Do you remove occluded or infiltrated IV right away or wait until new start done?

Published

  1. Do you promptly remove occluded or infiltrated IV's or wait until a new start is in?

    • Remove old IV promptly
    • Remove old IV after new IV started

358 members have participated

I am a new nurse on a cardiac floor and we do our own IV starts. I am curious as to why most nurses keep the old IV in until a new one is placed? I have heard conflicting information on this. In my IV class here at the hospital the instructors said to remove it and not wait until a new one is placed because it doesn't work anyway, and in case of an emergency it could be assumed it is patent by responding staff and just create a delay in treatment. One of my preceptor's (and most nurses I talk to) say it should be kept in but I am not hearing any evidence-based rationales for this.

Of course the goal is to get a new IV stat however this isn't always the case on a hectic floor especially with a hard stick and a wait for the IV team.

I would love your input.

I always take the old one out first. However,I have never had to start an IV under emergency circumstances,then I might leave the old one in so as not to delay things.

Specializes in L&D.

if occluded & not infuseable, DC...

if infiltrated, DC...

if tender, pink, but working...

restart new line, THEN DC.

Especially if "difficult stick".

Haze

Question, though.

what is being taught in school, in IV therapy about aspirating on poorly running IV sites? (NO, not forcing clots into circulation...)

H.

my textbook on the topic of infiltration or inflammation:

"necessitates removal of the IV needle or catheter to avoid further trauma to the tissues."

Specializes in oncology, surgical stepdown, ACLS & OCN.
I am a new nurse on a cardiac floor and we do our own IV starts. I am curious as to why most nurses keep the old IV in until a new one is placed? I have heard conflicting information on this. In my IV class here at the hospital the instructors said to remove it and not wait until a new one is placed because it doesn't work anyway, and in case of an emergency it could be assumed it is patent by responding staff and just create a delay in treatment. One of my preceptor's (and most nurses I talk to) say it should be kept in but I am not hearing any evidence-based rationales for this.

Of course the goal is to get a new IV stat however this isn't always the case on a hectic floor especially with a hard stick and a wait for the IV team.

I would love your input.

I always remove the clotted off IV or the infiltrated Iv first before starting a new IV, they don't work anyway so why would you ieave them in to cause more damage?

Specializes in 30 years IV Nurse.

if tender, pink, but working...

restart new line, THEN DC.

Especially if "difficult stick".

Haze

Why would you leave an IV in that is showing the first signs of Phlebitis? It is only get worse. In this case no IV is better than one that is phlebitic.

Specializes in NICU.

The other day in report (we tape report)... The nurse handing me her patients said.... the pt has a 20g in the left arm, a 22g in the left arm, and a 20g in the right arm... Both IVs in the left arm are leaking and I can't flush the IV in the right arm "maybe you can get it to work." WHAT? When i went into the room all 3 IVs were bad... How can you leave a pt with 3 bad IVs?? I don't understand...

The same morning on the next patient she said.. The 20g in his right arm infiltrated last night so I restarted a 20g in the left arm. When I went into the patient's room the BAD 20g was still in the right arm?? WOW I can't believe some people.. It made me angry.. I should of written her up but I didn't...

Tiger

+ Join the Discussion