Chlorhexidine gluconate transparent dressing does not decrease central line‐associated bloodstream infection in critically ill patients: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Central line‐associated blood stream infections are accompanied by increased mortality and health care costs. The application of different types of dressings in infection control has not been fully investigated to date. AIM: To assess the effects of two different dressing types on central line‐associated bloodstream infections. METHODS: A randomized, nonblinded, controlled trial was conducted. Central lines were randomly allocated to intervention (chlorhexidine gluconate transparent dressing, n = 259) and control groups (standard dressing, n = 215). The central line‐associated bloodstream infection rate was assessed. RESULTS: A statistically nonsignificant difference was noted in the overall central line‐associated bloodstream infection rates between the two groups. The frequency of dressing changes in the patients with the chlorhexidine gluconate transparent dressing was significantly lower than that in the patients with a standard dressing. The predominant type of infectious microorganisms isolated from the central line‐associated bloodstream infection episodes was Gram‐negative bacteria (57.2%). Gram‐positive bacteria and fungi were noted at lower percentages (28.5% and 14.3%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The use of a chlorhexidine gluconate transparent dressing does not decrease the central line‐associated bloodstream infection rate, although it decreases the frequency of dressing changes so may save nursing time.