Development of the A-DIVA scale: A clinical predictive scale to identify difficult intravenous access in adult patients based on clinical observations

Medicine (United States)

Volumn 95, Issue 16, 2016, Pages

  Van Loon, Fredericus H J ^a   Puijn, Lisette A P M ^a,b   Houterman, Saskia ^a   Bouwman, Arthur R A ^a,c  

^a CATHARINA HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^b FONTYS UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

^c EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

A DIVA SCALE; ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSESSMENT OF HUMANS; BODY HEIGHT; BODY MASS; BODY WEIGHT; CANNULATION; CLINICAL OBSERVATION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; HYPOVOLEMIA; INTRAVENOUS ACCESS; INTRAVENOUS CATHETER; KIDNEY FAILURE; LOW RISK POPULATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; VASCULAR ACCESS; VASCULAR DISEASE; VEIN DIAMETER; CATHETERIZATION; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; EMERGENCY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FOLLOW UP; HOSPITAL EMERGENCY SERVICE; MIDDLE AGED; MORBIDITY; NETHERLANDS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RISK FACTOR; STANDARDS; TREATMENT FAILURE; TRENDS;

ADULT; CATHETERIZATION, PERIPHERAL; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; EMERGENCIES; EMERGENCY SERVICE, HOSPITAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MORBIDITY; NETHERLANDS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; ROC CURVE; TREATMENT FAILURE;

EID: 84966340147     PISSN: 00257974     EISSN: 15365964     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003428     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Webster J, Osborne S, Rickard CM, et al. Clinically-indicated replacement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;30:4.
2. Rickard CM, Webster J, Wallis MC, et al. Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Lancet. 2012;380:1066-1074.
3. Waitt C, Waitt P, Pirmohamed M. Intravenous therapy. Postgrad Med J. 2004;80:1-6.
4. Aponte H, Acosta S, Rigamonti D, et al. The use of ultrasound for placement of intravenous catheters. AANA J. 2007;75:212-216.
5. Beck RM, Zbierajewski FJ, Barber MK, et al. A comparison of the pain perceived during intravenous catheter insertion after injection with various local anesthetics. AANA J. 2011;79:S58-61.
6. Patterson P, Hussa AA, Fedele KA, et al. Comparison of 4 analgesic agents for venipuncture. AANA J. 2000;68:43-51.
7. Szmuk P, Steiner J, Pop RB, et al. The VeinViewer vascular imaging system worsens first-attempt cannulation rate for experienced nurses in infants and children with anticipated difficult intravenous access. Anesth Analg. 2013;116:1087-1092.
8. Riker MW, Kennedy C, Winfrey BS, et al. Validation and refinement of the difficult intravenous access score: a clinical prediction rule for identifying children with difficult intravenous access. Acad Emerg Med. 2011;18:1129-1134.
9. Au AK, Rotte MJ, Grzybowski RJ, et al. Decrease in central venous catheter placement due to use of ultrasound guidance for peripheral intravenous catheters. Am J Emerg Med. 2012;30:1950-1954.
10. Panebianco NL, Fredette JM, Szyld D, et al. What you see (sonographically) is what you get: vein and patient characteristics associated with successful ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous placement in patients with difficult access. Acad Emerg Med. 2009;16:1298-1303.
11. Stein J, George B, River G, et al. Ultrasonographically guided peripheral intravenous cannulation in emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access: a randomized trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2009;54:33-40.
12. Fields JM, Piela NE, Au AK, et al. Risk factors associated with difficult venous access in adult ED patients. Am J Emerg Med. 2014;30:1179-1182.
13. Bensghir M, Chkoura K, Mounir K, et al. Peripheral intravenous access in the operating room: characteristics and predictors of difficulty. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2012;31:600-604.
14. Yen K, Riegert A, Gorelick MH. Derivation of the DIVA score: a clinical prediction rule for the identification of children with difficult intravenous access. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2008;24:143-147.
15. Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, et al. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162:55-63.
16. Sebbane M, Claret PG, Lefebvre S, et al. Predicting peripheral venous access difficulty in the emergency department using body mass index and a clinical evaluation of venous accessibility. J Emerg Med. 2013;44:299-305.
17. Kule A, Hang B, Bahl A. Preventing the collapse of a peripheral vein during cannulation: an evaluation of various tourniquet techniques on vein compressibility. J Emerg Med. 2014;46:659-666.
18. Nelson D, Jeanmonod R, Jeanmonod D. Randomized trial of tourniquet vs blood pressure cuff for target vein dilation in ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access. Am J Emerg Med. 2014;32:761-764.
19. Loveday HP, Wilson JA, Pratt RJ, et al. UK Department of Health. epic3: national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcareassociated infections in NHS hospitals in England. J Hosp Infect. 2014;86:S1: S1-70.
20. Infusion Nurses Society. Infusion nursing standards of practice. J Inf Nurs. 2011;34:1S.
21. Nashef SA, Roques F, Michel P, et al. European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (EuroSCORE). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999;16:9-13.
22. Bewick V, Cheek L, Ball J. Statistics review 13: receiver operating characteristic curves. Crit Care. 2004;8:508-512.
23. Lemeshow S, Hosmer DW Jr. A review of goodness of fit statistics for use in the development of logistic regression models. Am J Epidemiol. 1982;115:92-106.
24. Steyerberg EW, Harrell FE Jr, Borsboom GJ, et al. Internal validation of predictive models: efficiency of some procedures for logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:774-781.
25. Lapostolle F, Catineau J, Garrigue B, et al. Prospective evaluation of peripheral venous access difficulty in emergency care. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33:1452-1457.
26. Egan G, Healy D, O'Neill H, et al. Ultrasound guidance for difficult peripheral venous access: systematic review and meta-analysis. Emerg Med J. 2013;30:521-526.
27. Sebbane M, Claret PG, Lefebvre S, et al. Predicting peripheral venous access difficulty in the emergency department using body mass index and a clinical evaluation of venous accessibility. J Emerg Med. 2013;44:299-305.
28. Doniger SJ, Ishimine P, Fox JC, et al. Randomized controlled trial of ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter placement versus traditional techniques in difficult-access pediatric patients. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2009;25:154-159.
29. Guillon P, Makhloufi M, Baillie S, et al. Prospective evaluation of venous access difficulty and a near-infrared vein visualizer at four French haemophilia treatment centres. Haemophilia. 2015;21: 21-26.
30. Witting MD, Schenkel SM, Lawner BJ, et al. Effects of vein width and depth on ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous success rates. J Emerg Med. 2010;39:70-75.
31. Gregg SC, Murthi SB, Sisley AC, et al. Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access in the intensive care unit. J Crit Care. 2010;25:514-519.
32. Bensghir M, Chkoura K, Mounir K, et al. Peripheral intravenous access in the operating room: characteristics and predictors of difficulty. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2012;31:600-604.
33. Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med. 1996;15:361-387.
34. Liu YT, Alsaawi A, Bjornsson HM. Ultrasound-guided peripheral venous access: a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials. Eur J Emerg Med. 2014;21:18-23.
35. Moons KG, Kengne AP, Woodward M, et al. Risk prediction models: I. Development, internal validation, and assessing the incremental value of a new (bio)marker. Heart. 2012;98:683-690.
36. Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, Royston P, et al. Prognosis and prognostic research: validating a prognostic model. BMJ. 2009;338:b605.