CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Health and Allied Sciences NU 2017; 07(03): 021-024
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1708719
Original Article

A comparative study on impact of dry versus moist heat application on feasibility of peripheral intravenous cannulation among the patients of a selected hospital at Mangalore

Jisha K.
1  Lecturer, Lourde College Of Nursing, Kannur, Department of Medical Surgical Nursing, Nitte Usha Institute of Nursing Sciences, Nitte University , Mangalore - 575 018, India
,
Latha S.
2  Assoc. Professor & HOD, Department of Medical Surgical Nursing, Nitte Usha Institute of Nursing Sciences, Nitte University , Mangalore - 575 018, India,
,
Gincy Joseph
3  Lecturer, Department of Medical Surgical Nursing, Nitte Usha Institute of Nursing Sciences, Nitte University , Mangalore - 575 018, India
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

The present study was conducted to assess the impact of dry v/s moist heat application on feasibility of peripheral intravenous cannulation. The study design adopted was true experimental - post test only with control group design. Using randomized block sampling 60 patients were selected and equally allocated into 3 groups-dry heat (group I), moist heat (group II) and control group each with 20 samples. The baseline clinical data were collected from the patients by interview method. Dry heat with a hot water bag at temperature of 120-140 degree Fahrenheit was applied to the peripheral cannulation site in experimental group I and moist 0 heat was applied to group II by wrapping a moist towel (110-1150 F) over the site for seven minutes. Numerical Pain scale was used to measure the level of pain experienced during peripheral intravenous cannulation. Data obtained in these areas were analysed by descriptive and inferential statistics. A significant difference was found between experimental group and control group. The Mann Whitney U test scores for Impact of dry heat and moist heat on feasibility showed that the p value for the components of feasibility like (time taken for cannulation and pain score) is < 0.05, and both dry heat and moist heat is effective in improving the feasibility of IV cannulation. Comparison of dry heat and moist heat by Kruskal Wallis test revealed that dry heat is more effective than moist heat(least time for cannulation (Median =1) and least pain (Median==1).No significant association was found between the level of pain and selected variables. This study proved that dry heat application reduces the time for cannulation and level of pain experienced by the clients during intravenous cannulation.



Publication History

Received: 09 July 2017

Accepted: 28 August 2017

Publication Date:
22 April 2020 (online)

© .

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 
  • References

  • 1 Rafael Ortega, M.D., Pavan Sekhar. et al. Peripheral Intravenous Cannulation The new England journal of medicine n engl j med 359;21 available from:URLwww.fcmmg.br/lat/arquivos/Biblioteca/acesso%20venoso.pdf
  • 2 Cleary M, Johnstone M. et al. Peripheral intravenous cannulation.Aust Fam Physician1991;20:1285–1288. Available from URL http://www.bmj.com/content/325/7361/409.1.full
  • 3 Australian Nursing Journal Local warming improves cannulation. | November 1, 2002 | COPYRIGHT 2008 Available from URL http://business.highbeam.com/84/article-1G1-94061510/localwarming-improves-cannulation
  • 4 Journal of anesthesia practice. Local Warming Helps When Inserting Infusion Cannula - August 2009 Available from URL http://www.japractice.co.uk/products/local-warming-helps-when-insertinginfusion-cannula/#&panel1-1
  • 5 Lenhardt et al 2002 Intravenous therapy Available from URL http://nursingstandard.rcnpublishing.co.uk/archive/articleperipheral-cannulation/
  • 6 Dougherty L (2008) Peripheral cannulation. Nursing Standard July 21 2008 Available from URL http://nursingstandard.rcnpublishing.co.uk/archive/article-peripheral-cannulation/
  • 7 Regina M. Fink et.al, The Impact of Dry Versus Moist Heat on Peripheral IV Catheter Insertion. Available from URL http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/708046_2