Background of Study: In modern medical practice, approximately 90% of patients in acute care setting receive some form of intravenous infusion therapy (JeniseWillin, 1999). Phlebitis is one of the most common complications of IV therapy. Among hospitalized patients, 25% to70% of patients receiving IV therapy develops phlebitis. According to statistics, the most common grade of phlebitis were 1 and 2 (37% and 53.6%, respectively) [1]. Objectives: 1. To assess the degree of phlebitis, 2. To determine the effect of cold glycerin magsulf application in relieving phlebitis, 3. To determine the effect of hot glycerin magsulf application in relieving phlebitis, 4. To compare the effectiveness between cold and hot glycerin magsulf application in relieving phlebitis. Methods and Material: This study was conducted with the objectives to determine the effect of hot and cold glycerin magsulf application in relieving phlebitis among patients in a selected hospital.Hence evaluative research approach was considered as appropriate. With this approach it would be possible to evaluate the effectiveness of hot and cold glycerin magsuf application in relieving phlebitis. It consists of two group’s pre- test post- test, designed to assess the effectiveness of hot and cold glycerin magsulf in relieving phlebitis.The research design selected for the present study was quasi experimental two group pre-test and post-test design. Study conducted in medical surgical wards target population was patient with infusion phlebitis. Samples collected by purposive sampling technique. Research tool was standard infusion phlebitis scale and descriptive and inferential statistically, paired test “t” test was used for analysis. Reliability was established by interrater method and it was found as r = 0.88. Results: Majority of sample i.e. 96.6% were found with grade 3. None of sample had Grade 1 and Grade 5. For the grade 4 phebitis need to do further study, this 4 degree of phlebitis not relived in 5 days of intervention with hot and cold glycerin magsulf application. As per day of relief proved that hot glycerin magsulf application was more effective than the cold glycerin magsulf application. All over 56% of sample in hot glycerin magsulf application and 26.63% of sample in cold glycerin magsulf application got relief on the 3rd day and 43% of sample in cold glycerin magsulf application and 6.67% of hot glycerin magsulf application relief on the 4th day. Majority of sample got relief on the 3rd day with hot glycerin magsulf application. So hot glycerin magsulf application was more effective than cold glycerin magsulf application in reliving phlebitis. The effectiveness of hot and cold glycerin magsulf application in relieving phlebitis at pre and posttest. Mean, standard deviation and mean difference values were compared and student’s paired ‘t’ test was applied at 0.05 level of significance. The tabulated ‘t’ value was 2.05. The calculated ‘t’ value was much higher than the tabulated value at 0.05 level of significance which is statistically acceptable level of significance. Hence it is statistically interpreted that hot and cold glycerin magsulf applications in relieving phlebitis were effective. Conclusion: In this study, during a period of data collection the visual infusion phlebitis scale was used, onset of phlebitis, degree of phlebitis, site and size of cannulation were observed. Data showed that, majority of sample were found with grade three phlebitis and both the interventions i.e. hot glycerin magsulf and cold glycerin magsulf application both are effective which is already proved but as compare to cold glycerin magsulf application hot glycerin magsulf application is more effective in relieving phlebitis. Sample with grade 4 Phlebitis is not relieved in four days of intervention. Further study may need to prove this. In conclusion investigator state that the aim of investigator was achieved. This study can improve the outcome of nursing practice, which has been proven to be relevant also from a legal point of view. In fact, evidence based nursing is safer both for patients and nurses themselves.