated database specifically prepared for the study. The database will record all relevant variables:
Dependent variables Description Type of technique: Arterial puncture, peripheral venous cannulation with short PIVC Total score in the A-DICAVE scale: From 0 to 10 score in patients below 14 Score in DIVA scale: From 0 to 8 score in patients over 14- Score of every item in the A-DICAVE scale: Score of every item in the scale Success Successful result (Yes/No) Number of attempts: Number of punctures attempts to achieve cannulation Numbers of nurses attempting Number of nurses to achieve cannulation Time taken in the technique: Time in minutes taken for the procedure Cannulation zone Pace of insertion of the catheter (hand, forearm, flexure, arm) Catheter gauge: Measurement in gauges of the used catheter Pain: EAV scales (oriented patient), FLACC (pediatric patient) or PAINAD (disorientated patient) Permanence of the vascular access: Permanence time of the catheter Secondary effects Type of effects (extravasation, phlebitis, obstruction, others) Patient satisfaction: Level of satisfaction ( 5-point Likert scale) Family satisfaction: Level of satisfaction of the family (5-point Likert scale) Professional satisfaction: Level of satisfaction of the professional who applied the technique (5-point Likert scale) Independent variables Description Age Years Gender: Male, female, nonbinary Reason of the consultation: Reason for the assistance according to nursing record Emergency zone: Assigned emergency zone Triage level: Classification SET (I , II, III, IV, V) Predisposing factors of DIVA: Factors such as addiction, obesity, old age among others Procedure variables: Description Type of technique: Traditional, ultrasound guided or directed Tube placement: Longitudinal, transversal, none Confusion variables: Description Medication given :Medication used through the access Dilution volume: Volume in ml of the medication dilution Time of administratio:n Taken time in minutes of the administration Conscience level: Glasgow scale Agitation: Yes/No
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Arterial Blood Pressure
Difficult Vein Access
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
Allocation Method
RANDOMIZED
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Participants who meet the inclusion criteria will be randomly selected to form the control group, which will undergo the traditional technique, and the experimental group, which will undergo the study or ultrasound-guided technique.
Primary Study Purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Blinding Strategy
SINGLE
Outcome Assessors
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Echoguided technique
Ultrasound will be used for peripheral venous cannulation and arterial puncture by direct visualisation of the needle in the selected structure.
Group Type
EXPERIMENTAL
peripheral venous cannulation with ultrasound-guided technique
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Peripheral venous cannulation with short peripheral vascular access device, performed by ultrasound technique.
Arterial gas puncture using ultrasound-guided technique
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Arterial puncture using a needle and heparinised syringe to extract a sample for arterial blood gas analysis, using the ultrasound-guided technique.
Traditional technique
Vascular puncture will be performed using the traditional visualisation/palpation technique.
Group Type
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR
Peripheral venous cannulation with traditional technique
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Cannulation of a short peripheral vascular access device using the traditional visualisation and palpation technique.
Arterial puncture by traditional technique
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Arterial puncture using a needle and heparinised syringe to extract an arterial blood sample for arterial gamosetry analysis, performed using the traditional arterial pulse palpation technique.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
peripheral venous cannulation with ultrasound-guided technique
Peripheral venous cannulation with short peripheral vascular access device, performed by ultrasound technique.
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Arterial gas puncture using ultrasound-guided technique
Arterial puncture using a needle and heparinised syringe to extract a sample for arterial blood gas analysis, using the ultrasound-guided technique.
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Peripheral venous cannulation with traditional technique
Cannulation of a short peripheral vascular access device using the traditional visualisation and palpation technique.
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Arterial puncture by traditional technique
Arterial puncture using a needle and heparinised syringe to extract an arterial blood sample for arterial gamosetry analysis, performed using the traditional arterial pulse palpation technique.
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Prescription for CIP or GA cannulation.
* Informed consent signed by the patient or patient's representative.
* A score ≥3 on the A-DICAVE scale or ≥4 on the DIVA scale for PIVC.
* Informed consent signed by the patient or patient's representative.
* A score ≥3 on the A-DICAVE scale or ≥4 on the DIVA scale for PIVC.
Exclusion Criteria
* Scores below 3 on the A-DICAVE scale or below 4 on the DIVA scale for PIVC.
* Inability to obtain informed consent from the patient or patient's representative
* Inability to obtain informed consent from the patient or patient's representative
Eligible Sex
ALL
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University Rovira i Virgili
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Mercedes Segunda Peralta Gámez
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Mercedes Segunda Peralta Gámez
Graduate in nursing, master's degree in research in nursing sciences.
Responsibility Role
SPONSOR_INVESTIGATOR
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hospital Emergency Department of the Nuestra Señora de Sonsoles Hospital in Ávila.
Ávila, Ávila, Spain
Site Status
RECRUITING
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Spain
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Romo-Miguel P, Ballesteros-Pena S. Ultrasound-guided puncture vs conventional technique for arterial blood gas analysis sampling in adults: A systematic review. Enferm Intensiva (Engl Ed). 2024 Oct-Dec;35(4):368-375. doi: 10.1016/j.enfie.2023.10.003. Epub 2024 Mar 6.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Tran QK, Flanagan K, Fairchild M, Yardi I, Pourmand A. Nurses and Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Versus Traditional Venous Access: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Emerg Nurs. 2022 Mar;48(2):145-158.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jen.2021.12.003. Epub 2022 Feb 4.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Salleras-Duran L, Fuentes-Pumarola C, Fontova-Almato A, Roqueta-Vall-Llosera M, Camara-Liebana D, Ballester-Ferrando D. Pain and Satisfaction Perceptions of Ultrasound-Guided Versus Conventional Peripheral Intravenous Catheterization: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Pain Manag Nurs. 2024 Feb;25(1):e37-e44. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2023.07.010. Epub 2023 Aug 24.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Osakidetza. Guía de procedimiento de punción arterial para gasometría en población adulta. 2020. Available on: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339483856_ guia_de_procedimiento_de_puncion_arterial_para_gasometria_en_poblacion_adulta.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Kaganovskaya M, Wuerz L. Development of an educational program using ultrasonography in vascular access for nurse practitioner students. Br J Nurs. 2021 Jan 28;30(2):S34-S42. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2021.30.2.S34.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Ocsa C, Gimeno V, Cortés M, Naccarato G, Reinoso G, Nuñez P. Desarrollo de un programa de capacitación en la colocación de catéteres venosos periféricos guiada por ecografía: Experiencia en un hospital pediátrico de tercer nivel. Emerg pediatr. 2024;3(1):44-8.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Amick AE, Feinsmith SE, Davis EM, Sell J, Macdonald V, Trinquero P, Moore AG, Gappmeier V, Colton K, Cunningham A, Ford W, Feinglass J, Barsuk JH. Simulation-Based Mastery Learning Improves Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Insertion Skills of Practicing Nurses. Simul Healthc. 2022 Feb 1;17(1):7-14. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000545.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
McKinney A, Steanson K, Lebar K. A Standardized Training Program in Ultrasound-Guided Intravenous Line Placement: Improving Nurses' Confidence and Success. Adv Neonatal Care. 2023 Feb 1;23(1):17-22. doi: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000969. Epub 2022 Feb 15.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Rodriguez-Herrera A, Solaz-Garcia A, Molla-Olmos E, Ferrer-Puchol D, Esteve-Claramunt F, Trujillo-Barbera S, Garcia-Bermejo P, Casana-Mohedo J. Use of the Ultrasound Technique as Compared to the Standard Technique for the Improvement of Venous Cannulation in Patients with Difficult Access. Healthcare (Basel). 2022 Jan 29;10(2):261. doi: 10.3390/healthcare10020261.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Lam C, Dunstan L, Sweeny A, Watkins S, George S, Snelling PJ. A survey of paediatric difficult peripheral intravenous access in the emergency department and use of point-of-care ultrasound. Australas J Ultrasound Med. 2023 Jul 13;26(3):184-190. doi: 10.1002/ajum.12353. eCollection 2023 Aug.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Pittiruti M, Van Boxtel T, Scoppettuolo G, Carr P, Konstantinou E, Ortiz Miluy G, Lamperti M, Goossens GA, Simcock L, Dupont C, Inwood S, Bertoglio S, Nicholson J, Pinelli F, Pepe G. European recommendations on the proper indication and use of peripheral venous access devices (the ERPIUP consensus): A WoCoVA project. J Vasc Access. 2023 Jan;24(1):165-182. doi: 10.1177/11297298211023274. Epub 2021 Jun 4.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Salleras-Duran L, Fuentes-Pumarola C, Ballester-Ferrando D, Congost-Devesa L, Delclos-Rabassa J, Fontova-Almato A. Development, Diagnostic Sensitivity, and Prognostic Accuracy of the Adult-Difficult Venous Catheterization Scale for Emergency Departments. J Emerg Nurs. 2020 Nov;46(6):827-837.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jen.2020.06.013. Epub 2020 Sep 21.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Salleras-Duran L, Fuentes-Pumarola C. [Ultrasound-guided peripheral catheterization]. Enferm Clin. 2016 Sep-Oct;26(5):298-306. doi: 10.1016/j.enfcli.2015.04.002. Epub 2015 Jun 4. Spanish.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Genre Grandpierre R, Bobbia X, Muller L, Markarian T, Occean BV, Pommet S, Roger C, Lefrant JY, de la Coussaye JE, Claret PG. Ultrasound guidance in difficult radial artery puncture for blood gas analysis: A prospective, randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. 2019 Mar 20;14(3):e0213683. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213683. eCollection 2019.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Rodríguez Calero MA, Miquel Rodríguez Calero CA. Definiendo la vía venosa periférica de difícil canalización y los factores de riesgo asociados. Revisión sistemática Defining the venous peripheral via of difficult canalization and risk factors associated. Sistemic review. Medicina Balear. 2019;34(1):12-2018.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
CAAV/2024/60
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
Single v Dual-Operator Ultrasound Technique for Peripheral Vascular Access in the Emergency Department
NCT02806180
UNKNOWN
NA
Immediate Complications According to Ultrasound-guided Central Venous Catheters Insertion Site: a Non-inferiority Randomized Clinical Trial
NCT02975622
UNKNOWN
NA
Ultrasound-guided Catheterization of the Axillary Vein
NCT01919528
COMPLETED
NA
Nurse-led Placement of Peripheral Venous Catheters in Overweight Patients Using Standard or Dynamic Ultrasound-guided Technique
NCT04412967
COMPLETED
NA
Superior Venous Access, Midline vs Ultrasound IVs
NCT03440944
TERMINATED
NA
Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Peripheral IV Placement With and Without Use of a Guidewire
NCT02422472
COMPLETED
NA
Ultrasound Guided Arterial Puncture
NCT01660724
COMPLETED
NA
Comparison of Ultrasound-guided Versus Blind Insertion of Radial Artery Catheters
NCT01663779
TERMINATED
NA
Peripheral Intravenous Puncture Guided by Vascular Ultrasound
NCT00930254
COMPLETED
NA
Single-operator Ultrasound-guided IV Placement by Emergency Nurses
NCT01439113
COMPLETED
NA
Comparison of the Effectiveness of Ultrasound-guided Techniques and Infrared Illumination, Compared With the Standard Approach to Peripheral Venous Line Placement in People With Difficult Venous Access
NCT06838364
RECRUITING
NA
Ultrasound Guided Versus Landmark Guided Arterial Line Placement by Emergency Medicine Interns
NCT03326739
COMPLETED
NA
Ultrasound-guided Peripheral IV vs. Standard Technique in Difficult Vascular Access Patients by ICU Nurses
NCT03745209
UNKNOWN
NA
Ultrasound Guided Peripheral IV Insertion
NCT03841864
COMPLETED
NA
Ultrasound Guided Subclavian Vein Cannulation at Emergency Room
NCT05107089
UNKNOWN
Placement of Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters (PICC) in Children Guided by Ultrasound
NCT01279642
COMPLETED
NA
Ultrasound Guided Vascular Access in Pediatric Intensive Care Patients
NCT00207883
COMPLETED
Ultrasound-guided Axillary Artery vs Femoral Artery Cannulation.
NCT02801825
COMPLETED
NA
Landmark vs. Ultrasound Guided SCVC in the ED
NCT01914705
TERMINATED
NA
Ultrasound Guided Axillary Versus Jugular Central Venous Catheterization
NCT02624323
COMPLETED
NA
Ultrasound Guidance Versus Anatomical Landmarks for CVC Catheterisation:
NCT03207932
COMPLETED
Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Venous Access Using AccuCath
NCT02469038
COMPLETED
NA
Ultrasound Guided Axillary Venous Cannulation in Pediatrics
NCT02806401
COMPLETED
NA
Placement of Peripheral Venous Catheters Under Echo Guidance in a Post-emergency Medical Service
NCT04856826
RECRUITING
NA
Echogenic Versus Non-echogenic Needles for Venous Access
NCT05045352
COMPLETED
NA