Maningo-Salinas, Marie J.

Abstract Background: With the advent and popularity of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) use, reflected in clinical benefits, growing evidence suggests a possibility for significant consequences due to unsatisfactory securement. Such consequences may be avoided if stabilization has been optimal. Novel securement devices have shown effectiveness; however, each device has had its challenges. With the recognized need to endorse an agent aimed at reducing migration, would the use of a tissue adhesive (TA) be a pioneering alternative to securement? Methods: A quantitative, causal comparative, descriptive design was proposed to evaluate the relationship between TA applied at the insertion site and the exposed visible catheter length (EVL), with the intent to determine migration. Two groups were compared, 1 group having received the intervention. Analysis of data quantified the efficacy of the intervention. Results: A 2-sample t-test and χ2 test were used to analyze the variables. Statistical analyses were applied to equate baseline to innovation, encapsulated the solution, and offered a qualitative narrative, presenting a decrease in catheter migrations from 19.35% to 0%; P = 0.010 (FE 0.02), which was statistically significant. No adverse events or central line bloodstream infections were documented in those receiving TA. Conclusions: This study reports TA as a safe, inexpensive, and highly effective alternative to secure and stabilize PICCs. The continuation of the study for an additional 10 months yielded a 1.4% migration rate in more than 411 participants (P = 0.02), which speaks to the continued use and the sustainability of TA for securement and stabilization of PICCs.

Abstract Abstract 4743 Background: BMBX procedures are traditionally performed by physicians, NPs, or PAs using a manual method. It is uncommon for nurses to perform these procedures, and even more rare for nurses to perform them using non-traditional techniques, such as the battery-powered system (OnControl, Vidacare, Shavano, TX). In this study, we report our nurse-led BMBX team experience using OnControl to collect diagnostic BMBX samples. Patient care and safety, team satisfaction, and specimen quality were evaluated. Methods: A team of nurses trained to perform BMBX procedures on sedated and non-sedated patients completed 94 procedures using OnControl and established SOPs. All nurses completed a questionnaire aimed at assessing the patient experience during and after the procedure and overall nurse satisfaction with OnControl. Specimen quality was graded by 3 physicians and compared to 25 specimens obtained by the same nursing team using traditional methods. Bone core specimens were graded based on core length and the presence/absence of artifacts. Biopsies had to be >1 cm or >1.5 cm to qualify good or excellent, respectively. Aspirates were similarly evaluated taking into account the presence/absence of spicules on stained smears. Results: Patient Care & Safety: The majority (86.2%) of patients who underwent a BMBX procedure during the study were outpatients, and minimal sedation was used in 94.7%. Most patients (76.6%) had a prior BMBX using the traditional method. In 94 patients evaluated, pre-procedure pain was 0 (0-10 scale) in 72 (76.5%) while 21 (22.3%) reported pain up to 5 just before the procedure (avg=2). The post-procedure pain score in the same patients was 0 in 78 (83%) and up to 4 in six (6%) (avg=1). No patients had post-procedure bleeding or complications requiring medical care. Seventy patients were reached 24 hrs post-procedure: 33 (47%) reported no pain and 37 (53%) reported pain up to 8 (avg=2.5). Nurse BMBX Team Satisfaction: Team members reported 100% satisfaction with the process of inserting the OnControl biopsy needle through soft tissues and acquiring a core biopsy. The nurses reported having satisfactory control of the depth of needle through the cortex and into the medullary space using the needle guide 95% of the time. Team members were satisfied with the ease of obtaining an aspirate 93% of the time. Nearly all (95%) nurses felt improved ergonomics using the battery-powered driver compared to the manual method. The nurses reported that OnControl was easy to use, with 83% of them obtaining a core biopsy on their first attempt. All nurses indicated they would use OnControl over the manual method if given the choice. Specimen Quality: H&E-stained bone core biopsy slides and W-G-stained aspirate smears from 83/94 specimens collected using OnControl were reviewed and graded. All but two (2.4%) of the bone core specimens were adequate for diagnosis. Of adequate samples, 45.8% were excellent, 12% good, and 39.8% fair. Aspiration artifact was seen in 18/83 (21.6%) of cores, and that artifact was the reason for a downgrade to fair quality in 17/18 (94%). Extra aspirate material for research was collected in 7/18 with fair quality bone core biopsies. Similar grading applied to 25 core biopsy samples collected using the manual method revealed 44% of cores to be excellent, 20% good, 32% fair, and 4% poor. The average core length using OnControl and the traditional method was 1.6 cm and 1.7 cm, respectively. Five of 83 (6%) aspirates obtained using OnControl were poor quality due to lack of bone marrow cells. Of the remaining aspirates, 54.2% were excellent, 20.5% good, and 19.2% fair. Factors related to bedside technique caused a downgrade in 10/16 samples graded as fair and 5/17 samples graded as good. Aspirates obtained by the standard method were graded as 52% excellent, 28% good, 12% fair, and 8% poor. Conclusions: Trained nurses can safely and effectively perform BMBX procedures using traditional methods as well as novel techniques such as the OnControl battery-powered driver system. In the hands of experienced individuals, OnControl can consistently yield high-quality BMBX specimens. Aspiration artifact was the most common flaw found in bone cores obtained with OnControl, but it was usually focal and did not hinder interpretation. When artifact associated with technical aspects out of the control of the BMBX operator was excluded, the OnControl needle produced good-excellent aspirate in 87% of patients. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.