We have located links that may give you full text access.
Prospective cohort study of central venous catheters among internal medicine ward patients.
American Journal of Infection Control 2006 December
BACKGROUND: Central venous catheter (CVC) use is less well described for patients outside the intensive care unit. We evaluated CVCs and the associated bloodstream infection rate among patients admitted to the general medical service.
METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of patients who had a CVC on admission or inserted during their stay on the general medical service in a public teaching hospital, November 15, 2004, to March 31, 2005.
RESULTS: We identified 106 CVCs, 52 were present on admission and 54 were inserted; there were 682 catheter-days. The primary bloodstream infection rate was 4.4 per 1000 catheter-days (95% CI: 0.9-13): highest for catheters inserted in the emergency department compared with those inserted on other units (24 vs 1.7 per 1000 catheter-days), P = .045. By multivariable analysis, inadequate dressings were more likely among patients with a body mass index > or =30 kg/m(2), adjusted odds ratio, 3.4 (95% CI: 1.4-8.0).
CONCLUSIONS: Many CVCs had previously been inserted in the emergency department or intensive care unit; therefore, strategies to reduce bloodstream infections that focus on ward insertion practices may not dramatically reduce bloodstream infection rates. Intervention strategies should target improved dressing care and consideration of early removal or replacement of catheters inserted in the emergency department.
METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of patients who had a CVC on admission or inserted during their stay on the general medical service in a public teaching hospital, November 15, 2004, to March 31, 2005.
RESULTS: We identified 106 CVCs, 52 were present on admission and 54 were inserted; there were 682 catheter-days. The primary bloodstream infection rate was 4.4 per 1000 catheter-days (95% CI: 0.9-13): highest for catheters inserted in the emergency department compared with those inserted on other units (24 vs 1.7 per 1000 catheter-days), P = .045. By multivariable analysis, inadequate dressings were more likely among patients with a body mass index > or =30 kg/m(2), adjusted odds ratio, 3.4 (95% CI: 1.4-8.0).
CONCLUSIONS: Many CVCs had previously been inserted in the emergency department or intensive care unit; therefore, strategies to reduce bloodstream infections that focus on ward insertion practices may not dramatically reduce bloodstream infection rates. Intervention strategies should target improved dressing care and consideration of early removal or replacement of catheters inserted in the emergency department.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app