Preventing Catheter-Associated UTI in Acute Care
In this study of an educational program to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infection, implemented in more than 10% of U.S. acute care ...hospitals, both catheter use and catheter-associated UTI rates were significantly decreased in the non-ICU setting.
Catheter-associated urinary tract infection (UTI) is a common device-associated infection in the United States
1
and one of the most common health care–associated infections worldwide.
2
Up to 69% of catheter-associated UTIs are considered to be avoidable, provided that recommended infection-prevention practices are implemented.
3
Guidelines for the prevention of catheter-associated UTIs recommend appropriate use, aseptic insertion, proper maintenance, and timely removal of indwelling urinary catheters, as well as use of established practices such as hand hygiene.
4
–
6
In addition to these technical aspects of prevention, there has been a focus on the roles that changes in behavior and culture (the socioadaptive component . . .
Abstract The widespread use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has transformed the care of medical and surgical patients. Whereas intravenous antibiotics, parenteral nutrition, and ...administration of chemotherapy once necessitated prolonged hospitalization, PICCs have eliminated the need for such practice. However, PICCs may not be as innocuous as once thought; a growing body of evidence suggests that these devices also have important risks. This review discusses the origin of PICCs and highlights reasons behind their rapid adoption in medical practice. We evaluate the evidence behind 2 important PICC-related complications—venous thrombosis and bloodstream infections—and describe how initial studies may have led to a false sense of security with respect to these outcomes. In this context, we introduce a conceptual model to understand the risk of PICC-related complications and guide the use of these devices. Through this model, we outline recommendations that clinicians may use to prevent PICC-related adverse events. We conclude by highlighting important knowledge gaps and identifying avenues for future research in this area.
IMPORTANCE: Indwelling devices (eg, urinary catheters and feeding tubes) are often used in nursing homes (NHs). Inadequate care of residents with these devices contributes to high rates of ...multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) and device-related infections in NHs. OBJECTIVE: To test whether a multimodal targeted infection program (TIP) reduces the prevalence of MDROs and incident device-related infections. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized clinical trial at 12 community-based NHs from May 2010 to April 2013. Participants were high-risk NH residents with urinary catheters, feeding tubes, or both. INTERVENTIONS: Multimodal, including preemptive barrier precautions, active surveillance for MDROs and infections, and NH staff education. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the prevalence density rate of MDROs, defined as the total number of MDROs isolated per visit averaged over the duration of a resident’s participation. Secondary outcomes included new MDRO acquisitions and new clinically defined device-associated infections. Data were analyzed using a mixed-effects multilevel Poisson regression model (primary outcome) and a Cox proportional hazards model (secondary outcome), adjusting for facility-level clustering and resident-level variables. RESULTS: In total, 418 NH residents with indwelling devices were enrolled, with 34 174 device-days and 6557 anatomic sites sampled. Intervention NHs had a decrease in the overall MDRO prevalence density (rate ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.94). The rate of new methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus acquisitions was lower in the intervention group than in the control group (rate ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.96). Hazard ratios for the first and all (including recurrent) clinically defined catheter-associated urinary tract infections were 0.54 (95% CI, 0.30-0.97) and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.49-0.99), respectively, in the intervention group and the control group. There were no reductions in new vancomycin-resistant enterococci or resistant gram-negative bacilli acquisitions or in new feeding tube–associated pneumonias or skin and soft-tissue infections. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our multimodal TIP intervention reduced the overall MDRO prevalence density, new methicillin-resistant S aureus acquisitions, and clinically defined catheter-associated urinary tract infection rates in high-risk NH residents with indwelling devices. Further studies are needed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of this approach as well as its effects on the reduction of MDRO transmission to other residents, on the environment, and on referring hospitals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01062841
Summary Background Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism. However, the size of this risk relative to that associated with ...other central venous catheters (CVCs) is unknown. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the risk of venous thromboembolism associated with PICCs versus that associated with other CVCs. Methods We searched several databases, including Medline, Embase, Biosis, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Conference Papers Index, and Scopus. Additional studies were identified through hand searches of bibliographies and internet searches, and we contacted study authors to obtain unpublished data. All human studies published in full text, abstract, or poster form were eligible for inclusion. All studies were of adult patients aged at least 18 years who underwent insertion of a PICC. Studies were assessed with the Newcastle–Ottawa risk of bias scale. In studies without a comparison group, the pooled frequency of venous thromboembolism was calculated for patients receiving PICCs. In studies comparing PICCs with other CVCs, summary odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with a random effects meta-analysis. Findings Of the 533 citations identified, 64 studies (12 with a comparison group and 52 without) including 29 503 patients met the eligibility criteria. In the non-comparison studies, the weighted frequency of PICC-related deep vein thrombosis was highest in patients who were critically ill (13·91%, 95% CI 7·68–20·14) and those with cancer (6·67%, 4·69–8·64). Our meta-analysis of 11 studies comparing the risk of deep vein thrombosis related to PICCs with that related to CVCs showed that PICCs were associated with an increased risk of deep vein thrombosis (OR 2·55, 1·54–4·23, p<0·0001) but not pulmonary embolism (no events). With the baseline PICC-related deep vein thrombosis rate of 2·7% and pooled OR of 2·55, the number needed to harm relative to CVCs was 26 (95% CI 13–71). Interpretation PICCs are associated with a higher risk of deep vein thrombosis than are CVCs, especially in patients who are critically ill or those with a malignancy. The decision to insert PICCs should be guided by weighing of the risk of thrombosis against the benefit provided by these devices. Funding None.
Use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has grown substantially in recent years. Increasing use has led to the realization that PICCs are associated with important complications, ...including thrombosis and infection. Moreover, some PICCs may not be placed for clinically valid reasons. Defining appropriate indications for insertion, maintenance, and care of PICCs is thus important for patient safety. An international panel was convened that applied the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to develop criteria for use of PICCs. After systematic reviews of the literature, scenarios related to PICC use, care, and maintenance were developed according to patient population (for example, general hospitalized, critically ill, cancer, kidney disease), indication for insertion (infusion of peripherally compatible infusates vs. vesicants), and duration of use (≤5 days, 6 to 14 days, 15 to 30 days, or ≥31 days). Within each scenario, appropriateness of PICC use was compared with that of other venous access devices. After review of 665 scenarios, 253 (38%) were rated as appropriate, 124 (19%) as neutral/uncertain, and 288 (43%) as inappropriate. For peripherally compatible infusions, PICC use was rated as inappropriate when the proposed duration of use was 5 or fewer days. Midline catheters and ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous catheters were preferred to PICCs for use between 6 and 14 days. In critically ill patients, nontunneled central venous catheters were preferred over PICCs when 14 or fewer days of use were likely. In patients with cancer, PICCs were rated as appropriate for irritant or vesicant infusion, regardless of duration. The panel of experts used a validated method to develop appropriate indications for PICC use across patient populations. These criteria can be used to improve care, inform quality improvement efforts, and advance the safety of medical patients.
Hunting for a Diagnosis Houchens, Nathan; Hartley, Sarah; Commins, Scott P ...
New England journal of medicine/The New England journal of medicine,
02/2021, Letnik:
384, Številka:
5
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
A 47-year-old man in Michigan presented to the ED with a 1-day history of presyncope, swelling of the eyelids, and diffuse pruritic rash. He reported a 3-week history of postprandial watery bowel ...movements and a 5-day history of diffuse, crampy abdominal pain.
Burnout in medicine is a substantial problem with adverse consequences for both physicians and the patients who they treat. In our efforts to combat burnout, we must consider every tool at our ...disposal, since a complex problem requires a multifaceted approach. Recognizing that many physicians derive meaning from spirituality and religion, attempts to improve physician and trainee wellness should acknowledge the importance of religion and spirituality for self-care more than has heretofore been the case.
PDF
