Using maximal sterile barriers to prevent central venous catheter-related infection: A systematic evidence-based review
ABSTRACT Catheter-related infections cause increased morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Infection control experts advocate using maximal sterile barriers to reduce the incidence of these infections. Low compliance rates suggest that clinicians are not convinced or are not aware that available data support adopting this more cumbersome, time-consuming, and relatively more expensive technique. Accordingly, we conducted a systematic, evidence-based review of the medical literature to determine the value of maximal sterile barriers.
We used multiple computerized databases, reference lists of identified articles, and queries of prominent investigators.
We selected studies comparing infectious outcomes using maximal sterile barriers versus using less stringent sterile barrier techniques during central venous catheter insertion.
We found only 3 primary research studies. Although each study suggests maximal sterile barriers may reduce infectious complications, the evidence supporting this conclusion is incomplete. The only randomized controlled trial limited enrollment to ambulatory oncology patients. These 3 studies differed notably in their patient populations, research designs, and health care settings.
The medical literature suggests maximal sterile barriers are advantageous in at least one setting and may be useful in others. While we believe the available evidence does support the use of maximal sterile barriers during routine insertion of central venous catheters, prospective studies and economic analyses would better clarify its value.
- SourceAvailable from: cambridge.ma.us
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Thus, UTI is a serious concern for many hospitalized patients. Certain practices have been found to significantly reduce nosocomial infections such as hand washing, skin preparation, wound dressing, and monitoring of catheters (Cunliffe and Fawcett 2002; Hu et al. 2004; Kennedy et al. 2004; Seal and Paul-Cheadle 2004; Swoboda et al. 2004). Nurses are responsible for many of these practices in hospitals and other health care settings. "
ABSTRACT: A robust set of quality measures is essential to provide consumers with a vehicleto evaluate nurses' contributions to the care of hospitalized patients, providers, and systems with a set of nursing processes and outcomes to guide quality improvement, and insurers with indicators to reward hospitals for high quality nursing services. The processes employed by the Nursing Care Performance Measures Steering Committee convened by the National Quality Forum (NQF) in 2004 resulted in the endorsement of 15 indicators of health care quality influenced by nurses and contributed to the identification of significant gaps in measurement and priority areas for future research. This critical review of the state of the science related to health care processes and outcomes that reflect nurses' contributions to the quality of care for hospitalized patients is intended to push the boundaries in the measurement of nursing performance. Specific recommendations for future research and measure development are presented.Medical Care Research and Review 05/2007; 64(2 Suppl):144S-69S. DOI:10.1177/1077558707299257 · 2.62 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The management of the cancer patient is often complex and involves multiple disciplines. The complexity of the care that is required often necessitates venous access for the administration of myriad therapies and the acquisition of blood samples. Reliable venous access is critical for the optimal management of the many aspects of care of a patient with cancer. Although the exact number of catheters inserted annually in the United States for care of cancer patients is unknown, it is likely that it represents a significant percentage of the more than 5 million central venous catheters placed.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Sepsis and hospital acquired infections (HAI’s) are considered major public health risks and leading causes of death in hospitalized patients. These HAI’s may be preventable if addressed with bundled care processes, which are felt to be powerful drivers for improving the reliability of delivery of evidence-based care to impact patient outcomes. In addition to HAI, much attention has now been shifted to delirium and sedation practices in ICUs, with recent data showing the untoward effects of delirium with regards to increased ICU lengths of stay, costs, mortality and long-term cognitive impairment, and the realization that our sedation practices may in part contribute to this delirium.06/2013; 3(2). DOI:10.1007/s40140-013-0017-6