if the patient needed an IV, would it be better to place the IV in the right arm (on the unaffected side), or would it matter which arm it is placed in?
Would not unilateral neglect of the left arm or loss of function or sensation in that arm be a consideration in deciding which arm to place the IV?
2007-07-26 09:41:21 · 3 answers · asked by SamB12 3 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Medicine
When starting IV's, you go where the vein is. There is no contraindication to using the affected side, but if it's atrophied or has contractures, it might be harder to find a vein there.
2007-07-26 10:30:14 · answer #1 · answered by Pangolin 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
But sometimes, the affected arm can have a "gripping" reflex, where the hand latches onto, say, a bed rail.
I wouldn't mess with an arm that had that.
As far as the IV...the stroke's in the brain, not the arm itself. The arm is technically fine--it's the impulses from the brain that are messed up.
As long as the veins were good and it was checked for irritation and such, why not put it in the "bad" arm? I mean, yeah, you'd have to worry about the patient pulling out the IV by accident because he/she couldn't feel it...but not feeling an IV isn't necessarily a bad thing, as they can be extremely annoying.
If the veins are good, use 'em. It's better than overloading the veins on the good side, I'd think. Better than having to put in one of those permanent IV port thingies.
2007-07-26 09:48:55 · answer #2 · answered by SlowClap 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That's right, find where the good vein is. Loss of sensation wouldn't be a contraindication but I would prefer to place it in unaffected arm as much as possible. An affected arm might need some passive exercises or physiotherapy as part of early rehabilitation.
2007-07-26 15:57:37 · answer #3 · answered by ♥ lani s 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋