true
BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter with BD Multiguard™ Technology
Connect to confidence, care and comfort
- Overview
- Products & Accessories
- EIFU & Resources
- FAQ
BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter with BD Multiguard™ Technology elevates the level of safety by combining needlestick safety with blood control technology compared to a non-safety, non-blood control catheter.
false
Approximately 90% of hospital patients receive IV therapy.1 Globally, 1 billion+ peripheral IV catheters are placed every year.2
95% of IV catheters placed are PIVCs.1 Based on clinical studies, risks associated with PIVC use include:
Potentially high frequency of PIV catheter complications
35–50% of hospitalized patients who receive a PIVC experience a catheter-related complication.3
Occurance of blood exposure
In a study, when clinicians used a PIVC without blood control technology, blood leakage occurred 61% of the time,4 risking potential exposure to bloodborne pathogens (BBP).
Multiple PIVC insertion attempts
An emergency department study suggests that first attempt insertion success ranges from 18–79%.6
Multiple insertion attempts increase the risk to clinicians of needlestick injury (NSI) and potential exposure to BBP, and undue pain and increased infection risk to the patient.6
When clinician safety and patient comfort and care are critical, BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter with BD Multiguard™ Technology**:
-
Eliminates the need for venous compression
during insertion, connections and disconnections, and blood draws, reducing the risk of blood exposure.**,7
-
Reduces blood exposure risk**
by stopping blood flow during conections and reconnections.^,7
-
Provides immediate visual confirmation
of vessel entry with BD Instaflash™ Needle Technology, improving opportunities for first attempt insertion success.*,8,9
-
Provides protection from needlestick injuries (NSIs)
with integrated passive safety system.
-
Offers an ergonomic design
that is easily adaptable to preferred insertion techniqes and provides enhanced control throughout the procedure.
-
Clinically demonstrated to reduce phlebitis
by up to 69% with BD Vialon™ Catheter Material, compared to an FEP catheter material.10-12
-
Supports longer IV dwell times,
with BD Vialon™ Catheter Material.††,13
-
Smooth, tapered catheter tip design
with smooth, tapered catheter tip design.**
BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter with BD Multiguard™ Technology
The BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter with BD Multiguard™ Technology is designed to enhance the confidence, care and comfort of clinicians and patients.
Literature
BD's collection of literature on industry and on our offerings gives you information you can use to continue striving for excellence.
Learn more
true
false
Disclaimers:
*Compared to a non-notched needle
†Compared to an FEP catheter
^For up to 10 seconds
**Compared to a non-safety, non-blood control catheter
††Compared to PTFE catheter material
- iData Research Inc. Global Market Report Suite for Vascular Access Devices and Accessories. 2020.
- Alexandrou E, Ray-Barruel G, Carr PJ, et al. International prevalence of the use of peripheral intravenous catheters. Journal of Hospital Medicine. 2015 Aug 1;10(8):530-533.
- Helm RE, Klausner JD, Klemperer JD, et al. Accepted but unacceptable: peripheral IV catheter failure. J Infus Nurse. 2015;38(3):189-203.
- Haeseler G, Hildebrand M, Fritscher J. Efficacy and ease of use of an intravenous catheter designed to prevent blood leakage: prospective observational study. J Vasc Access. 2015;16(3):233-236.
- Rickard C, Webster J, Wallis MC, et al. Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Lancet [serial online]. 2012;380:1066-1074.
- Carr P, Rippey J, Budgeon C, Cooke M, Higgins N, Rickard C. Insertion of peripheral intravenous cannulae in the Emergency Department: factors associated with first-time insertion success. J Vasc Access. 2016;17(2):182-190.
- Onia R, Eshu-Wilson I, Arce, C, et al. Evaluation of a new safety peripheral IV catheter designed to reduce mucocutaneous blood exposure. CMRO. 2011;27(7):1339-1346. 8 Maki DG, Ringer M. Risk factors for infusionrelated phlebitis with small peripheral venous catheters. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1991;114:845-854.
- van Loon FHJ, Timmerman R, den Brok GPH, Korsten EHM, Dierick-van Daele ATM, Bouwman ARA. The impact of a notched peripheral intravenous catheter on the first attempt success rate in hospitalized adults: block-randomized trial. JVA. 2021 DOI: 10.1177/1129729821990217.
- Seetharam AM, Raju U, Suresh K. A randomized controlled study to compare first stick success with Instaflash technology: The FIRSST study. JVA. 2022 DOI:10.1177/11297298221080369.
- Kus B, Buyukyilmaz F. Effectiveness of Vialon biomaterial versus Teflon catheters for peripheral intravenous placement: A randomized clinical trial. Jpn J Nurs Sci. 2020;e12328. https://doi.org/10.1111/jjns.12328
- Maki DG, Ringer M. Risk factors for infusion-related phlebitis with small peripheral venous catheters. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1991;114:845-854.
- Gaukroger PB, Roberts JG, Manners TA. Infusion thrombophlebitis: a prospective comparison of 645 Vialon and Teflon cannulae in anaesthetic and postoperative use. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care. 1988;16:265-271.
- Chhugani M, James M, Thokchom S. A randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of Vialon™ cannula versus polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) cannula in terms of indwelling time and complications in patients requiring peripheral intravenous cannulation. International Journal of Science and Research. 2015;4(12).
- Richardson D, Kaufman L. Reducing blood exposure risks and costs associated with SPIVC insertion. Nurse Manage. 2011;42(12):31-34.
BD-42420 (05/23)
true