Never placed an IV!!!!!

[LoriZ342]

I'm not sure what to do and this sounds ridiculous! I just started a new position and realized I have never placed an IV and I have never stuck anyone for blood - my last job had IV team and phlebotomy. Does anyone have any advice how to learn very quickly!! I looked at community colleges but they only offer courses that last weeks...I need to learn asap! Thanks for any advice you have to offer.

[Esme12, ASN, BSN, RN]

How can any of you say that your school was "excellent" if you have zero knowledge about a skill which is critical to performing the job you went to school for?

I understand that some states don't allow practical hands-on patient experience by nursing students, but even in those situations, there should have been extensive dummy/fellow-student/cadaver training.

I did go to an excellent school at a large teaching university hospital. We had an indigent ward, where whenever someone died, nursing students and medical students lined up to place NG tubes, foleys, and any other invasive procedure we lacked skill on. Respect for the dead lost out on the need to train future health care providers.

It is disconcerting to hear about the lack of training of the future nurses of America.

What else didn't they teach you? Pharmacology? I'm sure I sound just awful and bitter to you, but I'm genuinely concerned about the quality of nursing that will be available when my family members are ill.

If I was the OP, I would contact the school and voice my concerns, while requesting they provide a lab course for future and past graduates, for all the skills you are lacking training in.

Indigent ward? Practiced on them? Respect for the dead lost out? While I agree that there have times I have let a student perform CPR at the end of a code or let a new RRT/Medic practice intubation. But foleys and NGT's on the average Joe who passed away just because they were indigent? NO....I have never....and I have been around a long time.

Even in advance A&P that I took at a prominent college and medical facility...we treated our dissecting cadavers with respect. Many nursing school do not allow IV starts as a skill unless on "dummy" arms. Many hospitals don't allow it until you have a license...not uncommon with new regulatory law.

I find it disconcerting that any school is teaching that the respect for the dead just because they are indigent is lost out over the need to train the future health care providers...without the families permission.

[Esme12, ASN, BSN, RN]

Damn, you've never seen a boob IV?

/fat chicks with thin arm veins tend to have great boob veins

We prefer full figured gals.....

[NurseAngel72]

My advice is to let every nurse that you work with know that you want to start any IVs that are needed. It is especially great in the ICU because so many of the patients are not conscious so you don't have to be nervous because the patient is watching and judging. The more honest you are with your work mates the more opportunity you will have...

[RNsRWe, ASN, RN]

This thread has been....enlightening to say the least.

Some thoughts:

My nursing school program at no time took the time to teach us IV insertion, period. We learned how to d/c one in our very first clinical rotations, how to care for them, how to push meds through them. But we did not spend a single hour on how to INSERT one. Why? Because the schools were already pressed severely for time to get through everything that absolutely had to be gotten through to pass the NCLEX as well as get our feet in the door at the area hospitals. And how to start an IV was hardly something that couldn't be learned in orientation once we were hired!

So yes, I learned first on a mannequin arm during the classroom part of my new-job hospital orientation to get the mechanics, and the following week I worked a day in Ambulatory starting IVs on everything that walked in the door. I needed five good sticks before being allowed to start one on my own (without a preceptor); I got all five the first hour and a half in Ambulatory. Admittedly, I seemed pretty good at it, but those who did not get all five their first day just spent more time during their orientation with their preceptor to get the hang of it, no big deal. None at all. It didn't make my school "less excellent" because they did not waste time teaching us something that the hospitals were more than willing to teach themselves, as part of their New Nurse Orientation.

Next thing--practicing on homeless people who had not signed consents for invasive procedures to be done on them post-mortem: I have never participated in this, and frankly did not think this kind of thing went on even twenty years ago, at least not legally, and certainly not with the approval of an accredited facility. The fact that it did happen (or perhaps still does happen somewhere?) does not make it any more savory a practice in my mind. If I don't know that I have the permission of the human being in the bed, or a close family member who knows what I'm about to do....I'm not doing it.

And for what it's worth, I also managed to learn, just fine, how to insert foley caths and NGTs on LIVE people, without issue or incident. Go figure.

[PrimaFacie]

next thing--practicing on homeless people who had not signed consents for invasive procedures to be done on them post-mortem: i have never participated in this, and frankly did not think this kind of thing went on even twenty years ago, at least not legally, and certainly not with the approval of an accredited facility. the fact that it did happen (or perhaps still does happen somewhere?) does not make it any more savory a practice in my mind. if i don't know that i have the permission of the human being in the bed, or a close family member who knows what i'm about to do....i'm not doing it.

that was interesting.

again, i have no idea if people admitted to the hospital signed something that would have covered that event. it's likely that they did, but i wasn't aware one way or the other.

i'm sorry that this is such an "unsavory" thing to so many of you. please see the articles i quoted in my post above though....this is how it is and has been for many years.

approval of an accredited facility? what do you mean? it is a very well known, major medical/research center. one of the top in the country.

[RNsRWe, ASN, RN]

That was interesting.

Whatever, glad to be of service.

As for the rest, the practices you mention simply do not appeal to my personal sensibilities; I find them distasteful, regardless of their prevalence or acceptance by anyone else.

Shouldn't matter to you at all....viva la difference.

Now back to the regularly scheduled programming.

[kanzi monkey]

for all i know, maybe they did obtain consents. do you think they would refuse medical tx because they didn't want anyone messing with their cadaver should they die? apparently you want to attach a class struggle to it.

as for would i allow this to happen to a family member of mine? once the person is dead, why does it matter? this is my personal and spiritual belief, and who are you to question it? apparently you also missed the class on multicultural awareness and acceptance.

i don't really think that because i question the act of taking bodies from "the indigent ward" and practicing non life-saving nursing skills on them that i am turning this into a "class struggle". i understand that bodies that have no identification (after attempts to determine this have been exhausted) may get used for research--i have conflicting feelings on this, but i don't actually oppose it. however, the patients at your facility i can assume were alive for part of their stay--most of the time, a patient admitted to the hospital has some background that can be discovered fairly quickly through a little research (even if the patient was too sick, injured, or mentally ill to identify himself). you said you didn't know if they'd signed a consent--that's worth finding out, as you have no idea who that person was or what their beliefs were about death. honoring a patient's wishes in death is being culturally competent--what you believe is not a factor when you are acting upon another human being. and if signing a consent for post-mortem prodding was required in order for a homeless person to receive medical treatment, then this either happened long long ago, or you were not actually working for an accredited facility.

you are awfully indignant thinking there is a difference between harvesting organs or educational practice.

what does this sentence mean? do you mean ignorant?

both these things are critically important and schools turn out many a brilliant doctor/nurse who in turn saves countless lives because of the skill learned there.

i did say that i have no problem with cadaver use for medical/surgical research and to learn life-saving and high risk skills. sticking a foley into a corpse is morbid and totally unnecessary (and probably impossible).

and lastly, what does humane conditions for testing, have to do with wearing fur? those are 2 unrelated concepts. use caution when using phrases like "cognitive dissonance" when you don't truly understand them.

no, actually, i use words and phrases that i do understand. so, you're ok with animal research for medicine as long as the animals are treated humanely. and you're also ok with animals being treated in-humanely prior to being slaughtered so that you may don a pretty garment. this is an excellent example of cognitive dissonance.

(apologies for momentary thread derailment, think it may be time to step away)

[Lynx25, LPN]

Damn, you've never seen a boob IV?

/fat chicks with thin arm veins tend to have great boob veins

I had to google that, I thought it might have been a thing.

Back on topic, I was never allowed a live stick in LPN school, while in the Army they showed us once on a fake arm, then gave us a handfull of catheters and told us, "Ok! Buddy up!"

It was a much better way to learn, however I prematurely puffed myself up and thought I was amazing, because I succeeded in my first attempt... (On a young man in perfect shape with veins the size of garden hoses).

[PrimaFacie]

Honoring a patient's wishes in death is being culturally competent--what you believe is not a factor when you are acting upon another human being. And if signing a consent for post-mortem prodding was required in order for a homeless person to receive medical treatment, then this either happened long long ago, or you were not actually working for an accredited facility.

What does this sentence mean? Do you mean ignorant?

I DID say that I have no problem with cadaver use for medical/surgical research and to learn life-saving and high risk skills. Sticking a foley into a corpse is morbid and totally unnecessary (and probably impossible).

No, actually, I use words and phrases that I do understand. So, you're ok with animal research for medicine as long as the animals are treated humanely. And you're also ok with animals being treated IN-humanely prior to being slaughtered so that you may don a pretty garment. This is an excellent example of cognitive dissonance.

It is growing tiresome responding to you because you twist things, ignore the points, neglect to read the links I provided, and generally don't understand or are refusing to understand that something just is as it is (or was).

First of all, I didn't invent the concept of using corpses for medical study/practice. Some here are offended by it, but does that mean we should pretend it didn't happen? The only reason I brought it up is, and let's get back to the original topic by the OP.....I gave an example of how real time practice was obtained while in school.

Secondly, you asked what I felt personally about if it was my family member. So my response was to that, not towards the other situation of strangers. I can not assume I know the belief system of strangers, unless they tell me what it is.

I assure you that my school of nursing was accredited, and though the nursing diploma program no longer exists, (as most diploma programs do not) the affiliated university remains to this day, one of the top medical schools and medical/research centers, in the country. You will just have to take my word for that.

indignant: expressing strong displeasure at something considered unjust.

cognitive dissonance: used to describe the feeling of discomfort that results from holding two conflicting beliefs.

I have no conflicting beliefs.

Why do you say animals are treated inhumanely to obtain fur? For some types of fur they may be, but many other types, they are not. You can't make a general assumption. Educate yourself. The cows that are hung with throat slit, and bled out right in front of their calves, while still alive, to make your Burger King/McDonald lunch are treated much more inhumanely. Many people will cringe at fur while wiggling their toes in real leather shoes. Do you think synthetics are more humane to the environment than a fur coat that has been passed down and used by several generations? Think. Not everything is so black and white.

[BlueDevil,DNP, DNP, RN]

Using anyone's body, dead or alive, without consent = repugnant. It's grossly immoral and unethical, period. Not knowing how to start IVs = meh, no biggie.

[Esme12, ASN, BSN, RN]

It is growing tiresome responding to you because you twist things, ignore the points, neglect to read the links I provided, and generally don't understand or are refusing to understand that something just is as it is (or was).

First of all, I didn't invent the concept of using corpses for medical study/practice. Some here are offended by it, but does that mean we should pretend it didn't happen? The only reason I brought it up is, and let's get back to the original topic by the OP.....I gave an example of how real time practice was obtained while in school.

I assure you that my school of nursing was accredited, and though the nursing diploma program no longer exists, (as most diploma programs do not) the affiliated university remains to this day, one of the top medical schools and medical/research centers, in the country.

Not everything is so black and white.

It makes perfect sense now..... Even I was growing annoyed at the implication of using the indigent.

I think the statement "indigent ward" set off the sensibilities of today's nurses and then the thought of practicing on them. Is what everyone saw as upsetting.

ATTENTION EVERYONE!!!!!

Just for the record......I remember "indigent wards" and every facility had them. Those patients were treated differently. The units were staffed differently. They looked different....almost barren. They had no families to protect them. They were homeless, from the "Poor farms", or orphanages.

It was the ONE thing I HATED about nursing when I started.

I stand corrected........those things did happen.

They were wrong then and they are wrong now. I remember my 1st year nursing instructor persuading me to stay because I told her if this was nursing I wanted out! The "wards" were separated by Insurance, "Private Pay", government pay with separation of medicare and medicaid....and the indigent....no pay.

For all you who don't remember these times.....THIS REALLY HAPPENED. It was horrible.

This is why you now have all the rules and regs. The Joint Commission. EMTALA. HIPAA. CMS and any other surveying/regulating body. So when you are frustrated about The JC regs and new incentives.......remember this thread and you'll know why they are necessary and why compliance isn't just a way to make your life miserable.

Peace...

:paw:

[PrimaFacie]

This is why you now have all the rules and regs. The Joint Commission. EMTALA. HIPAA. CMS and any other surveying/regulating body. So when you are frustrated about The JC regs and new incentives.......remember this thread and you'll know why they are necessary and why compliance isn't just a way to make your life miserable.

Peace...

Thank you......Nursing school and hospitalizations back then was a world apart from how it is now. (except for the stress level)

I don't get any exposure to recent grads in my current path, so that is why I was quite shocked to see nurses graduate now with so much less practical experience.