I would like to have some opinions as to whether something like 26G would not, after all, be conducive to better IV sustainability than ultra-thin 30G.
30G has two major drawbacks: 1) many false negative hits because the blood has difficulty making its way up the tiny lumen 2) the bevel is difficult to discern because it is so tiny and one ends up puncturing the vein with the bevel facing the wrong way.
A 3rd possible drawback may be than a 30G, because of its thinness, gets dammaged (blunted) the moment it hits the surface of the skin, while a bigger, and more robust 26G stays intact throughout the shot.
The question is whether it is not preferable to take a larger gauge like 26G within one's stride, in spite of the inevitable bigger entry hole.
30G has two major drawbacks: 1) many false negative hits because the blood has difficulty making its way up the tiny lumen 2) the bevel is difficult to discern because it is so tiny and one ends up puncturing the vein with the bevel facing the wrong way.
A 3rd possible drawback may be than a 30G, because of its thinness, gets dammaged (blunted) the moment it hits the surface of the skin, while a bigger, and more robust 26G stays intact throughout the shot.
The question is whether it is not preferable to take a larger gauge like 26G within one's stride, in spite of the inevitable bigger entry hole.