We have located links that may give you full text access.
Impact of a Best Practice Prevention Bundle on Central Line-associated Bloodstream Infection (CLABSI) Rates and Outcomes in Pediatric Hematology, Oncology, and Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Patients in Inpatient and Ambulatory Settings.
Journal of Pediatric Hematology/oncology 2021 January
BACKGROUND: Pediatric hematology, oncology, and hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) patients are at increased risk for bloodstream infections. The authors sought to evaluate the influence of a standardized best practice central venous catheter (CVC) maintenance bundle on the burden of and risk factors for mucosal barrier injury (MBI) and non-MBI central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) across a common inpatient and ambulatory continuum in this high-risk population.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with underlying malignancy, hematologic disorders, and HCT recipients with a CVC in place at the time of CLABSI diagnosis in both inpatient and ambulatory settings from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2016. Descriptive, nonparametric statistics were used to describe patient characteristics and outcomes. Logistic regression analyses were applied to identify potential risk factors for inpatient versus ambulatory and MBI versus non-MBI CLABSI.
RESULTS: During the 5-year period, 118 of 808 (14.6%) patients had 159 laboratory-confirmed CLABSIs for ambulatory and inpatient CLABSI rates of 0.27 CLABSI/1000 and 2.2 CLABSI/1000 CVC days, respectively. CLABSI occurred more frequently in hospitalized patients after HCT and with underlying leukemia, most frequently caused by Gram-negative bacteria. MBI CLABSI accounted for 42% of all CLABSI with a 3-fold higher risk in hospitalized patients. Having multiple CVC or a CVC that was not a port independently associated with higher CLABSI risk.
CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, non-MBI CLABSI continued to account for the majority of CLABSI. CVC type is independently associated with higher overall CLABSI risk. Further studies are needed to reliably define additional prevention strategies when CLABSI maintenance bundles elements are optimized in this high-risk population.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with underlying malignancy, hematologic disorders, and HCT recipients with a CVC in place at the time of CLABSI diagnosis in both inpatient and ambulatory settings from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2016. Descriptive, nonparametric statistics were used to describe patient characteristics and outcomes. Logistic regression analyses were applied to identify potential risk factors for inpatient versus ambulatory and MBI versus non-MBI CLABSI.
RESULTS: During the 5-year period, 118 of 808 (14.6%) patients had 159 laboratory-confirmed CLABSIs for ambulatory and inpatient CLABSI rates of 0.27 CLABSI/1000 and 2.2 CLABSI/1000 CVC days, respectively. CLABSI occurred more frequently in hospitalized patients after HCT and with underlying leukemia, most frequently caused by Gram-negative bacteria. MBI CLABSI accounted for 42% of all CLABSI with a 3-fold higher risk in hospitalized patients. Having multiple CVC or a CVC that was not a port independently associated with higher CLABSI risk.
CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, non-MBI CLABSI continued to account for the majority of CLABSI. CVC type is independently associated with higher overall CLABSI risk. Further studies are needed to reliably define additional prevention strategies when CLABSI maintenance bundles elements are optimized in this high-risk population.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app