Journals / Nefroloji Hemşireliği Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 2

Evaluation of Activity Time of Heparin Used in Port Catheter Care

Port Kateter Bakımında Kullanılan Heparinin Etkinlik Süresinin Değerlendirilmesi/ Evaluation of Activity Time of Heparin Used in Port Catheter Care

Pages
47–56
Publication Date
2022-05-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

After the port catheter care, heparin concentrations (mean: 55.72 IU/ml) did not decrease significantly in the third week, while heparin concentrations (mean: 39.75 IU/ml) in the sixth week showed a significant decrease.Conclusion: It can be suggested that the effectiveness of heparin used in venous port catheter care continues at the end of the sixth week and it is appropriate to perform port maintenance every six weeks.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The study aims to determine the duration of the activity of the heparin, which is used in theport catheter care in the catheter.Materials and Methods: The study was carried out in a single-group pretest-posttest design.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The universe of the study consisted of 56 cancer patients who applied to the outpatient chemotherapy unit of a university hospital for port catheter care between October 2019 and October 2020.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:After the port catheter care, heparin concentrations (mean: 55.72 IU/ml) did not decrease significantly in the third week, while heparin concentrations (mean: 39.75 IU/ml) in the sixth week showed a significant decrease.Conclusion: It can be suggested that the effectiveness of heparin used in venous port catheter care continues at the end of the sixth week and it is appropriate to perform port maintenance every six weeks.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2019 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Heparin · heparin etkinlik süresi · port kateter

Abstract

Aim: The study aims to determine the duration of the activity of the heparin, which is used in theport catheter care in the catheter.Materials and Methods: The study was carried out in a single-group pretest-posttest design. The universe of the study consisted of 56 cancer patients who applied to the outpatient chemotherapy unit of a university hospital for port catheter care between October 2019 and October 2020. During this period, 13 patients were excluded from the study, and the study was completed with 43 patients. After the port catheter care was performed with heparin/saline (100IU/ml), the heparin/saline amounts in the samples aspirated through the port catheter were compared at the end of the third and sixth weeks after the port catheter care. The first heparin/saline (100IU/ml) amount prepared was accepted as the pre-test value, and the heparin/saline amounts measured at the end of the third and sixth weeks were evaluated as the post-test. The data of our study were made using the GraphPad Prism7 package program. One Way ANOVA was used to determine the differences between the groups, Dunnett's multiple comparison test was used for multiple comparisons, descriptive statistics and frequency tables were used to analyze demographic data.Results: Twenty (46.5%) of the patients were male and 23 (53.5%) were female. The mean duration of the port catheter use is 4.62±2.69 years. The 35.3% of the individuals with chronic disease had hypertension (n=6), 35.3% (n=6) had diabetes mellitus, and 20.9% (n=9) of patients uses anticoagulant medication. After the port catheter care, heparin concentrations (mean: 55.72 IU/ml) did not decrease significantly in the third week, while heparin concentrations (mean: 39.75 IU/ml) in the sixth week showed a significant decrease.Conclusion: It can be suggested that the effectiveness of heparin used in venous port catheter care continues at the end of the sixth week and it is appropriate to perform port maintenance every six weeks.

Özet

Amaç: Bu alışmanın amacı, port kateter bakımında kullanılan heparinin kateter içerisindeki etkinlik süresinin belirlenmesidir.Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışma, tek gruplu ön test-son test desende yapılmıştır. Çalışmanın evrenini; Ekim 2019- Ekim 2020 tarihleri arasında bir üniversite hastanesinin ayaktan kemoterapi ünitesine port kateter bakımı için başvuran 56 kanser hastası oluşturmuştur. Çalışma süresi içinde 13 hasta çalışma dışı bırakılmış ve çalışma 43 hasta ile tamamlanmıştır. Port kateter bakımı heparin/salin (100IU/ml) ile yapıldıktan sonra, port kateter bakımı sonrası üçüncü ve altıncı hafta sonunda, port kateter içinden aspire edilen örneklerdeki heparin/salin miktarları karşılaştırılmıştır. Hazırlanan ilk heparin/salin (100IU/ml) miktarı ön test l değeri olarak kabul edilmiş olup, üçüncü ve altıncı hafta sonunda ölçülen heparin/salin miktarları son test olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışmamızın verileri, GraphPad Prism7 paket programı kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Gruplar arasındaki farklılıkların belirlenmesinde One Way ANOVA ve çoklu karşılaştırmalarda Dunnett’s çoklu karşılaştırma testi, demografik verilerin incelenmesinde tanımlayıcı istatistikler ve frekans tabloları kullanılmıştır.Bulgular: Hastaların 20’si (%46,5) erkek, 23’ü (%53,5) kadındır. Port kateter kullanım süresi ortalama 4,62±2,69 yıldır. Kronik hastalığı bulunan bireylerin %35,3’ünde (n=6) hipertansiyon, %35,3’ünde (n=6) diyabetes mellitus bulunmaktadır ve hastaların %20,9’u (n=9) antikoagülan ilaç kullanmaktadır. Port kateter bakımı sonrasında üçüncü hafta heparin derişimleri (ortalama: 55,72 IU/ml) anlamlı bir azalış göstermezken, altıncı hafta heparin derişimleri (ortalama: 39,75 IU/ml) anlamlı oranda düşüş göstermiştir.Sonuç: Venöz port kateter bakımında kullanılan heparinin etkinliğinin altıncı haftanın sonunda devam ettiği ve port bakımının altı haftada bir yapılmasının uygun olduğu önerilebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

SARI, A., SEZER, T., BÖLÜKBAŞI, S. Ş., SEVİMLİGÜL, G., KILIÇ, S., YILDIZ, S., YÜCEL, B. (2022). Evaluation of Activity Time of Heparin Used in Port Catheter Care. Nefroloji Hemşireliği Dergisi, Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 2, 47–56. https://ajindex.com/articles/401532

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (5)

  1. Green E, Macartney G, et al. Managing central venous access devices in cancerpatients: A clinical practice guideline. CONJ/RCSIO-2008. doi: 10.5737/1181912x18219
  2. Carlo JT, Lamont JP, McCarty TM, Livingston S, Kuhn JA. A prospective randomized trial demonstrating valved implantable ports have fewer complications and lower overall cost than nonvalved implantable ports. The American Journal of Surgery. 2004;188(6):722-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2004.08.041
  3. Kaygın MA, Dağ Ö, Güneş M, Şenocak M, Erkut B. Malign hastalarda intravenöz port kullanımı: 5 yıllık klinik deneyim. Selçuk Tıp Dergisi. 2012;28(1):17-21
  4. Hancock-Howard R, Connolly BL, McMahon M, Menon A, Woo G, Wales PW, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of implantable venous access device insertion using interventional radiologic versus conventional operating room methods in pediatric patients with cancer. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. 2010;21(5):677-84. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2010.01.014 5. LaRoy JR, White SB, Jayakrishnan T, Dybul S, Ungerer D, Turaga K, et al. Cost and morbidity analysis of chest port insertion: interventional radiology suite versus operating room. Journal of the American College of Radiology. 2015;12(6):563-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.01.012 6. Sticca RP, Dewing BD, Harris JD. Outcomes of surgical and radiologic placed implantable central venous access ports. The American journal of surgery. 2009;198(6):829-33. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.04.031 7. Özer AB, Bayar MK. İmplante edilebilir venöz port kateter uygulamalarımızın incelenmesi. Fırat Tıp Dergisi. 2011;16(1):6-10
  5. Güven C. Subkutan venöz port katater uygulamalarımızın değerlendirilmesi: 6 yıllık klinik tecrübemiz. ADYÜ Sağlık Bilimleri Derg. 2020;6(1):29-40. doi: 10.30569.adiyamansaglik.624148 9. Özdemir NY, Abalı H, Öksüzoğlu B, Budakoğlu B, Akmangit İ, Zengin N. It appears to be safe to start chemotherapy on the day of implantation through subcutaneous venous port catheters in inpatient setting. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2009;17(4):399-403. doi: 10.1007/s00520-008-0498-x 10. Ullman AJ, Marsh N, Mihala G, Cooke M, Rickard CM. Complications of central venous access devices: A systematic review. Pediatrics. 2015;136(5):e1331-44. doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-1507 11. McGee DC, Gould MK. Preventing complications of central venous catheterization. New England Journal of Medicine. 2003;348(12):1123-33. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra011883 12. Nelson BE, Mayer AR, Tseng PC, Schwartz PE. Experience with the intrave