CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 14Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisIntravenous Infusion Technology and Safety

Evaluation of pain and specimen quality by use of a novel 25-gauge blood collection set with ultra-thin wall cannula and 5-bevel tip design

Open access
Mouser, Amy, Uettwiller-Geiger, Denise, Plokhoy, Elizabeth, Berube, Julie, Ahuja, Aparna Jha, Stankovic, Ana K·2017·The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine
DOI 10.1373/jalm.2017.023564
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Phlebotomy has significant impact on overall patient satisfaction. Smaller gauge needles, such as a 25 gauge, may lessen patient discomfort but increase hemolysis and tube-filling times. Our studies evaluated the effect of a 5-bevel, 25-gauge blood collection set (BCS) with ultra-thin wall cannula [BD Vacutainer® UltraTouch™ Push Button BCS (UltraTouch)] on patient pain and anxiety compared with two 3-bevel, thin-wall, 23-gauge BCSs [BD Vacutainer® Safety-Lok™ (Safety-Lok) and Greiner Bio-One Vacuette® (Vacuette)]. Our studies also evaluated the 25-gauge UltraTouch for sample quality and tube filling compared with the 3-bevel, thin-wall, 23-gauge BD Vacutainer Push Button BCS. Methods: We conducted 2 studies with 214 subjects to compare pain and anxiety regarding future phlebotomy with the 3 aforementioned devices. Another study with 52 subjects assessed hemolysis in specimens collected with the UltraTouch and Push Button BCS; bench testing evaluated tube-filling times with these devices. A questionnaire captured pain upon needle insertion, overall pain, and anxiety regarding future phlebotomy. Hemolysis was evaluated visually, by Hemolysis Index and hemolysis-sensitive indicators potassium (K) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Results: A statistically significant decrease was noted for overall pain with UltraTouch compared with Vacuette and with insertion pain compared with Safety-Lok. There was no significant difference in anxiety regarding future phlebotomy. No increase was observed in Hemolysis Index, K or LDH. Tube-filling times were comparable for each device. Conclusions: The 25-gauge UltraTouch provided less overall pain compared with the 23-gauge Vacuette, less pain upon needle insertion than the 23-gauge Safety-Lok, and no compromise in specimen quality or flow rate.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1373/jalm.2017.023564

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Use of the 25G UT-PBBCS reduces perceived pain in both adult and pediatric patients without compromising sample quality, as indicated by the hemolysis index.

    “Studies demonstrate that its use reduces perceived pain in both adult and pediatric patients without compromising sample quality, as indicated by the hemolysis index (Mouser et al., 2017;Padoan et al., 2020).”

    From Evaluation of a novel blood collection set for venipuncture in oncology patients with difficult venous access: Impact on sample quality, phlebotomist satisfaction and patient pain perception (2024) · cites this paper as Mouser et al., 2017

    The Pain assessment section reports reduced insertion pain versus Safety-Lok and reduced overall pain versus Vacuette; the Hemolysis section reports no significant increase in Hemolysis Index. But Study subjects says all pain-study participants were at least 18, and the Discussion proposes pediatric evaluation as future work. This paper therefore supports the adult findings, not a demonstrated reduction in pediatric patients. (LLM, conf=0.92)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The filling time of blood collection tubes from adults remains unaffected when down-gauging to the 25G UT-PBBCS.

    “Furthermore, the filling time of blood collection tubes from adults remains unaffected when down-gauging to the 25G UT-PBBCS (Mouser et al., 2017).”

    From Evaluation of a novel blood collection set for venipuncture in oncology patients with difficult venous access: Impact on sample quality, phlebotomist satisfaction and patient pain perception (2024) · cites this paper as Mouser et al., 2017

    The Tube-filling times section reports no significant difference between the 25-gauge UltraTouch and 23-gauge Push Button BCS. However, the methods passage describes a bench test using sheep blood under simulated venous pressure, not tubes filled from adults; the claim extends the result beyond the tested conditions. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [14]14. Yee K, Shetty A, Lai K. Needle size and pain scores. Emerg Med J 2015;32:343-7.
  2. [17]17. Usha A, Yogish S. Hemolytic index-a tool to measure hemolysis in vitro. IOSR J Biotechnol Biochem 2016;2:49-52.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mouser, A., Uettwiller-Geiger, D., Plokhoy, E., Berube, J., Ahuja, A. J., & Stankovic, A. K.
Affiliations
  • Becton Dickinson (United States) (US)
  • John T. Mather Memorial Hospital (US)
  • BD Life Sciences—Preanalytical Systems, Franklin Lakes, NJ
Venue
The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2017-09-01
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
201-210
ISSN
  • 2475-7241 (ISSN-L)
  • 2576-9456
DOI
10.1373/jalm.2017.023564
OpenAlex
W2739341897
Semantic Scholar
49b1b230d2e53734cb52eac95c7bc727752251cd
Cited by
14
References
22
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
Locations
  • The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Intravenous Infusion Technology and Safety
Keywords
phlebotomy, needle insertion pain, patient anxiety, hemolysis, sample quality, hemolysis index, potassium, lactate dehydrogenase

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