Share This Link

Reducing the cost of cancer treatment is not the primary reason IV therapy is preferred for chemotherapy. In fact, IV administration can be expensive due to the need for specialized equipment, infusion centers, and trained personnel. While cost considerations are important in healthcare, the choice of IV therapy is based on pharmacokinetics and therapeutic effectiveness rather than financial savings. Therefore, this option is incorrect.

IV therapy does not eliminate side effects of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy drugs are cytotoxic and affect both cancerous and healthy rapidly dividing cells, leading to side effects such as nausea, hair loss, and immunosuppression. The route of administration does not prevent these systemic effects because once the drug enters circulation, it impacts multiple tissues. Thus, this option is scientifically inaccurate.

IV therapy is not the only method available for administering chemotherapy. Chemotherapy can also be given orally, intrathecally (into the cerebrospinal fluid), or via intraperitoneal infusion depending on the type of cancer and drug formulation. However, IV therapy is most commonly used because of its effectiveness in achieving rapid systemic distribution. Therefore, this option is incorrect

IV therapy does not eliminate the need for continuous monitoring. In fact, patients receiving IV therapy in critical care require close monitoring for complications such as infiltration, phlebitis, infection, and adverse drug reactions. Continuous monitoring is essential to ensure patient safety and therapeutic effectiveness, so this option is incorrect.

IV therapy does not inherently reduce the risk of drug interactions. Drug interactions depend on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of the medications themselves, not the route of administration. IV therapy may even increase the risk of interactions because drugs enter the bloodstream rapidly and act systemically. Therefore, this option is inaccurate.

IV therapy is not non-invasive. It requires puncturing the skin and inserting a catheter into a vein, which is considered invasive. Non-invasive routes include oral, sublingual, or transdermal administration. Thus, this option is incorrect.

Leaving air bubbles in infusion tubing is unsafe because air embolism can occur if air enters the bloodstream. Even small amounts of air can cause complications such as chest pain, shortness of breath, or circulatory collapse. Therefore, this action demonstrates a lack of understanding of safe IV practice.

Inserting a new IV device distal to the old IV site is incorrect. The new IV should be placed proximal to the old site or in a different vein to avoid complications such as infiltration or phlebitis from the previous site. Distal placement increases the risk of leakage and poor flow.

Shaving hair before IV insertion is not recommended because shaving can cause microabrasions, increasing the risk of infection. If hair interferes with placement, clipping is preferred rather than shaving. Thus, this option is incorrect.

Selecting a vein in the patient’s dominant arm is not a priority. In fact, using the dominant arm may interfere with mobility and daily activities. Vein selection should be based on accessibility, size, and condition rather than dominance.

Preparing the site with alcohol swabs only is inadequate. Proper skin antisepsis requires chlorhexidine or iodine-based solutions, which are more effective at reducing microbial load. Alcohol alone does not provide sufficient protection against infection.

Choosing a large-gauge needle is not always appropriate. While larger gauges allow faster fluid administration, they can damage smaller veins and increase discomfort. The gauge should be selected based on vein size, patient condition, and therapy requirements, not arbitrarily large.

Increasing intake of caffeinated beverages is harmful for clients at risk of osteoporosis. Caffeine can increase calcium excretion in urine, which reduces bone mineral density over time. This worsens the risk of osteoporosis rather than preventing it.

Limiting calcium intake to 600 mg per dose is misleading. While calcium should be taken in divided doses for better absorption, the total daily requirement for adults at risk of osteoporosis is higher, typically 1000–1200 mg per day. Restricting intake to 600 mg per dose without ensuring adequate daily intake would not provide sufficient protection against bone loss.

Taking 400 IU of vitamin D per day is insufficient for osteoporosis prevention. Adults at risk often require 800–1000 IU daily to maintain adequate serum vitamin D levels, which are essential for calcium absorption and bone health. Therefore, this option is not the best recommendation.

IV therapy does not eliminate the need for dietary modifications. Patients with dehydration may still require nutritional support and oral fluid intake once stabilized. IV therapy addresses acute fluid and electrolyte deficits but does not replace long-term dietary management.

IV therapy is not less invasive than oral rehydration solutions. Oral rehydration is non-invasive, while IV therapy requires venipuncture and catheter placement, making it invasive. This option is incorrect.

IV therapy does not aim for gradual rehydration over several days. Instead, it is used for rapid correction of severe dehydration. Gradual rehydration is more appropriate for mild dehydration managed orally.

Administering sodium bicarbonate is contraindicated in metabolic alkalosis. Sodium bicarbonate is used to treat metabolic acidosis, not alkalosis. Giving it would worsen the alkalotic state and increase complications.

Insulin is not indicated for metabolic alkalosis. Insulin is used in cases of hyperkalemia or diabetic ketoacidosis, not alkalosis. This option is inappropriate.

Breathing into a paper bag is used to treat respiratory alkalosis by increasing carbon dioxide levels. It is not effective for metabolic alkalosis, which is caused by excess bicarbonate or loss of hydrogen ions. Therefore, this option is incorrect.

Initiating blood transfusions is outside the LVN scope of practice in Texas. Blood transfusions require RN oversight due to the risk of severe complications such as transfusion reactions, fluid overload, or hemolysis. LVNs may monitor patients after transfusion initiation but cannot independently start the transfusion.

Administering chemotherapy is not permitted for LVNs. Chemotherapy drugs are highly toxic, require specialized handling, and demand advanced knowledge of oncology protocols. Only RNs with specialized certification or advanced practice nurses can administer chemotherapy.

Central line placement is a complex invasive procedure requiring advanced training and sterile technique. It is performed by physicians, nurse practitioners, or physician assistants, not LVNs. LVNs may assist with care of central lines but cannot insert them.

The jugular vein is not commonly used for peripheral IV therapy. It is a central vein typically accessed for central venous catheters, not routine peripheral IVs.

The femoral vein is also a central vein and is used in emergencies or when upper extremity access is not possible. It is not a first-line choice for peripheral IV therapy due to infection risk and difficulty maintaining patency.

The basilic vein is also used for IV therapy but is less commonly chosen compared to the cephalic vein. It is located medially and can be more difficult to stabilize during insertion. While it is a viable option, it is not the most common.

Hives are a manifestation of an allergic transfusion reaction, not an acute hemolytic reaction. Allergic reactions are typically mild and involve urticaria, itching, and sometimes fever.

Distended neck veins are more indicative of circulatory overload or congestive heart failure rather than hemolytic reaction. This occurs when too much fluid is infused too quickly, leading to pulmonary edema and increased venous pressure.

Wheezing is associated with an anaphylactic or severe allergic transfusion reaction, not hemolysis. It results from bronchospasm and airway involvement due to hypersensitivity.