Forum topic

It takes some getting used to, but using peripheral StatLocks is not any more difficult than using them on PICCs once you get the hang of it.

At my facility we have been using the Nexiva along with the Tegaderm IV dressing for 10 or 11 months. The "stabilization platform" and the ability of the Tegaderm IV dressing to wrap around the catheter tubing was sold as securement by BD. I also place the tape strip (on the Tegaderm IV card) across the stabilization platform for additional securement.

I find the ease of use of Nexiva to be exceptional. The closed system is wonderful for preventing blood exposure. The problem with dried blood at the catheter hub/extension tubing is eliminated since it is one piece. I can easily change the cap (and clean the connection site with the Site Scrub) if I find dried blood. A blood draw with the IV insertion is much easier and neater. I don't like the Q-site caps because they are not a flat surface. We justified the cost of the Nexiva by eliminating the Stat Lock in our IV start kits. Dwell time is equal to dwell times when using the BD Autoguard. Another benefit is the passive safety feature of the Nexiva. 

That being said, intermittently for the first six months, staff complained that they were unsuccessful using the Nexiva. My insertion technique did not change and I found the transition from the Autoguard to the Nexiva very smooth. 

We have been using the statlock IV in our peds facility for about 2 years. It is highly effective and just requires a little instruction  and patience on the learning curve like anything else new. I do not find it requires a lot of manipulation once you become comfortable with it and the improved outcomes are worth the learning period.

Holly Hess

Anyone IV clinician who has ever used a stat lock knows how damaging to the skin they are even if you follow the directions for removal. Any device that tells you that one must use alcohol to remove it cannot be Skin Friendly.  While the securement is good now comes along these IV dressings named Advanced Securement to follow the Nexiva platform. Without any hesitation, IV teams should trial these dressings as the securement is equal to a stat lock without hurting the skin upon removal. Ease of removal is superior and patients claim they are much more comfortable.

For years Bard has offered up the July/August 2006 Dr. Shears Journal of Infusion Nursing study as proof that using a securement device reduces catheter re-starts from around 70% to 16.6%. There is no reason to think that these new IV advanced securement dressings will be any different. The problem is that most hospitals do Not track catheter restarts, the major cause of phelbitis, infiltration and infection so they have no idea whether Dr. Shears 70% catheter restart rate percentage is correct or not when using just tape to secure a peripheral IV. Unfortunately it seems many hospitals choose to ignore what catheter restarts are really costing them and at a time when they are pressing everyone for cost savings.

I am of the opinion that using a peripheral stat lock is simply overkill especially when you now have these new IV securement dressings that hold very well, can help reduce infiltation and phlebitis and are easy on the skin. Don't be an ostrich and stick your head in the sand on this product as it is a winner whether you like Nexiva or not.

LIP 

Tulane