Abstract:Peripheral arterial catheters (ACs) are used in anaesthesia and intensive care settings for blood sampling and monitoring. Despite their importance, ACs often fail, requiring reinsertion. Dressings and securement devices maintain AC function and prevent complications such as infection. To evaluate the effectiveness of peripheral AC dressing and securement devices to prevent failure and complications in hospitalised people. We searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL Plus up to 16 May 2023. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to 16 May 2023. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different dressing and securement devices for the stabilisation of ACs in hospitalised people. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's RoB 1 tool. We resolved disagreements by discussion, or by consulting a third review author when necessary. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We included five RCTs with 1228 participants and 1228 ACs. All included studies had high risk of bias in one or more domains. We present the following four comparisons, with the remaining comparisons reported in the main review. Standard polyurethane (SPU) plus tissue adhesive (TA) compared with SPU: we are very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts rates of AC failure (risk ratio (RR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.98; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). Neither study (165 participants) reported catheter‐related bloodstream infections (CRBSI), thus we are very uncertain whether SPU plus TA impacts on the incidence of CRBSI (very low‐certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts AC dislodgement risk (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.03 to 9.62; I2 = 44%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts AC occlusion rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.91; I2 = 3%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts rates of adverse events with few reported events across groups (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.09 to 8.33; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). Bordered polyurethane (BPU) compared to SPU: we are very uncertain whether use of BPU impacts rates of AC failure (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.13; 1 study, 60 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). BPU may make little or no difference to CRBSI compared to SPU (RR 3.05, 95% CI 0.12 to 74.45; I2 = not applicable as 1 study (60 participants) reported 0 events; 2 studies, 572 participants; low‐certainty evidence). BPU may make little or no difference to the risk of AC dislodgement compared with SPU (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.17 to 3.22; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 572 participants; low‐certainty evidence). BPU may make little or no difference to occlusion risk compared with SPU (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 572 participants; low‐certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether BPU impacts on the risk of adverse events compared with SPU (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; 1 study, 60 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). SPU plus sutureless securement devices (SSD) compared to SPU: we are very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts risk of AC failure compared with SPU (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.52; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). We are very uncertain if SPU plus SSD impacts CRBSI incidence rate with no events in both groups (2 studies, 157 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts risk of dislodgement (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.57; I2 = not applicable as 1 study (96 participants) reported 0 events; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts risk of AC occlusion (RR 1.94, 95% CI 0.50 to 7.48; I2 = 38%; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts on the risk of adverse events (RR 1.94, 95% CI 0.19 to 20.24; I2 = not applicable as 1 study (96 participants) reported 0 events; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). Integrated securement dressings compared to SPU: integrated securement dressings may result in little or no difference in risk of AC failure compared with SPU (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 4.84; 1 study, 105 participants; low‐certainty evidence); may result in little or no difference in CRBSI incidence with no events reported (1 study, 105 participants; low‐certainty evidence); may result in little or no difference in the risk of dislodgement (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.04; 1 study, 105 participants; low‐certainty evidence), m -Abstract Truncated-

Risk factors for arterial catheter failure and complications during critical care hospitalisation: a secondary analysis of a multisite, randomised trial

Arterial catheter outcomes in intensive care: An analysis of 1117 patients

Dressings and securement devices to prevent complications for peripheral arterial catheters

Assessment of peripheral arterial catheters as a source of sepsis in the critically ill: a narrative review

A state of the art review on optimal practices to prevent, recognize, and manage complications associated with intravascular devices in the critically ill

Risk Factors for Midline Catheter Failure: A Secondary Analysis of an Existing Trial

Short-term dialysis catheter versus central venous catheter infections in ICU patients: a post hoc analysis of individual data of 4 multi-centric randomized trials

The Practice of Arterial Catheters in ICUs and Nurses’ Perceptions of Infection Prevention: A Multicentre Cross-Sectional Study

Observational study of peripheral intravenous catheter outcomes in an internal medicine department

The performance and complications of long peripheral venous catheters: A retrospective single‐centre study

Randomized multicenter study on long-term complications of peripherally inserted central catheters positioned by electrocardiographic technique

The effectiveness of dressings and securement devices to prevent central venous catheter-associated complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy and safety of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in acute cardiac care management

Interhospital Variation in Admissions Managed With Critical Care Therapies or Invasive Hemodynamic Monitoring in Tertiary Cardiac Intensive Care Units: An Analysis From the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry

Perioperative arterial catheterization: A prospective evaluation of ultrasound, infection, and patient-focused outcomes

Risk factors of central catheter bloodstream infections in intensive care units: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Safety, timing, and outcomes of early post-operative cardiac catheterisation following congenital heart surgery

Impact of cardiovascular risk factors and cardiac diseases on mortality in patients with moderate to severe ARDS: A retrospective cohort study

A novel integrated dressing to secure peripheral intravenous catheters in an adult acute hospital: a pilot randomised controlled trial

Peripheral arterial catheter securement and catheter survival in the pediatric intensive care unit

Wireless pulmonary artery haemodynamic monitoring in chronic heart failure: a randomised controlled trial