Cargando…

Does antimicrobial use density at the ward level influence monthly central line-associated bloodstream infection rates?

The aim of this study was to elucidate risk factors, including ward antimicrobial use density (AUD), for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in a 430-bed community hospital using central venous lines with closed-hub syst...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yoshida, Junichi, Harada, Yukiko, Kikuchi, Tetsuya, Asano, Ikuyo, Ueno, Takako, Matsubara, Nobuo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4266251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25525373
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S74347
_version_ 1782348998459260928
author Yoshida, Junichi
Harada, Yukiko
Kikuchi, Tetsuya
Asano, Ikuyo
Ueno, Takako
Matsubara, Nobuo
author_facet Yoshida, Junichi
Harada, Yukiko
Kikuchi, Tetsuya
Asano, Ikuyo
Ueno, Takako
Matsubara, Nobuo
author_sort Yoshida, Junichi
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to elucidate risk factors, including ward antimicrobial use density (AUD), for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in a 430-bed community hospital using central venous lines with closed-hub systems. We calculated AUD as (total dose)/(defined daily dose × patient days) ×1,000 for a total of 20 drugs, nine wards, and 24 months. Into each line day data, we inputed AUD and device utilization ratios, number of central line days, and CLABSI. The ratio of susceptible strains in isolates were subjected to correlation analysis with AUD. Of a total of 9,997 line days over 24 months, CLABSI was present in 33 cases (3.3 ‰), 14 (42.4%) of which were on surgical wards out of nine wards. Of a total of 43 strains isolated, eight (18.6%) were methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA); none of the MRSA-positive patients had received cefotiam before the onset of infection. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis showed that central line day 7 had the highest accuracy. Logistic regression analysis showed the central line day showed an odds ratio of 5.511 with a 95% confidence interval of 1.936–15.690 as did AUD of cefotiam showing an odds ratio of 0.220 with 95% confidence interval of 0.00527–0.922 (P=0.038). Susceptible strains ratio and AUD showed a negative correlation (R(2)=0.1897). Thus, CLABSI could be prevented by making the number of central line days as short as possible. The preventative role of AUD remains to be investigated.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4266251
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42662512014-12-18 Does antimicrobial use density at the ward level influence monthly central line-associated bloodstream infection rates? Yoshida, Junichi Harada, Yukiko Kikuchi, Tetsuya Asano, Ikuyo Ueno, Takako Matsubara, Nobuo Infect Drug Resist Original Research The aim of this study was to elucidate risk factors, including ward antimicrobial use density (AUD), for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in a 430-bed community hospital using central venous lines with closed-hub systems. We calculated AUD as (total dose)/(defined daily dose × patient days) ×1,000 for a total of 20 drugs, nine wards, and 24 months. Into each line day data, we inputed AUD and device utilization ratios, number of central line days, and CLABSI. The ratio of susceptible strains in isolates were subjected to correlation analysis with AUD. Of a total of 9,997 line days over 24 months, CLABSI was present in 33 cases (3.3 ‰), 14 (42.4%) of which were on surgical wards out of nine wards. Of a total of 43 strains isolated, eight (18.6%) were methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA); none of the MRSA-positive patients had received cefotiam before the onset of infection. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis showed that central line day 7 had the highest accuracy. Logistic regression analysis showed the central line day showed an odds ratio of 5.511 with a 95% confidence interval of 1.936–15.690 as did AUD of cefotiam showing an odds ratio of 0.220 with 95% confidence interval of 0.00527–0.922 (P=0.038). Susceptible strains ratio and AUD showed a negative correlation (R(2)=0.1897). Thus, CLABSI could be prevented by making the number of central line days as short as possible. The preventative role of AUD remains to be investigated. Dove Medical Press 2014-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4266251/ /pubmed/25525373 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S74347 Text en © 2014 Yoshida et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Yoshida, Junichi
Harada, Yukiko
Kikuchi, Tetsuya
Asano, Ikuyo
Ueno, Takako
Matsubara, Nobuo
Does antimicrobial use density at the ward level influence monthly central line-associated bloodstream infection rates?
title Does antimicrobial use density at the ward level influence monthly central line-associated bloodstream infection rates?
title_full Does antimicrobial use density at the ward level influence monthly central line-associated bloodstream infection rates?
title_fullStr Does antimicrobial use density at the ward level influence monthly central line-associated bloodstream infection rates?
title_full_unstemmed Does antimicrobial use density at the ward level influence monthly central line-associated bloodstream infection rates?
title_short Does antimicrobial use density at the ward level influence monthly central line-associated bloodstream infection rates?
title_sort does antimicrobial use density at the ward level influence monthly central line-associated bloodstream infection rates?
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4266251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25525373
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S74347
work_keys_str_mv AT yoshidajunichi doesantimicrobialusedensityatthewardlevelinfluencemonthlycentrallineassociatedbloodstreaminfectionrates
AT haradayukiko doesantimicrobialusedensityatthewardlevelinfluencemonthlycentrallineassociatedbloodstreaminfectionrates
AT kikuchitetsuya doesantimicrobialusedensityatthewardlevelinfluencemonthlycentrallineassociatedbloodstreaminfectionrates
AT asanoikuyo doesantimicrobialusedensityatthewardlevelinfluencemonthlycentrallineassociatedbloodstreaminfectionrates
AT uenotakako doesantimicrobialusedensityatthewardlevelinfluencemonthlycentrallineassociatedbloodstreaminfectionrates
AT matsubaranobuo doesantimicrobialusedensityatthewardlevelinfluencemonthlycentrallineassociatedbloodstreaminfectionrates