Parent satisfaction with education, support, and decision-making regarding their children’s central venous access devices

Judith A. Blakeley, Violeta Riberio, Jan Crocker

Abstract


This descriptive, exploratory study assessed parents’ satisfaction with the education and support they received before and after their children had central venous access devices (CVADs) inserted for cancer treatment. Decisions regarding the type of CVAD and parent satisfaction with that choice were also evaluated. Parents of children who experienced a CVAD during the six-year period 1992-1997 participated. Data were collected through telephone interviews using a questionnaire specifically designed for the purposes of the study. Results suggest that parents were satisfied with the teaching and support received both prior to and following CVAD insertion. Other findings reveal that not all parents take part in decisions about the type of device used, and that if given a choice, based on their experience, they would likely choose implanted ports over Hickman® catheters.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Akcasu, N., & Bodenmiller, S. (1994). Developing and producing a

patient education video on care of the permanent right atrial

catheter. Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, 11(3), 120-124.

Becton, D., Kletzel, M., Golladay, E., Hathaway, G., & Berry, D.

(1988). An experience with an implanted port system in 66

children with cancer. Cancer, 61, 376-378.

Brincker, H., & Saeter, G. (1986). Fifty-five patient years’ experience

with a totally implanted system for intravenous chemotherapy.

Cancer, 57, 1124-1129.

Brothers, T., Von Moll, L., Niederhuber, J., Roberts, J., Walker-

Andrews, S., & Ensminger, W. (1988). Experience with

subcutaneous infusion ports in three hundred patients. Surgery

Gynecology and Obstetrics, 166(4), 295-301.

Dawson, S., Pai, M., Smith, S., Rothney, M., Ahmen, K., & Barr, R.

(1991). Right atrial catheters in children with cancer: A decade of

experience in the use of tunnelled, exteriorized devices at a single

institution. American Journal of Pediatric

Hematology/Oncology, 13(2), 126-129.

Dearborn, P., De Muth, J., Requarth, A., & Ward, S. (1997). Nurse and

patient satisfaction with three types of venous access devices.

Oncology Nursing Forum, 24(1)(Supp.), 34-40.

DeBacker, A., Vanhulle, A., Otten, J., & Deconinck, P. (1993). Totally

implantable central venous access devices in pediatric oncologyour

experience in 46 patients. European Journal of Pediatric

Surgery, 3(2), 101-106.

Gyves, J., Ensminger, W., Niederhuber, J., Liepman, M., Cozzi, E.,

Doan, K., Dakhil, S., & Wheeler, R. (1982). Totally implanted

system for intravenous chemotherapy in patients with cancer.

American Journal of Medicine, 73, 841-845.

Iannacci, L., & Piomelli, S. (1984). Use of venous access lines.

American Journal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, 6(3),

-281.

Jolley, B. (1995). A one-year prospective evaluation of implantable

vascular access devices. CINA, 11(1), 14-18.

Keegan-Wells, D., & Stewart, J. (1992). The use of venous access

devices in pediatric oncology nursing practice. Journal of

Pediatric Oncology Nursing, 9(4), 159-169.

SPSS for Windows 7.0 [Computer software]. (1996). Chicago: SPSS

Inc.

Wacker, P., Bugmann, P., Halpern, D., Babel, J., Coultre, C., & Wyss,

M. (1992). Comparison of totally implanted and external catheters

in pediatric oncology patients. European Journal of Cancer,

A(4/5), 841-845.

Wesley, J. (1992). Permanent central venous access devices.

Seminars in Pediatric Surgery, 1(3), 188-201.

Wiener, E., McGuire, P., Stolar, C., Rich, R., Albo, V., Ablin, A.,

Betcher, D., Sitarz, A., Buckley, J., Krailo, M., Versteeg, C., &

Hammond, G. (1992). The CCSG prospective study of venous

access devices: An analysis of insertions and causes for removal.

Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 27(2), 155-164.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.