Pulsatile Vs. Continuous Flush - Page 2Register Today!
- Sep 5, '11 by IheartICUnursingI was taught to use the pulsatile method (where I work we call it the turbulent flow method) only when flushing a central line after a blood draw- it helps clear the port of blood. Some nurses were doing it all the time, but as many times as we flush lines in the ICU, they were starting to get arthritis
- Pulsatile for both CVCs and PIVs. We draw from PIVs in the ED, so I use pulsatile in order to better flush sticky platelets out of the lumen and preserve the integrity of the PIV in the event the patient is admitted.
- Sep 6, '11 by MunoRNQuote from ForeverQuestioningThat's actually a reason why I'm asking, the Infusion Nursing Society appears to be opposed to pulsatile flushing, although I'm not clear why.Our policies come from our IV therapy department, of which all the nurses are certified through the Infusion Nurses Society. Our protocol calls for the push/pause AKA pulsatile technique for all central lines and PICC lines.
- Sep 6, '11 by MunoRNQuote from ~*Stargazer*~This is Lynn Hadaway's view on the subject, Lynn writes many of the INS standards:Really? When did that change?
" I will not support this practice in any way and will continue to educate about the lack of science and it questionable impact on VADs. Also, the INS standards do not support this practice. Lynn"
I'm still not clear if they are opposed to it or just don't support it due to lack of evidence either way. The INS frequently makes recommendations that are purely theory based and without any evidence, so it would seem this position is due to some form of opposition to the practice rather than a lack of available research.
- Ah, I must have misunderstood. I'm guessing our facility's policy on push-pause for CVCs must be based on manufacturer recommendation, then.
Anyway, I've noticed that after a blood draw, continuous flushing does not clear the line of blood, but push-pause does.