Presented in part at the 7th International Conferences on Cancer Nursing Vienna, Austria, 16–21 August 1992.
Implantable devices for venous access: nurses' and patients' evaluation of three different port systems*
Version of Record online: 15 FEB 2006
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Volume 19, Issue 1, pages 21–28, January 1994
How to Cite
Lilienberg, A., Bengtsson, M. and Starkhammar, H. (1994), Implantable devices for venous access: nurses' and patients' evaluation of three different port systems. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19: 21–28. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01046.x
- Issue online: 15 FEB 2006
- Version of Record online: 15 FEB 2006
- Accepted for publication 25 May 1993
- Cited By
Implantable injection port systems are safe and convenient for long-term venous access. The present investigation comprises nurses' and patients' evaluation of three different types of devices; Port-A-Cath (16.0 g), Cordis Miniport (3.8 g) for implantation in the chest wall and the PAS Port system (5.6 g) for implantation in the forearm. The devices were implanted for chemotherapy. Eighty patients and 17 nurses answered a questionnaire regarding their experience with the devices. Overall, the systems functioned well and were helpful for both patients and nurses. In the patient study few significant differences emerged. Nurses noted that the PAS Port system was more difficult to withdraw blood from (P < 0.001) and its infusion flow capacity was inferior to the two ports in the chest wall (P < 0.001). Port-A-Cath was judged to be the easiest system for needle insertion and the needle position was felt to be more secure (P < 0.001). Fourteen of the 17 nurses preferred Cordis Miniport for cosmetic reasons (P < 0.001). All devices functioned well. The differences in shape, size and site of implantation allow an optimum port selection for each patient. The replies in thus study expressed the need for educational programmes in order to spread the injection port concept further.