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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |