Factors predicting the cause and prognosis of central line-associated bloodstream infections

Nemoto, Takaaki; Kunishima, Hiroyuki; Shimizu, Gohji; Hirose, Masahiro; Yamasaki, Yukitaka; Nishisako, Hisashi; Takagi, Taeko; Matsuda, Takahide

doi:10.1016/j.jiac.2014.10.010

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While CLABSIs occurred more commonly in men (n = 19, 55.8%) this did not reach statistical significance ( P = 0.73). The distribution of organisms identified in our CLABSIs mirrored previously reported studies, with gram-positive bacteria being the most prevalent, followed by gram-negative bacteria and fungi (Fontela et al, 2012; Nemoto et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

A quality assurance investigation of CLABSI events: are there exceptions to never?

Strickler

Gupta

Doucette

et al. 2017

Journal of Infection Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

A quality assurance investigation of CLABSI events: are there exceptions to never?

Strickler

Gupta

Doucette

et al. 2017

Journal of Infection Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study, the predominant infectious microorganisms isolated from CLABSI episodes were Gram‐negative bacteria, notably Acinetobacter baumannii , which was in agreement with the findings of a previous study (Bukhari et al, ). However, it was also reported (Nemoto et al, ) that Gram‐positive bacteria were the main infectious microorganisms in CLABSI episodes. In the present study, 45.9% of the central lines were inserted through the femoral vein, and femoral vein insertion is reportedly one of the risk factors for infection by Gram‐negative bacteria (Mermel et al, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

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

Meng

et al. 2019

Int J of Nursing Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 lineassociated 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.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

show abstract

“…We examined the type of bacteria that causes bacterial contamination as a related factor. We used S. aureus in the present study because it is one of the most frequently isolated pathogens from the epidermis and central line-associated bloodstream infections [8,9]. Therefore, ATCC 29213 was selected as the standard strain because it exhibits an intermediate biofilm formation ability as an adhesion factor [10].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, ATCC 29213 was selected as the standard strain because it exhibits an intermediate biofilm formation ability as an adhesion factor [10]. Gram-negative bacillus, particularly Pseudomonas aeruginosa, is a known cause of catheter-related bloodstream infections [9]. As with S. aureus, gram-negative bacilli may also cause contamination of a needle while a package is being opened.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bacterial contamination upon the opening of injection needles

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Two opening methods are used for injection needle products: the "peel-apart method" where the adhesive surface of the packaging mount is peeled off, and the "push-off top method," where the needle hub is pressed against the mount to break it. However, the risks of bacterial contamination as a result of opening method remain unknown. The aim of our study was to evaluate the bacterial contamination of needle hubs upon the opening of injection needles by the peel-apart or push-off top method under various conditions. Methods: Bacterial contamination upon the opening of injection needles was examined in two materials, paper and plastic. Various concentrations of Staphylococcus aureus were applied to the mount and were maintained under wet or dry conditions. Injection needles were opened using the peel-apart or push-off top method. Needle hub contamination was examined using agar medium colony counting. Clinically assumed conditions (the hands and saliva of anesthesiologists) were also evaluated. Data were statistically examined using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel, Jonckheere, and Fisher's exact tests. Results: The lateral surfaces of needle hubs were contaminated using the push-off top method, but not by the peelapart method, in a manner that was dependent on S. aureus concentrations. No significant differences were observed between mount materials. Needle hub contamination was significantly more severe for the wet than for the dry opening portion. The clinically assumed condition study revealed that the lateral and bottom surfaces of the needle hub were contaminated significantly more in the saliva contamination group than in the dry and wet hand groups. Conclusions: The bacterial contamination of needle hubs may occur upon the opening of injection needles when the push-off top method is used and may be affected by hands contaminated with saliva under clinical conditions.

show abstract

Factors predicting the cause and prognosis of central line-associated bloodstream infections

Cited by 8 publications

References 15 publications

A quality assurance investigation of CLABSI events: are there exceptions to never?

A quality assurance investigation of CLABSI events: are there exceptions to never?

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

Bacterial contamination upon the opening of injection needles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About