INS Standards of Practice, page S84, supported by a reference from ISMP. Granted there is no much evidence but that is the problem. There has been no research to establish this to be a safe practice. The chance of that male luer tip being contaminated is high, thus you are contaminating the entire set. Lynn
How would connecting that presumed contaminated male tip to a port other than the port of it's own line be any different? If we should assume that the male tip is contmainated, then it shouldn't be connected to any port, even on other lines, or to the IV itself, correct?
No this is not acceptable practice, not evidence based and below the standard of practice. Lynn
Lynn Hadaway, M.Ed., RN, NPD-BC, CRNI
Lynn Hadaway Associates, Inc.
PO Box 10
Milner, GA 30257
Website http://www.hadawayassociates.com
Office Phone 770-358-7861
Thanks Lynn. But can you explain further why or can you direct me to an article explaining why it's not acceptable.
INS Standards of Practice, page S84, supported by a reference from ISMP. Granted there is no much evidence but that is the problem. There has been no research to establish this to be a safe practice. The chance of that male luer tip being contaminated is high, thus you are contaminating the entire set. Lynn
Lynn Hadaway, M.Ed., RN, NPD-BC, CRNI
Lynn Hadaway Associates, Inc.
PO Box 10
Milner, GA 30257
Website http://www.hadawayassociates.com
Office Phone 770-358-7861
How would connecting that presumed contaminated male tip to a port other than the port of it's own line be any different? If we should assume that the male tip is contmainated, then it shouldn't be connected to any port, even on other lines, or to the IV itself, correct?