OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and cost-effectiveness of replacing the intravenous (IV) tubing sets in hospitalized patients at 4- to 7-day intervals instead of every 72 hours. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized study of infusion-related contamination associated with changing IV tubing sets within 3 days versus within 4 to 7 days of placement. SETTING:A tertiary university cancer center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cancer patients requiring IV infusion therapy were randomized to have the IV tubing sets replaced within 3 days (280 patients) or within 4 to 7 days of placement (232 patients). Demographic, microbiological, and infusion-related data were collected for all participants. The main outcome measures were infusion- or catheter-related contamination or colonization of IV tubing, determined by quantitative cultures of the infusate, and infusion- or catheter-related bloodstream infection (BSI), determined by quantitative culture of the infusate in association with blood cultures in febrile patients. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable in terms of patient and catheter characteristics and the agents given through the IV tubing. Intent-to-treat analysis demonstrated a higher level of tubing colonization in the 4- to 7-day group versus the 3-day group (median, 145 vs 50 colony-forming units; P=.02). In addition, there were three episodes of possible infusion-related BSIs, all of which occurred in the 4- to 7-day group (P=.09). However, when the 84 patients who received total parenteral nutrition, blood transfusions, or interleukin-2 through the IV tubing were excluded, the two groups had a comparable rate of colonization (0.4% vs 0.5%), with no catheter- or infusion-related BSIs in either group. CONCLUSION: In patients at low risk for infection from infusion- or catheter-related infection who are not receiving total parenteral nutrition, blood transfusions, or interleukin-2, delaying the replacement of IV tubing up to 7 days may be safe, as well as cost-effective
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and cost-effectiveness of replacing the intravenous (IV) tubing sets in hospitalized patients at 4- to 7-day intervals instead of every 72 hours. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized study of infusion-related contamination associated with changing IV tubing sets within 3 days versus within 4 to 7 days of placement. SETTING: A tertiary university cancer center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cancerpatients requiring IV infusion therapy were randomized to have the IV tubing sets replaced within 3 days (280 patients) or within 4 to 7 days of placement (232 patients). Demographic, microbiological, and infusion-related data were collected for all participants. The main outcome measures were infusion- or catheter-related contamination or colonization of IV tubing, determined by quantitative cultures of the infusate, and infusion- or catheter-related bloodstream infection (BSI), determined by quantitative culture of the infusate in association with blood cultures in febrile patients. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable in terms of patient and catheter characteristics and the agents given through the IV tubing. Intent-to-treat analysis demonstrated a higher level of tubing colonization in the 4- to 7-day group versus the 3-day group (median, 145 vs 50 colony-forming units; P=.02). In addition, there were three episodes of possible infusion-related BSIs, all of which occurred in the 4- to 7-day group (P=.09). However, when the 84 patients who received total parenteral nutrition, blood transfusions, or interleukin-2 through the IV tubing were excluded, the two groups had a comparable rate of colonization (0.4% vs 0.5%), with no catheter- or infusion-related BSIs in either group. CONCLUSION: In patients at low risk for infection from infusion- or catheter-related infection who are not receiving total parenteral nutrition, blood transfusions, or interleukin-2, delaying the replacement of IV tubing up to 7 days may be safe, as well as cost-effective
Authors: Naomi P O'Grady; Mary Alexander; Lillian A Burns; E Patchen Dellinger; Jeffrey Garland; Stephen O Heard; Pamela A Lipsett; Henry Masur; Leonard A Mermel; Michele L Pearson; Issam I Raad; Adrienne G Randolph; Mark E Rupp; Sanjay Saint Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2011-04-01 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: H P Loveday; J A Wilson; R J Pratt; M Golsorkhi; A Tingle; A Bak; J Browne; J Prieto; M Wilcox Journal: J Hosp Infect Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 3.926
Authors: Amanda J Ullman; Marie L Cooke; Donna Gillies; Nicole M Marsh; Azlina Daud; Matthew R McGrail; Elizabeth O'Riordan; Claire M Rickard Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2013-09-15
Authors: Claire M Rickard; Nicole M Marsh; Joan Webster; Nicole C Gavin; Matthew R McGrail; Emily Larsen; Amanda Corley; Debbie Long; John R Gowardman; Marghie Murgo; John F Fraser; Raymond J Chan; Marianne C Wallis; Jeanine Young; David McMillan; Li Zhang; Md Abu Choudhury; Nicholas Graves; E Geoffrey Playford Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-02-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: K W Jauch; W Schregel; Z Stanga; S C Bischoff; P Brass; W Hartl; S Muehlebach; E Pscheidl; P Thul; O Volk Journal: Ger Med Sci Date: 2009-11-18