<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Randomized, Crossover Comparison of Injected Buffered Lidocaine, Lidocaine Cream, and No Analgesia for Peripheral Intravenous Cannula Insertion.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://beckerinfo.net/JClub/2009/04/09/a-randomized-crossover-comparison-of-injected-buffered-lidocaine-lidocaine-cream-and-no-analgesia-for-peripheral-intravenous-cannula-insertion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://beckerinfo.net/JClub/2009/04/09/a-randomized-crossover-comparison-of-injected-buffered-lidocaine-lidocaine-cream-and-no-analgesia-for-peripheral-intravenous-cannula-insertion/</link>
	<description>Division of Hospital Medicine Virtual Journal Club</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:14:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janice Mooney</title>
		<link>http://beckerinfo.net/JClub/2009/04/09/a-randomized-crossover-comparison-of-injected-buffered-lidocaine-lidocaine-cream-and-no-analgesia-for-peripheral-intravenous-cannula-insertion/comment-page-1/#comment-558</link>
		<dc:creator>Janice Mooney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:34:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description>Do you incorporate a pain assessment in your documentation  for your IV starts?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you incorporate a pain assessment in your documentation  for your IV starts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr Kadiyali M Srivatsa</title>
		<link>http://beckerinfo.net/JClub/2009/04/09/a-randomized-crossover-comparison-of-injected-buffered-lidocaine-lidocaine-cream-and-no-analgesia-for-peripheral-intravenous-cannula-insertion/comment-page-1/#comment-128</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr Kadiyali M Srivatsa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 10:38:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description>Intra venous Cannula (IVC) – as well as word ‘venfon’ – is hated by all, especially patients and house officers. The former dislike it because it is painful, whereas the latter are repulsed more by the fact that inserting cannulae on regular basis is such a sub-cortical job (GMC Today). 

Of all vascular access devices, peripheral venous cannula is the most frequently used in healthcare. The number of staphylococcal infection has rapidly increased since 1960s and this trend parallels the increased use of intravenous cannula. This is the only device that can &quot;Save Life&quot;, but must be inserted into blood vessels with care and meticulously monitored. These bacteria are now said to be resistant to biocides used to clean skin which makes insertion a major risk factor.

Doctors and nurses claim the bad veins, dodgy veins, thrombosed vein and so the cannula manufacturers claim doctors and nurses find it hard to locate a vein, but we have found this claim is not true. The number of attempts taken to be successful is 2-3 attempts. Blood collection noticed in the blood chamber in every failed attempt seen in the discarded cannula indicate the vein is punctured.  

These bacteria are commonly carried on the skin around 30% of the healthy people.  Multiple puncture will allow CA-MRSA to enter the vein resulting in phlebitis, septicaemia and death. 

We hope the doctors will organising studies to find the number of attempts taken to insert cannula, infections associated with multiple attempts, problem with ported cannula and the cost of discarded contaminated waste in the hospitals, than wasting time repeating what others have already proved.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Intra venous Cannula (IVC) – as well as word ‘venfon’ – is hated by all, especially patients and house officers. The former dislike it because it is painful, whereas the latter are repulsed more by the fact that inserting cannulae on regular basis is such a sub-cortical job (GMC Today). </p>
<p>Of all vascular access devices, peripheral venous cannula is the most frequently used in healthcare. The number of staphylococcal infection has rapidly increased since 1960s and this trend parallels the increased use of intravenous cannula. This is the only device that can &#8220;Save Life&#8221;, but must be inserted into blood vessels with care and meticulously monitored. These bacteria are now said to be resistant to biocides used to clean skin which makes insertion a major risk factor.</p>
<p>Doctors and nurses claim the bad veins, dodgy veins, thrombosed vein and so the cannula manufacturers claim doctors and nurses find it hard to locate a vein, but we have found this claim is not true. The number of attempts taken to be successful is 2-3 attempts. Blood collection noticed in the blood chamber in every failed attempt seen in the discarded cannula indicate the vein is punctured.  </p>
<p>These bacteria are commonly carried on the skin around 30% of the healthy people.  Multiple puncture will allow CA-MRSA to enter the vein resulting in phlebitis, septicaemia and death. </p>
<p>We hope the doctors will organising studies to find the number of attempts taken to insert cannula, infections associated with multiple attempts, problem with ported cannula and the cost of discarded contaminated waste in the hospitals, than wasting time repeating what others have already proved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

