| Summary: | Abstract Aim To investigate patient experiences with peripherally inserted venous catheters, namely PICC lines and Midlines, as well as the influence of socio‐demographic variables, length of stay, comorbidity and complications on these experiences. Design The study had a descriptive, multicentre, cross‐sectional design. Methods We used a questionnaire to investigate patient experiences (N = 359). Results Patients experiences were not optimal on each of the items in the questionnaire. Nevertheless, few respondents would have preferred a traditional peripheral venous catheter instead. Moreover, free‐text answers indicated that patients were very satisfied with their catheter. Results also indicate that the hospitals have different approach when selecting a PICC line or a Midline as route of choice. The only factor associated with patient experiences was “complications.” Conclusion Even though patients reported of several disadvantages with the PICC line/Midline, findings indicate that they would have chosen this again. PICC lines and Midlines are beneficial from the patients' perspective, even though they have disadvantages.
|
|---|