In which scenario would a central line be preferred over a peripheral IV?

A central line is preferred for long-term IV therapy in patients requiring frequent access due to several key factors. Central lines are designed to remain in place for extended periods, making them suitable for patients who need continued access for medication administration or nutrition, such as total parenteral nutrition (TPN).

Compared to peripheral IVs, which can become occluded, phlebitic, or may need to be replaced frequently, central lines reduce the need for repeated venipunctures and are less likely to be impacted by complications associated with peripheral placements. Additionally, central lines can accommodate larger volumes of fluid and a broader range of therapies, including hyperosmolar solutions that peripheral IVs may not be able to handle safely.

In scenarios involving the administration of electrolytes or hydration in outpatient settings, while these can sometimes be managed with peripheral IVs, they are typically not as convenient or safe for patients requiring ongoing treatment. Quick bolus administration of fluids can be effectively performed with peripheral IVs, making that option less aligned with the unique advantages presented by central lines in long-term therapy contexts.