-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 18G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 18G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 20G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 20G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 20G x 1.25"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 20G x 1.25"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 22G x 1.0"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 22G x 1.0"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 24G x 0.75"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 24G x 0.75"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 24G x 0.56"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 24G x 0.56"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 18G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 18G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 20G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 20G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 20G x 1.25"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 20G x 1.25"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 20G x 1.0"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 20G x 1.0"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 22G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 22G x 1.75"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 22G x 1.0"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 22G x 1.0"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 24G x 0.75"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 24G x 0.75"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 24G x 0.56"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 24G x 0.56"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 18G x 1.25"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 18G x 1.25"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 20G x 1.0"
-
Nexiva Dual Port with Q-Syte, 20G x 1.0"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 18G x 1.25"
-
Nexiva Single Port, 18G x 1.25"
- Overview
- Products & Accessories
- Best Practices
- EIFU & Resources
Proprietary BD Vialon™ biomaterial softens up to 70% in the vein, enabling longer dwell times 3† and reducing the chance of mechanical phlebitis by up to 50%. 3†
98% reduced blood exposure during insertion due to the BD Nexiva™ IV catheter preassembled systems.2*
In a randomized study comparing the BD Nexiva™ IV catheter to an open catheter system, the median dwell time for BD Nexiva IV catheters was 144.5 hours and 96 hours for the open system.1
In a 2014 clinical study, the longer dwell time (6 days)|| of the BD Nexiva™ IV catheter led to cost reductions of approximately $1 million per year per 1000 beds compared with an open system.1**
BD Nexiva™: Traditional vs closed IV catheter insertion
Catheter stabilization is recognized as an intervention to decrease the risk for phlebitis, catheter migration and dislodgement and may be advantageous in preventing catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs).3
Recommend limiting the use of add-on devices to reduce the potential for contamination, additional manipulation, and disconnection.5
98% reduced blood exposure during insertion due to the BD Nexiva IV catheter preassembled system.2*
Clinically demonstrated to reduce accidental dislodgement,2‡ meeting Infusion Nursing Society standards4 and CDC guidelines5 for catheter stabilization.
In a clinical study, results demonstrated a significant reduction in the rate of phlebitis (grade 2 or higher), PIVC-related complications, and infiltration in the closed system versus the open system group.1
In compliance with industry best practices, BD Nexiva IV catheter is the only all-in-one PIVC system shown to dwell longer and preserve sites vs open system PIVCs.1,2||
BD offers training resources to help improve your clinical practices as part of our goal of advancing the world of health.
BD supports the healthcare industry with market-leading products and services that aim to improve care while lowering costs. We host and take part in events that excel in advancing the world of health™.
BD promotes clinical excellence by providing various resources on best practices, clinical innovations and industry trends in healthcare.
Notes
*Compared to an open system.
**Results and savings may vary for other institutions.
†Compared with an FEP catheter.
‡When used with a specially designed 3M™ Tegaderm™ IV site securement dressing.
§Compared with B. Braun Introcan Safety ® catheter with Bard Statlock ® IV Ultra stabilizatio device.
||Compared with 96 hours in an open system.
¶Compared with a non-blood control catheter.
References
- González López J, Arribi Vilela A, Fernández Del Palacio E, et al. Indwell times, complications and costs of open vs closed safety peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomized study. J Hosp Infect. 2014;86(2):117-126.
- Bausone-Gazda D, Lefaiver CA, Walters SA. A randomized controlled trial to compare the complications of 2 peripheral intravenous catheter stabilization systems. J Infus Nurs. 2010;33(6):371-384.
- Maki DG, Ringer M. Risk factors for infusion-related phlebitis with small peripheral venous catheters. Ann Intern Med. 1991;114(10):845-854.
- Infusion Nurses Society. Infusion therapy standards of practice. J Infus Nurs. 2016:39(1S).
- O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. CDC. 2011:16.