Prevention Of Intravascular Catheter-related Infections Research Articles

Assessing Hemodialysis Catheter Insertion Practices Against CDC Guidelines: A Closed-Loop Audit at a Tertiary Hospital in Egypt.

Background Following evidence-based guidelines during hemodialysis catheter insertion procedures is key to lowering catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) and other complications. Our aim was to examine all aspects relevant to the insertion of hemodialysis catheters in the dialysis unit at Alexandria Main University Hospital,Alexandria, Egypt, in order to identify practices that could be contributing to high complication rates. Methods We used the CDC's Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-Related Infections to define the criteria relevant to hemodialysis catheter insertion procedures. These criteria were made into a form to be used as the primary auditing tool. The form was then used to record catheterization procedures in the dialysis unit from March 2024 to July 2024. Eighty patients scheduled for hemodialysis catheter insertion were randomlyselected, 40 in the initial cycle of the audit, and 40 in the re-audit cycle. Percentage adherence to each criterion was then calculated for each audit cycle and compared. Results Overall, adherence to the criteria assessed showed significant improvements, with mean compliance increasing from 69% in the initial cycle to 90% in the second cycle. In addition, the rate of mechanical complications recorded decreased. Conclusion Our study emphasized the effectiveness of using closed-loop clinical audits to ensure continuous improvement of care delivered during hemodialysis catheter insertion procedures.

Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-Related Infections

Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-Related Infections

Patient safety in nursing care during medication administration.

ABSTRACTObjective:to evaluate the conformity of care practices of the nursing team during the administration of drugs through central vascular catheter. Method:a descriptive, prospective, observational study conducted in an Intensive Care Unit. The non-probabilistic intentional sample consisted of 3402 observations of drug administrations in patients with central vascular catheters. The previously validated collection instrument was constructed based on the Guideline for Prevention of Intravascular catheter-related infections. Data was collected through direct observations of nursing practices performed by the nursing team. The analysis used analytical, descriptive and inferential statistics (Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test). Results:a total of 3402 procedures of drug administrations were observed. Female nursing technicians performed the highest number of actions. In none of the procedures did the professional perform all necessary actions. 0.2% of drug administrations were preceded by hand hygiene and 1.3% by disinfection of the multidose vial, ampoule or injectors. Conclusion:the practice evaluated was classified as undesirable. Failure to achieve the desired conformity was probably due to the low adherence of professionals to the practice of hand hygiene and disinfection of materials, injectors and connectors.

Preventing catheter-related bloodstream infections

British Journal of Healthcare ManagementVol. 22, No. 6 Infection PreventionPreventing catheter-related bloodstream infectionsJennie WilsonJennie WilsonSearch for more papers by this authorJennie WilsonPublished Online:21 Jun 2016https://doi.org/10.12968/bjhc.2016.22.6.304AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail View article References Bion J, Richardson A, Hibbert P et al. (2012) Matching Michigan: a 2-year stepped wedge interventional programme to minimise central venous catheters infections in intensive care units in England. BMJ Qual Saf 22: 110–23 Crossref, Google ScholarCurran ET (2011) Intravenous drug preparation: the infection risks. Br J Nurs 20: S4, S6–8 Link, Google ScholarHalton KA, Cook D, Paterson DL et al. (2010) Cost-effectiveness of a central venous catheter care bundle. PLoS One 5: e12815 Crossref, Google ScholarHealth Protection Agency (2012) English national point prevalence survey on healthcare associated infections and antimicrobial use, 2011: preliminary data. Health Protection Agency, London. www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1317134305239 (accessed 1 June 2016) Google ScholarLoveday HP, Wilson JA, Pratt RP et al.; UK Department of Health (2014) epic3: National Evidence-Based Guidelines for Preventing Healthcare-Associated Infections in NHS Hospitals in England. J Hosp Infect 86: S1 S1–70 Crossref, Google ScholarPronovost P, Needham D, Berenholtz S et al. (2006) An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med 355: 2725–32 Crossref, Google ScholarO'Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA et al. (2011) Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Infect Dis 52: e162–93 Crossref, Google ScholarLipitz-Snyderman A, Steinwachs D, Needham DM et al. (2011) Impact of a statewide intensive care unit quality improvement initiative on hospital mortality and length of stay: retrospective comparative analysis. BMJ 342: d219 Crossref, Google ScholarRupp ME, Sholtz LA, Jourdan DR et al. (2007) Outbreak of bloodstream infection temporally associated with the use of an intravascular needleless valve. Clin Infect Dis 44: 1408–14 Crossref, Google ScholarWebster J, Osborne S, Rickard C, New K (2013) Clinically-indicated replacement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4: CD007798 Google ScholarWilson J (2006) Infection Control in Clinical Practice. Elsevier, London Google ScholarZhang L, Cao S, Marsh N et al. (2016) Infection risks associated with peripheral catheters. J Infect Prevent (in press) Crossref, Google Scholar FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails 2 June 2016Volume 22Issue 6ISSN (print): 1358-0574ISSN (online): 1759-7382 Metrics History Published online 21 June 2016 Published in print 2 June 2016 Information© MA Healthcare LimitedPDF download

Fifteen years after To Err is Human: a success story to learn from

Preventable harm is a major cause of preventable death worldwide. In late 1999, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) released To Err is Human ,1 a report that riveted the world's...

Knowledge of “Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections (2011)”: A survey of intensive care unit nursing staffs in China

Aims and objectivesTo evaluate intensive care unit (ICU) nurses' knowledge of the updated guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections; to identify the factors that affect the nurses' knowledge and to explore the barriers to adherence to evidence-based guidelines in clinical practice in China. MethodsCross-sectional surveys were carried out in Chinese ICUs from January 2013 to March 2014. The nurses' demographic information, knowledge of the guidelines, and barriers to adherence were assessed by a validated questionnaire and then analyzed statistically. ResultsThe questionnaires were completed by 455 ICU nurses from 4 provinces of China. The mean score was 8.17 of 20, and higher scores were significantly associated with province, years of experience, and years of ICU experience. Forty-nine (10.7%) nurses had not heard of the guidelines, whereas 231 (50.7%) nurses heard of the guidelines but did not receive training for them. Trained nurses' scores were higher than untrained nurses' scores. The three main barriers to compliance with the guidelines were an unfamiliarity with them, an excessive workload due to a shortage of nurses, and a lack of training. ConclusionsICU nurses' knowledge of the updated guidelines is quite low, which could be a potential risk factor for patient safety. Multidisciplinary interventions and continuous educational programs are needed to improve the knowledge of and adherence to the guidelines.

G537(P) Prospective re-audit of central line associated bloodstream infections on the neonatal unit following guideline implementation

Context This audit was carried out in Wrexham Maelor Hospital’s (WMH) neonatal unit (NNU) and conducted by the authors (two FY2 doctors and Staff Grade paediatrician). The guideline which has been implemented was approved by both medical and nursing teams. Problem A prospective audit performed in 2010–2011 showed that Wrexham Maelor Hospital’s (WMH) neonatal unit (NNU) had a high rate of central-line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) as compared to the rate reported by Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (USA). CLABSI have a high cost in terms of both morbidity and financial expenditure, and are preventable. Assessment of problem and analysis of its causes To quantify the problem the infection rate was expressed as number of central lines days per one CLABSI. CLABSI was defined as growth of the same organism in blood and central line tip cultures (obtained within 48 hrs of each other). The causes of CLABSI were assessed using CDC recommendations (Guideline for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections, 2011, CDC, USA). To impose the changes, CDC recommendations were adapted, local guideline developed and medical and nursing staff educated. Intervention A guideline was introduced in January 2013 that recommended use of 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol (Hydrex® Pink), “check and do” list for clinicians, purchase of bundled supplies, continuous staff education, and nurse empowerment to stop non-urgent insertions if proper procedures were not followed. Study design This was a prospective re-audit. Strategy for change The “check-and-do” list was approved by the medical and nursing teams. The results of the initial audit were presented to the paediatric team along with the new guideline. It was agreed that the guideline would be followed and completed and list inserted into the notes of every patient who had a central line inserted from June 2013 onwards. The re-audit looked at the rate of CLABSI for all central lines (long lines, umbilical venous catheters [UVCs] and umbilical arterial catheters [UACs]) inserted between June 2013 and May 2014, and was prospective. Measurement of improvement The results of these pre- and post-guideline audits were compared. The CLABSI rate in the pre-guideline audit was 10 in 179 long line days. In the re-audit, the CLABSI rate was 0 in 201 long line days, and 3 in 530 all central line days (long lines, UVCs and UACs; Note the pre-guideline audit only looked at infections associated with long lines). The difference between the distributions of gestational age in the audits was non-significant (Mann-Whitney test). Effects of changes The re-audit data showed that the rate of CLABSI in the NNU have significantly decreased since the implementation of the guideline. CLABSI-associated morbidity and mortality have also decreased, which clearly benefited the patient group. Lessons learnt It is helpful when implementing change and new guidance to work as a multi-disciplinary team. We found that by doing so, the new guidance was well received and adhered to. Message for others We would recommend that all neonatal units establish an ongoing audit of CLABSI, and produce a guideline and check and do list if there is not already one in use. Our experience showed that significant reduction in CLABSI rate can be achieved in a relatively small NNU, over a relatively short time scale with similar effectiveness to that shown in larger NNUs and with close to zero additional costs.

Comparison of three cutaneous antiseptic solutions for the prevention of catheter colonization in an ICU for adult patients: a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial

The current CDC guideline for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections recommends skin preparation with a greater than 0.5% chlorhexidine with alcohol solution before central venous catheter (CVC) or peripheral arterial catheter (AC) placement. However, few studies investigated the superiority of 1% alcoholic chlorhexidine gluconate (1% CHG) over either 0.5% alcoholic chlorhexidine gluconate (0.5% CHG) or 10% aqueous povidone iodine (10% PVI) for the prevention of catheter colonization. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of three skin antiseptic solutions for the prevention of intravascular catheter colonization.

The use of central venous lines in the treatment of chronically ill children.

Treatment of chronic diseases in children is aspecial medical problem. Maintaining constant access to the central vascular system is necessary for long-term hemato-oncological and nephrological therapies as well as parenteral nutrition. Providing such access enables chemotherapic treatment, complete parenteral nutrition, long-term antibiotic therapy, hemodialysis, treatment of intensive care unit patients, monitoring blood pressure in the pulmonary artery and stimulation of heart rate in emergency situations as well as treatment of patients suffering from complications, especially when chances of access into peripheral veins are exhausted. Continuous access to the central vascular system is desirable in the treatment of chronically ill children. Insertion of acentral venous catheter line eliminates the unnecessary pain and stress to achild patient accompanying injection into peripheral vessels. In order to gain long-term and secure access to the central venous system, respecting the guidelines of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention contained in the updated 'Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-Related Infections' is necessary.

Perioperative Skin Preparation

Liaison: Anthony T Tokarski BS Leaders: David Blaha MD (US), Michael A. Mont MD (US), Parag Sancheti MS, DNB, MCh (International) Delegates: Lyssette Cardona MD, MPH, MHA, AAHIVS, FIDSA, Gilberto Lara Cotacio MD, Mark Froimson MD, Bhaveen Kapadia MD, James Kuderna MD, PhD, Juan Carlos Lopez MD, Wadih Y Matar MD, MSc, FRCSC, Joseph McCarthy MD, Rhidian Morgan-Jones MB BCh, FRCS, Michael Patzakis MD, Ran Schwarzkopf MD, Gholam Hossain Shahcheraghi MD, Xifu Shang MD, Petri Virolainen MD, PhD, Montri D. Wongworawat MD, Adolph Yates Jr, MD

Nurses' knowledge of evidence‐based guidelines on the prevention of peripheral venous catheter‐related infections: a multicentre survey

To evaluate nurses' knowledge of guidelines for preventing infections associated with peripheral venous catheters. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections are an important tool to help healthcare professionals minimise the risk of infection. However, they are not always applied by nurses. The literature on this topic is limited, and no study examined this matter for peripheral venous catheters. This cross-sectional study was carried out from November 2011-June 2012. The nurses' knowledge of peripheral venous catheter guidelines and its association with gender, experience, education and the ward membership was assessed using a validated questionnaire. Sixteen hospitals from six regions of Italy participated, and 933 questionnaires were collected. Most participants were female (70·1%), undergraduate (51·8%), worked in medical (35·8%) and surgical departments (28·0%), and had >10years of experience (55·0%). The median score on 10 questions was 6 of 10. A majority of nurses knew it is recommended to replace peripheral venous catheters routinely (90·0%), to perform an aseptic technique during connecting/disconnecting the infusive lines (55·2%), and to replace the administration set <24hour when lipid emulsions have been infused (88·4%). Of note, 52·6% of nurses advocated the use of steel needles, a potentially dangerous practice. In multivariate analysis, a higher level of education and the area of work were associated with better test scores. The sample of nurses' knowledge to some recommendations is frequently low. This could be a potential risk factor for patient safety. The results should sensitise healthcare managers to improve nursing training and education, according to clinical risk management perspectives. These data request for more emphasis on international guidelines in infection prevention initiatives.

A survey of central venous catheter practices in Australian and New Zealand tertiary neonatal units

BackgroundInfection is the most common problem with central venous catheters (CVCs) in neonates. There are two published guidelines, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infection that describes evidence-based practice to reduce nosocomial infection. ObjectiveOur aims were to survey current medical and nursing management of central venous catheters in tertiary neonatal intensive care units in Australia and New Zealand and to compare with the CDC evidence-based practice guideline. MethodsA cross sectional survey was performed across 27 Australian and New Zealand neonatal units in September 2012. Two web-based questionnaires were distributed, one to medical directors related to the insertion of CVCs while CVC “maintenance” surveys were sent to nurse unit managers. ResultsSeventy percent (19/27) medical management and 59% (16/27) on nursing management surveys were completed. In all neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) there were guidelines for CVC maintenance and for 18 out of 19 there were guidelines for insertion. In the seven units using femoral lines, three had a guideline on insertion and four for maintenance. CVC insertion was restricted to credentialed staff in 57.9% of neonatal units. Only 26.5% used full maximal sterile barriers for insertion. Skin disinfection practices widely varied. Dressing use and dressing change regimens were standardised; all using a semi-permeable dressing. Duration of cleaning time of the access point varied significantly; however, the majority used a chlorhexidine with alcohol solution (68.8%). Line and fluid changes varied from daily to 96 h. The majority used sterile gloves and a sterile dressing pack to access the CVC (68.8%). In the majority of NICUs stopcocks were used (62.5%) with a needle-less access point attached (87.5%). In less than 50% of NICUs education was provided on insertion and maintenance. ConclusionThere is diversity of current practices and some aspects vary from the CDC guideline. There is a need to review NICU current practices to align with evidence based guidelines. The introduction of a common guideline may reduce variations in practice.

Legal Briefs: Devastating Consequences From Prolonged Use of an Umbilical Arterial Catheter

A 960-g, 26-3/7 weeks’ gestation male twin B was delivered by normal vaginal spontaneous delivery in the breech position to 31-year-old, healthy, gravida 3 para 1 mother whose pregnancy was complicated by preterm labor and diamniotic dichorionic twins. The mother received antibiotics, a partial course of betamethasone, and magnesium sulfate for tocolysis. At delivery, the infant had a heart rate (HR) less than 100 beats per minute, no respiratory effort, and was blue. The infant was intubated and required resuscitation, including chest compressions for 15 seconds, and 2 doses of epinephrine via an endotracheal tube (ETT). Apgar scores were 2 at 1 minute, 4 at 5 minutes, and 7 at 10 minutes. The infant was then admitted to the NICU, where an umbilical venous catheter (UVC) and an umbilical arterial catheter (UAC) were placed. The UVC was placed in the right atrium, where it remained until its removal several days later, and his UAC was placed appropriately at the seventh thoracic vertebrae and removed on day 13. The infant’s vital signs and blood pressure were normal. He had respiratory distress syndrome, for which he was given 3 doses of surfactant. Initially, the infant required 100% oxygen, but after several hours, the inspired oxygen was weaned to 30%, and the ventilator settings were low. His initial complete blood cell count revealed a white blood cell count (WBC) of 3.1 × 103/uL, a platelet count of 185 × 103/uL, and a hematocrit reading of 51% (0.51). The infant was given ampicillin and gentamicin after blood culture results were obtained, and he was started on low-dose indomethacin for intraventricular hemorrhage prophylaxis. On day 1, the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) and ventilatory settings were low. The blood gas values were normal, with some permissive hypercarbia in the …

Transparent Guideline Methodology Needed

As part of learning at the Nordic Workshop of Evidence-based Medicine, we have read with interest the practice guidelines for central venous access, published in your Journal in 2012.1 We appraised the quality of this guideline using the checklist developed by The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.2 Similar criteria for guideline quality have been suggested elsewhere.3 Our conclusion was that this much needed guideline is currently unclear about several aspects of the methodology used in developing the recommendations. This means potential users cannot be certain that the recommendations are based on best currently available evidence.Our concerns are in two main categories: the rigor of development, including methodology of searching, evaluating, and combining the evidence; and editorial independence, including funding and possible conflicts of interest. The methodological issues that we would like to see clarified in the guideline are:The searches may have missed relevant information. The authors report their searches covered a period from 1968 to 2011, identifying over 2,000 citations. When we made a PubMed search until the end of 2011 using “central venous catheter” as the search term, we found 12,453 references; adding “infection” retained 4,729 of these; and adding “coated” resulted in 128 studies, including a cohort study of catheters coated with antibiotics published in 2011.4 This study shows such catheters significantly decreased infections “in a manner that was independent and complementary to the infection control precautions.” In the paragraph on Recommendations for Use of Catheters Containing Antimicrobial Agents, the guideline has no references. A clear description of the search strategies could explain such a discrepancy.The concept of “evidence linkage” is rather central for the methodology but not quite fully explained in the methods. Does it mean “a statement regarding potential relationships between clinical interventions and outcomes” (as in appendix 5)?In reporting the results, we would appreciate separating the recommendations based on published scientific evidence and opinion-based evidence. Reading the guideline, it was first unclear to us whether the letters (e.g., Category B2 evidence) referred to scientific evidence or opinion-based evidence. Getting to the footnote of appendix 5, it seems the categories refer to scientific evidence only. It would be interesting to learn whether the guideline group for the next version could consider using a more widely used grading system, such as the GRADE (The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).5It may be that we have missed where the authors have referred to the methods used, although we did our best to study the publication and the Supplemental Digital Content carefully. We also searched the website of this Journal† to make sure we did not miss any information on guideline methodology. In many guidelines, for example in a recent one on the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections,6 the methodology is provided on an external site.‡Finally, we would have appreciated seeing the conflict of interest statements for all authors, and a declaration of how this undoubtedly work-intensive process has been funded.Making the evidence more transparent would be helpful to guideline users. Our suggestions are anchored in principles of evidence-based medicine. Our aim with this letter is to encourage the authors to provide information which could increase our confidence in the guideline and thus promote its application in practice.We hope that this important guideline will be updated within a couple of years, and that the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Central Venous Access will consider adding the necessary methodological information in their guideline.

정맥관 감염예방 근거중심 가이드라인의 권고강도 별 간호사의 지식 및 수행정도

Purpose: The objective of this study was to examine the relationships between nurses' knowledge and performance for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections (ICRI) according to the strength of recommendations in evidence based guidelines (EBG). Methods: The total participants were 144 nurses working for medical surgical unit and intensive care unit. Data were collected from July 12 to July 30, 2010 and analyzed by one way ANOVA and Pearson's correlation analysis. Results: The knowledge and performance mean scores were <TEX>$0.80{\pm}0.17$</TEX> and <TEX>$3.04{\pm}0.31$</TEX> for peripheral venous catheter (PVC) management, and <TEX>$0.83{\pm}0.17$</TEX> and <TEX>$3.00{\pm}0.30$</TEX> for central venous catheter (CVC) management respectively. The items of category IA had the highest knowledge score (F=44.70, p<.001) and the items of category II had the highest performance score (F=47.09, p<.001) in PVC management, while the items of category IA had the highest knowledge (F=20.04, p<.001) and performance scores (F=18.20, p<.001) in CVC management. Knowledge and performance scores were significantly correlated in CVC management (r=.24, p=.004), but not in PVC management (r=.03, p=.753). Conclusion: EBG for the prevention of ICRI was not fully implemented in clinical settings. These findings emphasize that clinical professions need to develope strategies to enhance nursing practices with evidence based guideline.

Incidence of Catheter-Associated Bloodstream Infection After Introduction of Minocycline and Rifampin Antimicrobial-Coated Catheters in a Pediatric Burn Population

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections suggest that antimicrobial-coated catheters can decrease the risk of developing catheter-related bloodstream infection in a variety of adult patient populations. There are limited data on their efficacy in the pediatric population, particularly among children with burn injuries. A study was conducted at Shriners Hospitals for Children®, Boston, to determine whether minocycline/rifampin (MR)-coated catheters could decrease the incidence of catheter-associated bloodstream infection (CABSI) in a pediatric burn population. A historical control group included all patients with double- or triple-lumen catheters inserted in the 18-month period from January 2006 to June 2007. The study group included all patients with MR antimicrobial double- or triple-lumen catheters inserted in the subsequent 18-month period, July 2007 to December 2008. Data collected included name, age, date of burn/injury, date of admission, percent TBSA area burn injury or other diagnosis, catheter site (subclavian, internal jugular, or femoral), method of insertion (new percutaneous stick or guidewire), type of catheter (double or triple lumen), date inserted, duration of catheter placement (days), and positive blood cultures recovered while the central venous catheter was in place. CABSI was defined using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition of laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection. There were a total of 66 patients with 252 catheters (1780 catheter days) in the control group and 75 patients with 263 catheters (1633 catheter days) in the study group. Age, percent burn injury, catheter site, and method of insertion were not statistically different between the two groups. The percentage of infected catheters and the rate of infection were significantly different for the two groups, with the MR antimicrobial catheters only half as likely to become infected. In a subset of these patients with catheters in place for more than 4 days, the percentage of infected catheters and rate of infection were also significantly different with results similar to those in the entire group. MR antimicrobial-coated catheters significantly reduced the incidence of CABSI in this pediatric burn population compared with noncoated catheters.

Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-related Infections

Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-related Infections

Summary of Recommendations: Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-related Infections

These guidelines have been developed for healthcare personnel who insert intravascular catheters and for persons responsible for surveillance and control of infections in hospital, outpatient, and home healthcare settings. This report was prepared by a working group comprising members from professional organizations representing the disciplines of critical care medicine, infectious diseases, healthcare infection control, surgery, anesthesiology, interventional radiology, pulmonary medicine, pediatric medicine, and nursing. The working group was led by the Society of Critical Care Medicine

Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections

These guidelines have been developed for healthcare personnel who insert intravascular catheters and for persons responsible for surveillance and control of infections in hospital, outpatient, and home healthcare settings. This report was prepared by a working group comprising members from professional organizations representing the disciplines of critical care medicine, infectious diseases, healthcare infection control, surgery, anesthesiology, interventional radiology, pulmonary medicine, pediatric medicine, and nursing. The working group was led by the Society of Critical Care Medicine

A Broad-Spectrum Look at Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infections

The issue of central vascular catheter-related bloodstream infections is prominent in medical literature and practice today, both in the United States and throughout the international healthcare community. In its 2002 report on Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-Related Infections, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that 250,000 cases of central vascular catheter-related infections occur annually. This article is a review of current literature pertaining to catheter-related bloodstream infections. Included are resources from 2004 onward, as well as resources such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, and the National Guideline Clearinghouse.