An interventional study of 18-gauge peripheral intravenous cannula and 20-gauge peripheral intravenous cannula in Peripheral Catheterization, Veins and Emergency Department Patient, sponsored by Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-05.
Sponsored by Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion is one of the most frequently performed invasive procedures in both medical and nursing practice. It is essential for blood sampling, intravenous (IV) fluid resuscitation, medication administration, blood product transfusion, and IV contrast-enhanced radiological imaging. In emergency department (ED) settings, where patients may deteriorate rapidly, timely and adequate IV access is of critical importance. Larger-bore cannulas allow faster fluid and contrast delivery and are less prone to occlusion; however, Larger-bore cannulas are often perceived to cause greater pain and procedural difficulty compared to smaller-bore cannulas. This perception may lead clinicians to prefer smaller cannulas, potentially compromising care quality in patients who may unexpectedly deteriorate.
Cannula insertion inherently causes discomfort, pain, and anxiety for patients, and multiple failed attempts further amplify these effects. Patient satisfaction, an important dimension of overall care quality, is directly influenced by pain experience and the number of insertion attempts. Patients requiring two or more attempts for successful cannulation are generally classified as having difficult intravenous access (DIVA). Repeated failed attempts are associated with vascular injury, increased patient distress, delays in diagnosis and treatment, and greater consumption of healthcare resources. The A-DIVA score, developed by Van Loon et al., enables risk stratification for IV access difficulty at triage, classifying patients as low, moderate, or high risk, and facilitating proactive measures such as ultrasound guidance or involvement of experienced personnel for high-risk patients.
This single-center, prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial aims to compare 18-gauge (18G) and 20-gauge (20G) PIVCs in terms of patient-reported pain intensity and nurse-reported procedural difficulty in adult ED patients with low-to-moderate A-DIVA risk. The investigators hypothesize that 18G cannulas cause similar pain and procedural difficulty compared to 20G cannulas in this patient population.
The study will be conducted at Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital Emergency Department. Ethics approval has been granted by the Marmara University Faculty of Medicine Clinical Research Ethics Committee. Adult patients (18 years and older) requiring IV access for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes and classified as low or moderate A-DIVA risk will be eligible. Patients with cognitive impairment, altered mental status, or hemodynamic instability (systolic BP less than 90 mmHg or mean arterial pressure less than 65 mmHg) will be excluded.
Eligible consenting patients will be randomized 1:1 using a block randomization method (block size of 4) to either 18G or 20G cannula insertion. Cannula assignment will be delivered to nurses in sealed envelopes. Patients will be blinded to cannula size using blackout goggles. Cannulation will be performed by ED nurses following standard antiseptic and securement procedures, targeting the dorsum of the hand, forearm, or antecubital fossa. If the first attempt fails, at least one additional attempt with the assigned cannula will be required before allowing free choice of cannula and site.
The primary outcomes are patient-reported pain intensity and nurse-reported procedural difficulty, each assessed using a 10 cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) immediately after the first cannulation attempt and compared between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. Secondary outcomes include the comparison of first-attempt cannulation success rate between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. This comparison will also be performed separately according to cannulation site, operator experience, A-DIVA risk category, patient age, and patient sex.
A total of 204 patients (102 per group) will be enrolled, based on 90% power, 5% type I error, a minimum clinically important difference of 13 mm on the VAS, and a 10% dropout allowance.
2,219 studies on the registry are indexed under Pain; 917 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 204 is above the median of 70 across 1,904 interventional studies indexed under Pain.
Browse Pain studies →Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital is the lead sponsor of 32 studies on the registry; 13 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Participants in this arm will undergo peripheral intravenous cannulation using an 18-gauge (18G, green) cannula. Cannulation will be performed by emergency department nurses targeting the dorsum of the hand, forearm, or antecubital fossa following standard antiseptic and securement procedures. If the first attempt fails, at least one additional attempt with the assigned 18G cannula will be made before allowing free choice of cannula and site.
Device: 18-gauge peripheral intravenous cannula
Participants in this arm will undergo peripheral intravenous cannulation using a 20-gauge (20G, pink) cannula. Cannulation will be performed by emergency department nurses targeting the dorsum of the hand, forearm, or antecubital fossa following standard antiseptic and securement procedures. If the first attempt fails, at least one additional attempt with the assigned 20G cannula will be made before allowing free choice of cannula and site.
Device: 20-gauge peripheral intravenous cannula
Peripheral intravenous cannulation performed using an 18-gauge (18G, green) cannula inserted into the dorsum of the hand, forearm, or antecubital fossa by an emergency department nurse following standard antiseptic and securement procedures. No local anesthetic agents will be used. Patients will be blinded to cannula size using blackout goggles.
Peripheral intravenous cannulation performed using a 20-gauge (20G, pink) cannula inserted into the dorsum of the hand, forearm, or antecubital fossa by an emergency department nurse following standard antiseptic and securement procedures. No local anesthetic agents will be used. Patients will be blinded to cannula size using blackout goggles.
Pain intensity
Patient-reported pain intensity assessed using a 10 cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) after the first cannulation attempt, compared between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. The VAS score ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). The unit of measure is the score on the Visual Analog Scale (0-10 cm).
Time frame: Immediately after the first cannulation attempt
Procedural difficulty
Nurse-reported procedural difficulty assessed using a 10 cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) after the first cannulation attempt, compared between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. The VAS score ranges from 0 (no difficulty) to 10 (worst imaginable difficulty). The unit of measure is the score on the Visual Analog Scale (0-10 cm)
Time frame: Immediately after the first cannulation attempt
First-attempt cannulation success rate
The proportion of participants with successful cannulation achieved on the first attempt, compared between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. The unit of measure is the percentage of participants (%).
Time frame: Immediately after the first cannulation attempt
Comparison of first-attempt cannulation success rate by cannulation site between groups
The first-attempt cannulation success rate at each cannulation site (dorsum of hand, forearm, or antecubital fossa), assessed by procedural documentation, will be compared between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. The unit of measure is the percentage of participants with successful first-attempt cannulation per site (%).
Time frame: Immediately after the first cannulation attempt
Comparison of first-attempt cannulation success rate by operator experience between groups
The first-attempt cannulation success rate across different levels of operator experience, assessed in years of clinical experience, will be compared between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. The unit of measure is the percentage of participants with successful first-attempt cannulation per operator experience level (%).
Time frame: Immediately after the first cannulation attempt
Comparison of first-attempt cannulation success rate by A-DIVA score between groups
The first-attempt cannulation success rate across A-DIVA risk categories, assessed using the Adult Difficult Intravenous Access (A-DIVA) scoring tool, will be compared between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. The unit of measure is the percentage of participants with successful first-attempt cannulation per A-DIVA risk category (%). The A-DIVA score ranges from 0 to 5, with scores of 0-1 indicating low risk, 2-3 indicating moderate risk, and 4-5 indicating high risk of difficult intravenous access.
Time frame: Immediately after the first cannulation attempt
Comparison of first-attempt cannulation success rate by patient age between groups
The first-attempt cannulation success rate across different age groups, recorded in years at the time of enrollment, will be compared between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. The unit of measure is the percentage of participants with successful first-attempt cannulation per age group (%).
Time frame: Immediately after the first cannulation attempt
Comparison of first-attempt cannulation success rate by patient sex between groups
The first-attempt cannulation success rate by patient sex (male or female), recorded at the time of enrollment, will be compared between the 18G and 20G cannula groups. The unit of measure is the percentage of participants with successful first-attempt cannulation per sex (%).
Time frame: Immediately after the first cannulation attempt
Plan to share: No
This study is completed, as verified in Jun 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital