• Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The burden of catheter-related infections (CRIs) in developing countries is severe. In South Africa, a standardised surveillance definition does not exist and the collection of catheter days is challenging. The aim of the study was to provide baseline data on the prevalence of CRIs and to describe the epidemiology of CRI events within a tertiary academic hospital.Methods Surveillance was laboratory-based and conducted for a six month period. A microbiologically confirmed CRBSI (MC-CRBSI) event was defined as the isolation of the same microorganism from the catheter and concomitant blood cultures (BCs), within 48 h of catheter removal, which were not related to an infection at another site.ResultsA total of 508 catheters, removed from 332 patients, were processed by the laboratory, of which only 50% (253/508 removed from 143/332 patients) of the catheters were accompanied by BCs within 48 h. Sixty-five episodes of MC-CRBSI in 57 patients were detected, involving 71 catheters and 195 microbial isolates. The institutional prevalence rate was 3.7 episodes per 1 000 admissions and 5.8 episodes per 10 000 in-patient days. Catheter day data was collected in only six wards of the hospital. The pooled laboratory incidence was 10.1 MC-CRBSI episodes per 1 000 catheter days, whereas the hospital-based central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rate was pooled at 5.7 episodes per 1 000 catheter days. The majority of patients had an underlying gastro-intestinal condition (33%; 19/56) with a non-tunnelled, triple-lumen central venous catheter, placed in the subclavian vein (38%; 27/71). The most predominant pathogen was methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (28%; 55/195), followed by extensively-drug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (18%; 35/195).Conclusions Catheter-related infection prevention and control efforts require urgent attention, not only to keep patients safe from preventable harm, but to prevent the spread of multidrug resistant microorganisms.
    BMC Infectious Diseases 01/2015; 15(1):5. DOI:10.1186/s12879-014-0743-5 · 2.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives Central line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) is a preventable nosocomial infection. Simulation-based training in sterile technique during central venous catheter (CVC) placement for emergency medicine (EM) residents, and its effect on changing the medical intensive care unit (MICU) practice of routine replacement of CVCs placed under sterile technique in the emergency department (ED), has not been evaluated.Methods Emergency medicine residents received simulation-based sterile technique training during CVC placement between May 2008 and September 2010. Between June 2008 and January 2011, the authors reviewed records of patients who had CVCs placed in the ED under sterile technique by EM residents and were admitted to the MICU (group 1) and CVCs placed in the MICU under sterile technique by internal medicine (IM) residents (group 2). IM residents completed similar simulation-based training before May 2008. Changes in EM residents' sterile technique performance scores were compared, as well as CLABSI rates in both groups. EM residents' CVC procedural skills were not assessed.ResultsSeventy-six EM residents completed simulation-based training with significant improvement in performance (median scores 13 out of 24 before training, 24 out of 24 after training; p < 0.001). CLABSI rates per 1,000 catheter-days were 1.02 in group 1 and 1.02 in group 2 (p = 0.99). Both groups had similar demographics, acuity, and mortality (p > 0.5).Conclusions Routine replacement of CVCs placed in the ED under sterile technique after simulation-based training would appear to be unnecessary. These findings demonstrate patient-centered outcomes that are comparable for CVCs in ED-admitted MICU patients, regardless of whether the CVC was placed in the ED or MICU.
    Academic Emergency Medicine 12/2014; 22(1). DOI:10.1111/acem.12551 · 2.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Central venous catheterization (CVC) is an important procedure in emergency departments (EDs). Despite existence of ultrasonography (US) devices in every ED, CVC is done using anatomical landmarks in many EDs in Iran. This study aimed to compare the traditional landmark method vs. US-guided method of CVC placement in terms of complications and success rate. In this randomized controlled trial, patients who were candidate for internal jugular vein catheterization, and referred to Baqiyatallah Hospital ED were randomly allocated into US-guided CVC and anatomical landmarks guided CVC groups. Central vein access time, number of attempts, success rate, and complications in each group were evaluated. Mann-Whitney U, chi-square and Fisher exact tests along with Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients were used to analyze the data. Out of 100 patients, 56 were male and 44 were female. No significant differences were found between the US-guided and traditional landmark methods of CVC insertion in terms of age, gender, BMI, and site of catheter insertion. The mean access time was significantly lower in the US-guided group (37.12 ± 17.33 s vs. 63.42 ± 35.19 s, P < 0.001). The mean number of attempts was also significantly lower in the US-guided group (1.12 ± 0.3 vs. 1.58 ± 0.64 times, P < 0.001). Eighty-eight percent of patients in the US-guided group were catheterized in the first attempt, while 50% of patients in the traditional landmark group were catheterized in the second or more attempts (P < 0.001). The success rate was 100% in the US-guided group, while it was 88% in the landmark group (P = 0.013). Moreover, the rate of complications was significantly lower in the US-guided group (4% vs. 24%, P = 0.004). The US-guided method for CVC placement was superior to the traditional landmark method in terms of access time, number of attempts, success rate, and fewer complications.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
23 Downloads
Available from
Jul 4, 2014