PhlebitisNCT07524608
Implementing an Evidence-based, Standardized Care Bundle Targeting Register Nurses and Anaesthesiologists, to Enhance Patient Safety and Quality of Intravascular Access Devices Care Management - The Safe-IVADs Project. A Longitudinell Implementation Intervention With an Embedded Process Evaluation.
An observational study of Phlebitis and Thrombophlebitis, run by Sahlgrenska University Hospital at 1 site in Sweden.
Trial summary
The goal of this observational study spanning over three years is to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing a co-designed, care bundle on intravascular access device (IVAD) quality and nurses and anaesthesiologist knowledge of IVADs best practices, at an intervention hospital compare to care as usual the a control… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Phlebitis, Thrombophlebitis, Infiltration of Peripheral IV Therapy
- What is being tested?
- The Safe IVADs project
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- How many people
- 700 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSweden
- Study dates
- 20 Jul 2026to 31 Dec 2028
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Sahlgrenska university hospital/Mölndal
Who may be able to join
- Register nurses and anesthesiologist
Who cannot join
- -
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Sweden1 site
Sahlgrenska Academy, Sahlgrenska University hospital/Mölndal
Gothenburg
Maria Frödin Frödin, Dr, +46 0731 802487, maria.frodin@gu.se
Linda Ahlstrom, Associate professor, +46 070-5784636, linda.ahlstrom@gu.se
About this study
Official title: The Safe IVADs Project
The goal of this observational study spanning over three years is to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing a co-designed, care bundle on intravascular access device (IVAD) quality and nurses and anaesthesiologist knowledge of IVADs best practices, at an intervention hospital compare to care as usual the a control hospital. Additional aims are to:
- translate and validate a tool for identifying patients with difficult vein access within the Swedish healthcare context,
- to evaluate the implementation related to its feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and cost-effectiveness.
Read more
The main questions it aims to answer are:
- Does the implementation of evidence-based practices improve the quality of IVADs care, e.g. thrombophlebitis/phlebitis, extravasation, infiltration, dislodgement and increase register nurses and anaesthesiologists' knowledge of IVADs best practices?
- Does the intervention bridge barriers to successful implementation and support routinization of evidence-based practices.
- Which factors influence the implementation in terms of feasibility, acceptability, cost-effectiveness and compatibility with professionals' existing values and clinical workflows?
Read the detailed description
The study adopts a longitudinal implementation design with an embedded process evaluation,guided by Medical Research Council guidance (MRC) framework: developing, feasibility, refinement, implementation and evaluation. The design integrates mixed methods to assess the effectiveness, implementation process, and contextual factors influencing the prevention of IVAD-related complications across an intervention and a control hospital.
Data on IVAD care quality and healthcare professionals' knowledge will be collected at both sites once a month over a three-year period . Multiple data sources will be used, including repeated bedside audits of IVADs and electronic knowledge questionnaires, to capture changes over time and between study sites.
Quality of IVADs, power calculation: A conservative sample size calculation was based on a simple before-after comparison of independent PIVCs (PIVC-miniQ, SD = 1.55), assuming 80% power, a two-sided α = 0.05, and a detectable mean difference of 0.5 points, which requires approximately 150 PIVCs before and 150 after (≈300 total), inflated by 10 30% to account for clustering. Although the study includes all types of IVADs, this calculation provides a conservative estimate of the required sample size.
Data will be analyzed using linear mixed-effects models that explicitly account for clustering and repeated measures over time, which is expected to yield at least comparable, and likely higher, statistical power. Audit tool: Data on IVAD care quality will be collected by trained nurses, using a modified and validated audit tool (IVAD-miniQ). The tool has been piloted at both sites and adapted to fit all IVAD commonly used at the study sites, IVAD-miniQ-Sweden. The final version is in electronic format.
Knowledge assessment: Registered nurses and anaesthesiologists involved in IVADs management at the study sites. Electronic knowledge questionnaire distributed before, during and after the care bundle implementation, based on the Swedish Handbook for Healthcare IVAD best-practice recommendations.
Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of an adult difficult vein access scale (A-DIVA) to Swedish context - Face validity (performed by the expert committee members through qualitative analysis of the participant's comments), reliability (test-retest intra class correlation coefficient, one week interval), construct validity (exploratory factor analysis (EFA)) will be performed. Factors will be extracted using the maximum likelihood method (MLE)
Process evaluation Quantitative process data: Attendance rate in meetings, completed IVAD certificates and staff turnover. Qualitative process data: Implementation logbook (notebook on processes, meetings, and reflections). Semi-structured interviews, with a strategic selection of participants on micro- and meso-level within the organization (variation from the involved units, type of profession, age, working years, and gender). The interviews will be performed by a researcher who is not involved in the intervention.
The questions will investigate the participants' experiences of:
- participating in the intervention, what worked? How and why?
- how the intervention interacted with different contextual features?
- how the intervention affected other care giving activities?
- how competing priorities affected the intervention and its activities?
- how different goals and prioritization such as limited resources in healthcare, affected the intervention? Data analysis The process data will be analyzed using a thematic analysis.
Cost-effectiveness analysis will be used to compare incremental costs from a health system perspective (implementation, intervention, and downstream) to the incremental health outcomes; the IVADs complications. The economic evaluation will include scenario analyses and sensitivity analyses according to state of the art, to account for uncertainty of parameters and underlying model uncertainty.
Data management plan A data management plan will be developed following the Swedish national data service checklist, ensuring compliance with Swedish regulations, FAIR principles, and Horizon Europe guidelines throughout data collection, storage, sharing, and preservation
- Conditions
- Phlebitis, Thrombophlebitis, Infiltration of Peripheral IV Therapy, Extravasation Injury, Infections Symtoms
- Being tested
- The Safe IVADs project
- Keywords
- Quality of intravascular catheters, Quality of peripheral vein cathters, Point prevalence measure of quality of intravascular catheter, Implementation intervention
- Medical subject headings
- Phlebitis, Thrombophlebitis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
The Safe IVADs projectBehavioural
The implementation intervention is based on classic theories on organisational culture and leadership and dialogue, to change nurses and anaesthesiologist way of thinking and acting to improve the quality of intravascular catheters.
The implementation will be leas by six facilitators. Approximately 650 register nurses and 50 anaesthesiologist will participate in the implementation program. The implementation objects are co-designed learning activities that will be implemented over one year.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | The implementation program is co-design with interest holders at the intervention hospital. The implementation object that is the co-design learning activities targets registered nurses and anesthesiologist at the intervention hospital. Receives: Behavioral: The Safe IVADs project | |
| Control hospital | Care as usual with or without local changes |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
To evaluate changes in intravascular catheter care quality and healthcare professionals' knowledge over time, at the intervention and control hospital.
The protocol monitor intravascular catheters quality encompasses nominal variables (0 or 1) and points are summarized with an optimal score of zero indicating high intravascular catheter care quality .
Thrombophlebitis is classified using a severity grading scale from 0 to 4 grades, where higher grades indicate greater symptom severity.
Staff knowledge test consist of 26 question from the National Board of Health and Welfare catheter best practices.
Linear mixed models will be used for longitudinal analysis of the repeated measurements of intravascular catheter quality and staff knowledge test. With additional comparisons between intervention and control hospital.
Measured: Monthly changes in quality of intravascular catheter care over time at the intervention and control hospital, over three years.
Secondary outcomes (3)
To translate and cross-culture adapt an adult difficult vein access scale (A-DIVA) to Swedish context.
The adult difficult vein access scale, Adult-DIVA scale will be translated into Swedish and culturally adapted following internationally recommended guidelines. The process will include forward-backward translation, expert panel review, and cognitive debriefing with healthcare professionals to ensure conceptual, semantic, and operational equivalence.
To assess the validity and reliability among the Swedish registered nurse and anesthesiologists involved in difficult vein access management, a convenience sample (n=30) of general native Swedish speaking healthcare workers will be recruited from both intervention and control hospital. After completing the cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity will be assessed within a larger sample (n=100) of healthcare workers involved with A-DIVA management.
Measured: From enrollment to end of completion of the validation process within one year.
Process evaluation of the Safe IVADs implementation intervention, using Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance regarding feasibility, acceptability and fidelity.
The design integrates quantitative and qualitative process data, to evaluate the implementation process, and contextual factors influencing the prevention of IVAD-related complications across an intervention and a control hospital.
Quantitative process data: Attendance rate in meetings, completed IVAD certificates and staff turnover. Qualitative process data: Implementation logbook (notebook on processes, meetings, and reflections). Semi-structured interviews, with a strategic selection of participants on micro- and meso-level within the organization (variation from the involved units, type of profession, age, working years, and gender)
Measured: From planning of the intervention to the end of post intervention measurement after three years.
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention
Cost-effectiveness analysis will compare incremental costs from a health system perspective (implementation, intervention, and downstream) to the incremental health outcomes; the IVADs complications.
Measured: From pre-planning to end of intervention period december 2028
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Apr 2026
- Study start20 Jul 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion31 Dec 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2028 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for PhlebitisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 700 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Sahlgrenska University Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Maria Frödin, Sahlgrenska University Hospital
- Investigators
- Maria Frödin, Dr, Principal investigator, Göteborg University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07524608
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2026-00217-01
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 26 Mar 2026
- Last updated
- 25 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Not ethical approved. Only data on group level.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Safe IVADs Project
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07524608
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2026-00217-01
- Conditions
- Phlebitis, Thrombophlebitis, Infiltration of Peripheral IV Therapy, Extravasation Injury, Infections Symtoms
- Keywords
- Quality of intravascular catheters, Quality of peripheral vein cathters, Point prevalence measure of quality of intravascular catheter, Implementation intervention
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 700 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Sahlgrenska University HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 20 Jul 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2028 (estimated)
- First posted
- 13 Apr 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this observational study spanning over three years is to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing a co-designed, care bundle on intravascular access device (IVAD) quality and nurses and anaesthesiologist knowledge of IVADs best practices, at an intervention hospital compare to care as usual the a control hospital. Additional aims are to:
- translate and validate a tool for identifying patients with difficult vein access within the Swedish healthcare context,
- to evaluate the implementation related to its feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and cost-effectiveness.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
- Does the implementation of evidence-based practices improve the quality of IVADs care, e.g. thrombophlebitis/phlebitis, extravasation, infiltration, dislodgement and increase register nurses and anaesthesiologists' knowledge of IVADs best practices?
- Does the intervention bridge barriers to successful implementation and support routinization of evidence-based practices.
- Which factors influence the implementation in terms of feasibility, acceptability, cost-effectiveness and compatibility with professionals' existing values and clinical workflows?
Detailed description
The study adopts a longitudinal implementation design with an embedded process evaluation,guided by Medical Research Council guidance (MRC) framework: developing, feasibility, refinement, implementation and evaluation. The design integrates mixed methods to assess the effectiveness, implementation process, and contextual factors influencing the prevention of IVAD-related complications across an intervention and a control hospital.
Data on IVAD care quality and healthcare professionals' knowledge will be collected at both sites once a month over a three-year period . Multiple data sources will be used, including repeated bedside audits of IVADs and electronic knowledge questionnaires, to capture changes over time and between study sites.
Quality of IVADs, power calculation: A conservative sample size calculation was based on a simple before-after comparison of independent PIVCs (PIVC-miniQ, SD = 1.55), assuming 80% power, a two-sided α = 0.05, and a detectable mean difference of 0.5 points, which requires approximately 150 PIVCs before and 150 after (≈300 total), inflated by 10 30% to account for clustering. Although the study includes all types of IVADs, this calculation provides a conservative estimate of the required sample size.
Data will be analyzed using linear mixed-effects models that explicitly account for clustering and repeated measures over time, which is expected to yield at least comparable, and likely higher, statistical power. Audit tool: Data on IVAD care quality will be collected by trained nurses, using a modified and validated audit tool (IVAD-miniQ). The tool has been piloted at both sites and adapted to fit all IVAD commonly used at the study sites, IVAD-miniQ-Sweden. The final version is in electronic format.
Knowledge assessment: Registered nurses and anaesthesiologists involved in IVADs management at the study sites. Electronic knowledge questionnaire distributed before, during and after the care bundle implementation, based on the Swedish Handbook for Healthcare IVAD best-practice recommendations.
Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of an adult difficult vein access scale (A-DIVA) to Swedish context - Face validity (performed by the expert committee members through qualitative analysis of the participant's comments), reliability (test-retest intra class correlation coefficient, one week interval), construct validity (exploratory factor analysis (EFA)) will be performed. Factors will be extracted using the maximum likelihood method (MLE)
Process evaluation Quantitative process data: Attendance rate in meetings, completed IVAD certificates and staff turnover. Qualitative process data: Implementation logbook (notebook on processes, meetings, and reflections). Semi-structured interviews, with a strategic selection of participants on micro- and meso-level within the organization (variation from the involved units, type of profession, age, working years, and gender). The interviews will be performed by a researcher who is not involved in the intervention.
The questions will investigate the participants' experiences of:
- participating in the intervention, what worked? How and why?
- how the intervention interacted with different contextual features?
- how the intervention affected other care giving activities?
- how competing priorities affected the intervention and its activities?
- how different goals and prioritization such as limited resources in healthcare, affected the intervention? Data analysis The process data will be analyzed using a thematic analysis.
Cost-effectiveness analysis will be used to compare incremental costs from a health system perspective (implementation, intervention, and downstream) to the incremental health outcomes; the IVADs complications. The economic evaluation will include scenario analyses and sensitivity analyses according to state of the art, to account for uncertainty of parameters and underlying model uncertainty.
Data management plan A data management plan will be developed following the Swedish national data service checklist, ensuring compliance with Swedish regulations, FAIR principles, and Horizon Europe guidelines throughout data collection, storage, sharing, and preservation
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | – | Behavioral: The Safe IVADs projectThe implementation program is co-design with interest holders at the intervention hospital. The implementation object that is the co-design learning activities targets registered nurses and anesthesiologist at the intervention hospital. |
| Control hospital | – | –Care as usual with or without local changes |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Sahlgrenska university hospital/Mölndal
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Register nurses and anesthesiologist
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- -
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| The Safe IVADs projectThe implementation intervention is based on classic theories on organisational culture and leadership and dialogue, to change nurses and anaesthesiologist way of thinking and acting to improve the quality of intravascular catheters. The implementation will be leas by six facilitators. Approximately 650 register nurses and 50 anaesthesiologist will participate in the implementation program. The implementation objects are co-designed learning activities that will be implemented over one year. | Behavioural | Intervention |
Primary outcome
To evaluate changes in intravascular catheter care quality and healthcare professionals' knowledge over time, at the intervention and control hospital.
Time frame: Monthly changes in quality of intravascular catheter care over time at the intervention and control hospital, over three years.
The protocol monitor intravascular catheters quality encompasses nominal variables (0 or 1) and points are summarized with an optimal score of zero indicating high intravascular catheter care quality . Thrombophlebitis is classified using a severity grading scale from 0 to 4 grades, where higher grades indicate greater symptom severity. Staff knowledge test consist of 26 question from the National Board of Health and Welfare catheter best practices. Linear mixed models will be used for longitudinal analysis of the repeated measurements of intravascular catheter quality and staff knowledge test. With additional comparisons between intervention and control hospital.
3 secondary outcomes
To translate and cross-culture adapt an adult difficult vein access scale (A-DIVA) to Swedish context.
Time frame: From enrollment to end of completion of the validation process within one year.
Process evaluation of the Safe IVADs implementation intervention, using Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance regarding feasibility, acceptability and fidelity.
Time frame: From planning of the intervention to the end of post intervention measurement after three years.
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention
Time frame: From pre-planning to end of intervention period december 2028
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Jun 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Not ethical approved. Only data on group level.
Related trials for Phlebitis
Recruiting
Evaluation of Proximal Massage and Palm-to-Fist Tapping on Reducing the Risk of Phlebitis
Phlebitis, Catheter Complications
Recruiting
Evaluating the Role of the Guidewire in Peripheral Intravenous Access: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Ultrasound-Guided Catheter Survival
Peripheral Intravenous Vein Catheter Phlebitis, Intravenous Infection
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Comparing of Sesame Oil, Nitroglycerin Ointment, and Aloe Vera Gel
Cancer, Chemotherapy
Not yet recruiting
Prevention of Phlebitis, Infiltration and Extravasation With Infusion Monitoring System
Extravasation, Intensive Care Units (ICUs)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Maria Frödin, Dr principal investigator
Göteborg University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Phlebitis and Thrombophlebitis, run by Sahlgrenska University Hospital at 1 site in Sweden.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Jun 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Sweden. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Maria Frödin Frödin, Dr (+46 0731 802487, maria.frodin@gu.se), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
To evaluate changes in intravascular catheter care quality and healthcare professionals' knowledge over time, at the intervention and control hospital. (time frame: Monthly changes in quality of intravascular catheter care over time at the intervention and control hospital, over three years.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Jun 2026.