Learn how IV filter recommendations differ between clinical societies.
"Clinical guidelines are meant to help ensure that patients receive appropriate treatment and care. Guidelines summarize the current medical knowledge, weigh the benefits and harms of diagnostic procedures and treatments, and give specific recommendations based on this information. They should also provide information about the scientific evidence supporting those recommendations (1)."
Table 1. Guidelines recommending IV in-line filters
Country |
| Society | Year |
USA | INS | Infusion Nursing Society | 2021
|
ASPEN | American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition | 2020
|
Ireland | IRSPEN | Irish Society for Clinical Nutrition & Metabolism | 2020 |
France | HAS
| Haute Autorité De Santé
| 2018
|
Europe and China | ESPGHAN
| European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology Nutrition
| 2018
|
ESPEN
| European Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
|
ESPR
| European Society for Paediatric Research
|
CSPEN
| Chinese Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
|
Germany | KRINKO
| Commission for Hospital Hygiene and Infection Prevention
| 2017
|
Japan | JSPEN | Japanese Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism | 2013 |
UK | BPNG | British Pharmaceutical Nutrition Group | 2001 |
After the occurrence of two deaths and at least two cases of respiratory distress related to calcium phosphate precipitation, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) suggested in 1994, the use of a 1.2 micron air-eliminating filter for lipid-containing products and a 0.22 micron air-eliminating filter for lipid-free products (2). In the following 30 years, several national and international organizations developed their own recommendations by reviewing the increasing scientific evidence regarding the potential benefits of IV filters.
This blog summarizes the current situation around the globe by comparing eight guidelines and their recommendations regarding the usage of IV in-line filters.