Cargando…

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

HYPOTHESIS: Our objective was to evaluate whether the use of midline venous catheters in place of central line venous catheters, when appropriate, decreased the overall incidence of central line–associated bacteremia in a ventilator unit. METHODS: The time interval between February 2012 and February...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pathak, Rahul, Patel, Anish, Enuh, Hilary, Adekunle, Oluwaseyi, Shrisgantharajah, Vasanthy, Diaz, Keith
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4420154/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25972725
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/IPC.0000000000000237
_version_ 1782369680362569728
author Pathak, Rahul
Patel, Anish
Enuh, Hilary
Adekunle, Oluwaseyi
Shrisgantharajah, Vasanthy
Diaz, Keith
author_facet Pathak, Rahul
Patel, Anish
Enuh, Hilary
Adekunle, Oluwaseyi
Shrisgantharajah, Vasanthy
Diaz, Keith
author_sort Pathak, Rahul
collection PubMed
description HYPOTHESIS: Our objective was to evaluate whether the use of midline venous catheters in place of central line venous catheters, when appropriate, decreased the overall incidence of central line–associated bacteremia in a ventilator unit. METHODS: The time interval between February 2012 and February 2013 was divided into 2 periods. Group A was the first half of the year, before the introduction of midline catheters, and group B was the second half of the year, 6 months after their introduction. Central line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) was calculated using the equation: (total number of CLABSI/total number of catheter days) × 1000. The Z test was used for proportions between independent groups to compare the significance in the difference in CLABSI between groups A and B. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in the total number of catheter days on the ventilator unit in group A from 2408 catheter days in 1 year (August 1, 2011, to July 31, 2012) before the introduction of midline catheters to 1521 catheter days in group B in the following year (November 1, 2012, to October 31, 2013; P < 0.05 for both groups). CONCLUSIONS: Midline catheters in place of central lines decrease the rate of CLABSI in a ventilator unit. In addition, no bloodstream infections were associated with midline catheters.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4420154
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44201542015-05-11 The Incidence of Central Line–Associated Bacteremia After the Introduction of Midline Catheters in a Ventilator Unit Population Pathak, Rahul Patel, Anish Enuh, Hilary Adekunle, Oluwaseyi Shrisgantharajah, Vasanthy Diaz, Keith Infect Dis Clin Pract (Baltim Md) Original Articles HYPOTHESIS: Our objective was to evaluate whether the use of midline venous catheters in place of central line venous catheters, when appropriate, decreased the overall incidence of central line–associated bacteremia in a ventilator unit. METHODS: The time interval between February 2012 and February 2013 was divided into 2 periods. Group A was the first half of the year, before the introduction of midline catheters, and group B was the second half of the year, 6 months after their introduction. Central line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) was calculated using the equation: (total number of CLABSI/total number of catheter days) × 1000. The Z test was used for proportions between independent groups to compare the significance in the difference in CLABSI between groups A and B. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in the total number of catheter days on the ventilator unit in group A from 2408 catheter days in 1 year (August 1, 2011, to July 31, 2012) before the introduction of midline catheters to 1521 catheter days in group B in the following year (November 1, 2012, to October 31, 2013; P < 0.05 for both groups). CONCLUSIONS: Midline catheters in place of central lines decrease the rate of CLABSI in a ventilator unit. In addition, no bloodstream infections were associated with midline catheters. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2015-05 2015-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4420154/ /pubmed/25972725 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/IPC.0000000000000237 Text en Copyright © 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License, where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Pathak, Rahul
Patel, Anish
Enuh, Hilary
Adekunle, Oluwaseyi
Shrisgantharajah, Vasanthy
Diaz, Keith
The Incidence of Central Line–Associated Bacteremia After the Introduction of Midline Catheters in a Ventilator Unit Population
title The Incidence of Central Line–Associated Bacteremia After the Introduction of Midline Catheters in a Ventilator Unit Population
title_full The Incidence of Central Line–Associated Bacteremia After the Introduction of Midline Catheters in a Ventilator Unit Population
title_fullStr The Incidence of Central Line–Associated Bacteremia After the Introduction of Midline Catheters in a Ventilator Unit Population
title_full_unstemmed The Incidence of Central Line–Associated Bacteremia After the Introduction of Midline Catheters in a Ventilator Unit Population
title_short The Incidence of Central Line–Associated Bacteremia After the Introduction of Midline Catheters in a Ventilator Unit Population
title_sort incidence of central line–associated bacteremia after the introduction of midline catheters in a ventilator unit population
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4420154/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25972725
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/IPC.0000000000000237
work_keys_str_mv AT pathakrahul theincidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT patelanish theincidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT enuhhilary theincidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT adekunleoluwaseyi theincidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT shrisgantharajahvasanthy theincidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT diazkeith theincidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT pathakrahul incidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT patelanish incidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT enuhhilary incidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT adekunleoluwaseyi incidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT shrisgantharajahvasanthy incidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation
AT diazkeith incidenceofcentrallineassociatedbacteremiaaftertheintroductionofmidlinecathetersinaventilatorunitpopulation