Published
Yes it is a real risk esp if the particles accumulate ...all of those particles usually end up in your lungs. On Autopsy if they go looking they can be found in the lungs esp if the patient has had prolonged hosptialization. The size of allowable particles in IVF is also regulated and there is a cuttoff by mircon size of the particles you can have in IVFs. One function of a filter is also to catch paticulate matter and in the case of a microaggregate filter..it prevents micoraggregates from entering the vascular system.
"The potential risks associated with intravenous administration of glass particles are based on animal studies, though similar risks would apply equally to humans. It has been shown that glass particles cause inflammatory reactions (eg, phlebitis) and granuloma formation in pulmonary, hepatic, splenic, renal, and intestinal tissue. This represents a significant risk of an adverse patient outcome"
Ask the Experts: 18(4) FILTER NEEDLES AND GLASS AMPULES
Also;
Glass ampules and filter needles: an example of implementing the sixth 'R' in medication administration | MedSurg Nursing | Find Articles
Hadn't thought of those glass filters in a looooong time. When I had to, I used them. Why risk some microscopic potential contaminant? Lasix (little brown amps) and KCl (clear amps) had to have the necks cracked with an alcohol prep breaking away from you. You could invert the amp with the needle inside and no dripping because of the surface tension. OMG!! What a flashback!:icon_roll
aging1
25 Posts
I know we're supposed to use filter needles on meds drawn from glass ampules, so I do. However, in the first, oh, 25 years of my nursing career I didn't. Is this a theoretical risk, or does research of actual harm done exist? Anybody know?
Bottom line: is there a real (research-based) danger, or are we just afraid of glass?