Should we use closed or open infusion containers for prevention of bloodstream infections?

Medical College of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials (Impact Factor: 2.19). 02/2010; 9(1):6. DOI: 10.1186/1476-0711-9-6
Source: PubMed


Hospitalized patients in critical care settings are at risk for bloodstream infections (BSI). Most BSIs originate from a central line (CL), and they increase length of stay, cost, and mortality. Open infusion containers may increase the risk of contamination and administration-related (CLAB) because they allow the entry of air into the system, thereby also providing an opportunity for microbial entry. Closed infusion containers were designed to overcome this flaw. However, open infusion containers are still widely used throughout the world.The objective of the study was to determine the effect of switching from open (glass, burettes, and semi-rigid) infusion containers to closed, fully collapsible, plastic infusion containers (Viaflex) on the rate and time to onset of central line-associated bloodstream infections CLABs.
An open label, prospective cohort, active healthcare-associated infection surveillance, sequential study was conducted in four ICUs in Mexico. Centers for Disease Control National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance Systems definitions were used to define device-associated infections.
A total of 1,096 adult patients who had a central line in place for >24 hours were enrolled. The CLAB rate was significantly higher during the open versus the closed container period (16.1 versus 3.2 CLAB/1000 central line days; RR = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.11-0.36, P < 0.0001). The probability of developing CLAB remained relatively constant in the closed container period (1.4% Days 2-4 to 0.5% Days 8-10), but increased in the open container period (4.9% Days 2-4 to 5.4% Days 8-10). The chance of acquiring a CLAB was significantly decreased (81%) in the closed container period (Cox proportional hazard ratio 0.19, P < 0.0001). Mortality was statistically significantly lower during the closed versus the open container period (23.4% versus 16.1%; RR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.54-0.88, P < 0.01).
Closed infusion containers significantly reduced CLAB rate, the probability of acquiring CLAB, and mortality.

Download full-text


Available from: Manuel Sigfrido Rangel-Frausto, Dec 14, 2013
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We report a meta-analysis of 4 identical time-series cohort studies of the impact of switching from use of open infusion containers (glass bottle, burette, or semirigid plastic bottle) to closed infusion containers (fully collapsible plastic containers) on central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates and all-cause intensive care unit (ICU) mortality in 15 adult ICUs in Argentina, Brazil, Italy, and Mexico. All ICUs used open infusion containers for 6-12 months, followed by switching to closed containers. Patient characteristics, adherence to infection control practices, CLABSI rates, and ICU mortality during the 2 periods were compared by χ(2) test for each country, and the results were combined using meta-analysis. Similar numbers of patients participated in 2 periods (2,237 and 2,136). Patients in each period had comparable Average Severity of Illness Scores, risk factors for CLABSI, hand hygiene adherence, central line care, and mean duration of central line placement. CLABSI incidence dropped markedly in all 4 countries after switching from an open to a closed infusion container (pooled results, from 10.1 to 3.3 CLABSIs per 1,000 central line-days; relative risk [RR], 0.33 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.24-0.46]; P <.001). All-cause ICU mortality also decreased significantly, from 22.0 to 16.9 deaths per 100 patients (RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.68-0.87]; P <.001). Switching from an open to a closed infusion container resulted in a striking reduction in the overall CLABSI incidence and all-cause ICU mortality. Data suggest that open infusion containers are associated with a greatly increased risk of infusion-related bloodstream infection and increased ICU mortality that have been unrecognized. Furthermore, data suggest CLABSIs are associated with significant attributable mortality.
    Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 01/2011; 32(1):50-8. DOI:10.1086/657632 · 4.18 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Resumen Los pacientes hospitalizados están en continuo riesgo de infecciones del torrente sanguíneo (its), especialmente en las unidades de cuidado intensivo (uCi). Las its constituyen 14% de las infecciones nosocomiales (in) y representan casi un tercio de las muertes asociadas con in. es así que se han establecido pautas de prevención y protocolos de manejo para reducir el impacto de las its asociadas a catéteres (CR). entre ellas están las diferencias entre contenedores de infusión intravenosa (iV). Los de infusión abierto necesitan la introducción de aire para su vaciamiento. Los de infusión cerrado son contenedores colapsables que no requieren aire para su vaciamiento. en conclusión, en la era de la seguridad del paciente se hace necesario que los sistemas de salud propendan por hacer los cambios en la tecnología que redundan en una mejor atención y que muchas veces son costo/efectivas (Acta Med Colomb 2011; 36: xx-xx). Palabras clave: sistema cerrado, catéteres centrales. Abstract Hospitalized patients are at continued risk of bloodstream infections (Bsi), especially in intensive care units (iCu). Bsi constitute 14% of nosocomial infections (Hai) and represent almost a third of deaths associated with Hai. it is well established that prevention guidelines and management protocols reduce the impact of Bsi associated with catheters (CR). among them are the differences between containers intravenous (iV). the open infusion required the introduction of air for emptying. the closed infusion are collapsible containers that do not require air for emptying. in conclusion, in the era of patient safety it is necessary to propitiate health systems to make the changes in technology that result in improved care and often are cost-effective (Acta Med Colomb 2011; 36: xx-xx).
    Acta médica colombiana: AMC: organo de la Asociación Columbiana de Medicina Interna 01/2011; 36.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Universal precautions and general infection control measures need to be considered when undertaking any clinical procedure, but when administering intravenous (IV) therapy (medicines and/or maintenance fluids), specific measures need to be considered. This is especially important for vulnerable patients or if administering IV therapy in the home environment. There are many reasons why patients may need to receive IV therapy in the community, and these will all present nurses with specific problems. This article discusses some of the infection control procedures one must undertake when administering IV therapy to patients in the community.
    British journal of nursing (Mark Allen Publishing) 02/2011; 20(3):152-5. DOI:10.12968/bjon.2011.20.3.152
Show more