Literature DB >> 23051883

Prevention of intravenous bacterial injection from health care provider hands: the importance of catheter design and handling.

Randy W Loftus1, Hetal M Patel, Bridget C Huysman, David P Kispert, Matthew D Koff, John D Gallagher, Jens T Jensen, John Rowlands, Sundara Reddy, Thomas M Dodds, Mark P Yeager, Kathryn L Ruoff, Stephen D Surgenor, Jeremiah R Brown.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Device-related bloodstream infections are associated with a significant increase in patient morbidity and mortality in multiple health care settings. Recently, intraoperative bacterial contamination of conventional open-lumen 3-way stopcock sets has been shown to be associated with increased patient mortality. Intraoperative use of disinfectable, needleless closed catheter devices (DNCCs) may reduce the risk of bacterial injection as compared to conventional open-lumen devices due to an intrinsic barrier to bacterial entry associated with valve design and/or the capacity for surface disinfection. However, the relative benefit of DNCC valve design (intrinsic barrier capacity) as compared to surface disinfection in attenuation of bacterial injection in the clinical environment is untested and entirely unknown. The primary aim of the current study was to investigate the relative efficacy of a novel disinfectable stopcock, the Ultraport zero, with and without disinfection in attenuating intraoperative injection of potential bacterial pathogens as compared to a conventional open-lumen stopcock intravascular device. The secondary aims were to identify risk factors for bacterial injection and to estimate the quantity of bacterial organisms injected during catheter handling.
METHODS: Four hundred sixty-eight operating room environments were randomized by a computer generated list to 1 of 3 device-injection schemes: (1) injection of the Ultraport zero stopcock with hub disinfection before injection, (2) injection of the Ultraport zero stopcock without prior hub disinfection, and (3) injection of the conventional open-lumen stopcock closed with sterile caps according to usual practice. After induction of general anesthesia, the primary anesthesia provider caring for patients in each operating room environment was asked to perform a series of 5 injections of sterile saline through the assigned device into an ex vivo catheter system. The primary outcome was the incidence of bacterial contamination of the injected fluid column (effluent). Risk factors for effluent contamination were identified in univariate analysis, and a controlled laboratory experiment was used to generate an estimate of the bacterial load injected for contaminated effluent samples.
RESULTS: The incidence of effluent bacterial contamination was 0% (0/152) for the Ultraport zero stopcock with hub disinfection before injection, 4% (7/162) for the Ultraport zero stopcock without hub disinfection before injection, and 3.2% (5/154) for the conventional open-lumen stopcock. The Ultraport zero stopcock with hub disinfection before injection was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of bacterial injection as compared to the conventional open-lumen stopcock (RR = 8.15 × 10(-8), 95% CI, 3.39 × 10(-8) to 1.96 × 10(-7), P = <0.001), with an absolute risk reduction of 3.2% (95% CI, 0.5% to 7.4%). Provider glove use was a risk factor for effluent contamination (RR = 10.48, 95% CI, 3.16 to 34.80, P < 0.001). The estimated quantity of bacteria injected reached a clinically significant threshold of 50,000 colony-forming units per each injection series.
CONCLUSIONS: The Ultraport zero stopcock with hub disinfection before injection was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of inadvertent bacterial injection as compared to the conventional open-lumen stopcock. Future studies should examine strategies designed to facilitate health care provider DNCC hub disinfection and proper device handling.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23051883     DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31826a1016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  6 in total

Review 1.  Perioperative Infection Transmission: the Role of the Anesthesia Provider in Infection Control and Healthcare-Associated Infections.

Authors:  Archit Sharma; Patrick G Fernandez; John P Rowlands; Matthew D Koff; Randy W Loftus
Journal:  Curr Anesthesiol Rep       Date:  2020-07-17

Review 2.  Disinfection of Needleless Connector Hubs: Clinical Evidence Systematic Review.

Authors:  Nancy L Moureau; Julie Flynn
Journal:  Nurs Res Pract       Date:  2015-05-14

3.  The effect of implementing an aseptic practice bundle for anaesthetists to reduce postoperative infections, the Anaesthetists Be Cleaner (ABC) study: protocol for a stepped wedge, cluster randomised, multi-site trial.

Authors:  Alan F Merry; Derryn A Gargiulo; Ian Bissett; David Cumin; Kerry English; Christopher Frampton; Richard Hamblin; Jacqueline Hannam; Matthew Moore; Papaarangi Reid; Sally Roberts; Elsa Taylor; Simon J Mitchell
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2019-06-10       Impact factor: 2.279

4.  Infectious Disease Risk Associated with Contaminated Propofol Anesthesia, 1989-2014(1).

Authors:  Andrés Zorrilla-Vaca; Jimmy J Arevalo; Kevin Escandón-Vargas; Daniel Soltanifar; Marek A Mirski
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 6.883

5.  Strategies for daily operating room management of ambulatory surgery centers following resolution of the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Franklin Dexter; Mohamed Elhakim; Randy W Loftus; Melinda S Seering; Richard H Epstein
Journal:  J Clin Anesth       Date:  2020-04-29       Impact factor: 9.452

Review 6.  Perioperative COVID-19 Defense: An Evidence-Based Approach for Optimization of Infection Control and Operating Room Management.

Authors:  Franklin Dexter; Michelle C Parra; Jeremiah R Brown; Randy W Loftus
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 6.627

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.