Literature DB >> 22020239

Zero risk for central line-associated bloodstream infection: are we there yet?.

Mary-Louise McLaws1, Anthony R Burrell.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Identify the longest period a central line remains free from central line-associated bloodstream infection during an 18-month insertion-bundle project.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort.
SETTING: New South Wales adult intensive care units at university teaching hospitals between July 2007 and December 2008. PATIENTS: Intensive care unit adult patients whose central line was inserted in the intensive care unit. INTERVENTION: Compliance with the insertion bundle for central lines during the first 12-month roll-out period and the last 6 months. MAIN OUTCOMES: The cumulative line days that remained close to infection-free before the lowest probability of central line-associated bloodstream infection, 1 in 100 chances, was identified using conditional probability modeling. An adjusted central line-associated bloodstream infection rate was calculated for these cumulated line days and thereafter where the probability for infection increased with additional dwell time.
RESULTS: The lowest probability identified for central line-associated bloodstream infection was 1 in 100 chances regardless of the phase of the project or central line type. During the first 12 months of the project, the close to infection-free period finished by the end of day 7 giving an adjusted central line-associated bloodstream infection rate of 1.8 (95% confidence interval 0.9-3.3)/1000 line days. By the last 6 months of the project the close to infection-free period was extended by 2 additional line days to the end of day 9, giving an adjusted central line-associated bloodstream infection rate of 0.9 (95% confidence interval 0.5-1.5)/1,000 line days. For dialysis and unspecified central line types, the close to infection-free period was extended by 5 additional line days, from day 2 with a rate of 4.3 (95% confidence interval 0.9-12.5)/1,000 line days to day 7, giving a rate of 0.6 (95% confidence interval 0.2-2.4)/1,000 line days.
CONCLUSION: The success of the insertion bundle was identified by improved analysis that identified that the safest dwell time was extended to the first 9 days for centrally inserted lines and up to day 7 for dialysis, peripherally inserted central catheters, and unspecified central line types. Given that three quarters of intensive care unit patients have their central line removed by day 7, zero risk for central line-associated bloodstream infection should be achievable in the majority of patients where clinicians comply with the clinician and patient insertion bundles.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22020239     DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318232e4f3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  8 in total

1.  Reducing central line infections in pediatric and neonatal patients.

Authors:  Simon Li; Edward Vincent S Faustino; Sergio G Golombek
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.725

Review 2.  Prevention of central line-associated bloodstream infections through quality improvement interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Koen Blot; Jochen Bergs; Dirk Vogelaers; Stijn Blot; Dominique Vandijck
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Duration of central venous catheter placement and central line-associated bloodstream infections after the adoption of prevention bundles: a two-year retrospective study.

Authors:  Vassiliki Pitiriga; John Bakalis; Elsa Kampos; Petros Kanellopoulos; George Saroglou; Athanasios Tsakris
Journal:  Antimicrob Resist Infect Control       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 6.454

4.  Prevention of hospital infections by intervention and training (PROHIBIT): results of a pan-European cluster-randomized multicentre study to reduce central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections.

Authors:  Tjallie van der Kooi; Hugo Sax; Didier Pittet; Jaap van Dissel; Birgit van Benthem; Bernhard Walder; Vanessa Cartier; Lauren Clack; Sabine de Greeff; Martin Wolkewitz; Stefanie Hieke; Hendriek Boshuizen; Jan van de Kassteele; Annemie Van den Abeele; Teck Wee Boo; Magda Diab-Elschahawi; Uga Dumpis; Camelia Ghita; Susan FitzGerald; Tatjana Lejko; Kris Leleu; Mercedes Palomar Martinez; Olga Paniara; Márta Patyi; Paweł Schab; Annibale Raglio; Emese Szilágyi; Mirosław Ziętkiewicz; Albert W Wu; Hajo Grundmann; Walter Zingg
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2017-12-16       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  The Incidence of Central Line-Associated Bacteremia After the Introduction of Midline Catheters in a Ventilator Unit Population.

Authors:  Rahul Pathak; Anish Patel; Hilary Enuh; Oluwaseyi Adekunle; Vasanthy Shrisgantharajah; Keith Diaz
Journal:  Infect Dis Clin Pract (Baltim Md)       Date:  2015-05

Review 6.  The relationship between hand hygiene and health care-associated infection: it's complicated.

Authors:  Mary-Louise McLaws
Journal:  Infect Drug Resist       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 4.003

7.  A survey of preventive measures used and their impact on central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in intensive care units (SPIN-BACC).

Authors:  Milagros Gonzales; Isabelle Rocher; Elise Fortin; Patricia Fontela; Mohammed Kaouache; Claude Tremblay; Charles Frenette; Caroline Quach
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2013-12-01       Impact factor: 3.090

8.  Effect of Central Line Bundle Compliance on Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections.

Authors:  Kyoung Hwa Lee; Nan Hyoung Cho; Su Jin Jeong; Mi Na Kim; Sang Hoon Han; Young Goo Song
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 2.759

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.