Is the IV obstructed or infiltrated? A simple clinical test

Abstract

Objective. The objective of our study was to determine if clinical observation of pressure-flow relationships (PFR) can differentiate between partial external obstruction (obstruction) and infiltration as a cause of poor performance of gravity-fed infusions.Methods. A total of 24 patients with functional intravenous cannulae in situ had obstruction simulated by the application of a tourniquet proximal to the cannula. The change in flow (ΔF) for a discrete change in pressure (ΔP) was determined in each case by counting drop rates at two different elevations of the fluid reservoir level, 10 cm apart. The same process was repeated in 15 patients in whom the cannula was in an extra vascular location (infiltration). Three sizes of cannula—16-gauge, 18-gauge, and 20-gauge—were examined, with equal distribution of sizes in each group. The effect on flow rates of inflating a blood pressure (BP) cuff proximally on the cannulated limb was assessed. The ratio ΔP/ΔF is the total resistance of the infusion system, and by subtracting known values for resistance of infusion tubing and cannula, the venous or tissue resistance was calculated.Results. There was a statistically significant difference between the change in flow for obstructed compared with infiltrated cannulae for the same change in pressure for each cannula size. The mean venous resistance was 23 mm Hg/L/hr, while that of tissue was 280 mm Hg/L/hr, with no overlap between groups. There was no effect on flow rate with blood pressure cuff inflation in the infiltrated group whereas flow progressively fell in the obstructed group.Conclusions. Clinical observation of PFRs in poorly functioning gravity-fed IV infusions can assist in detecting infiltration as a cause. Inflation of a blood pressure cuff will further impair flow where the cannula is intravascular, but will have no effect in an extravascular location.