Cited by 43Central Venous Catheters and HemodialysisVascular Procedures and ComplicationsDialysis and Renal Disease Management

CANNULATION PRACTICE PATTERNS IN HAEMODIALYSIS VASCULAR ACCESS: PREDICTORS FOR UNSUCCESSFUL CANNULATION

Van Loon, Magda M., Kessel, Alphons G.H., Van Der Sande, Frank M., Tordoir, Jan H.M.·2009·Journal of Renal Care

Abstract

SUMMARY: Background: Little is known about the relationship of cannulation practices in dialysis facilities with the frequency of failed cannulations, complications and subsequent vascular access (VA) failure. Methods: In an observational study the incidence of mis‐cannulations and related complications were observed. Patient characteristics, comorbidities and VA characteristics like type of VA were correlated with occurrence of cannulation‐related complications. In addition, the cannulation technique and practice patterns like needle direction, tourniquet use and years of experience of dialysis nurses were registered. Results: During the study period, 37% of patients with autogenous arteriovenous fistulae (AVF), and 19% of patients with arteriovenous grafts (AVG) had more than 10 miscannulations. Cannulation‐induced haematoma resulted into single‐needle (SN) and catheter dialysis in 40% of the patients. The use of central venous catheters (CVC) and SN dialysis were significant predictors of VA failure (p <0.0001). Conclusion: This study demonstrated a high incidence of unsuccessful cannulation procedures and cannulation‐related complications necessitating catheter and SN dialysis. The type and location of the VA is significantly related to occurrence of unsuccessful and complicated cannulation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1755-6686.2009.00092.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Nurses' approach, attitude and cannulation skill with AVFs have an impact on AVF outcomes, including complications following infiltration(s) resulting in the need for a central venous catheter (CVC).

    “and on AVF outcomes, including complications following infiltration(s) resulting in the need for a central venous catheter (CVC) [13, 14].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Van Loon, M. M., Kessel, A. G. H., Van Der Sande, F. M., & Tordoir, J. H. M.
Affiliations
Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL)
Venue
Journal of Renal Care
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-05-08
Volume
35
Issue
2
Pages
82-89
ISSN
  • 1755-6678 (ISSN-L)
  • 1755-6686
OpenAlex
W1970025747
Cited by
43
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2009-08-04)
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Renal Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Vascular Procedures and Complications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
Keywords
cannulation failure, hemodialysis vascular access, hematoma, arteriovenous fistula, arteriovenous graft, central venous catheters, single needle dialysis, tourniquet use, vascular access failure
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical, Blood Vessel Prosthesis, Catheterization, Catheters, Indwelling, Female, Renal Dialysis, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Prospective Studies, Regression Analysis, Risk Factors, Multivariate Analysis, Medical Errors, Equipment Failure Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review