Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=600 Randomized Treatment

Prospective, Randomized Controlled Comparison of TERUMO SurFlash Plus Versus BD Insyte Autoguard in an Urban ED

Catheters · Catheterization, Peripheral

Enrolled (actual)
600
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Jun 2018
Primary outcome: Primary: Number of Participants With First-skin Puncture Success — 244; 229 Participants

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Terumo SurFlash Plus catheter (Device); BD Insyte Autoguard catheter (Device)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
University of Maryland, Baltimore
Primary completion
Oct 2016

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Number of Participants With First-skin Puncture Success
244; 229
SECONDARY
Number of Participants With Blood Visible at Site of Insertion
8; 92

Summary

A randomized prospective comparison of two FDA approved intravenous catheters in the emergency department setting. The Terumo SurFlash Plus offers novel technologies that promise to increase intravenous access success rates and decrease blood contamination of the insertion site. This study would analyze these properties in our busy, urban emergency department setting where time and safety of intravenous access are most critical.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Adult ED patient requiring an IV for clinical care
  • Hemodynamically stable: pulse >50 and 60
  • Willing to read (or be read to) the informed consent and participate in study

Exclusion Criteria

  • Medically unstable
  • Agitated or psychiatrically unstable
  • Lacking capacity to consent, such as with altered mental status.
  • Unable to speak and read English
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02769442). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search