Inappropriate intravascular device use: a prospective study

Pharmaceutical Analysis of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Requests Increases the Use of Single-Lumen Catheters: A Prospective Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

Several studies have suggested a strong relationship between the number of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) lumens and the risk of complications. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of the intervention of a clinical pharmacist (CP) on the number of lumens of PICC inserted and assess PICC-related complications.

METHOD

This prospective monocentric study included all consecutive patients from 5 different units who underwent PICC insertions from September 2017 to March 2018. In the intervention group, the CP validated the pertinence of each PICC request according to the patients' records, choice of device (single or double lumen), and incompatibilities between treatments. The control group consisted of patients who underwent PICC insertions without a CP intervention. Complications were prospectively recorded up to PICC removal. Multivariate analyses adjusted for sex, age, and PICC line duration were performed.

RESULTS

In the intervention group, 207 PICCs were inserted, 81.2% (n = 168) were single-lumen devices and 18.8% (n = 39) were double-lumen devices. In the control group (n = 77), the use of single-lumen PICCs was significantly lower (n = 48, 62.3%; P = 0.002). After intervention, the overall complication incidence rate decreased from 4.42 to 3.23 per 1000 catheter days ( P = 0.082). Considering the overall population, 216 single-lumen PICCs were inserted with significantly fewer complications than double-lumens (respectively n = 16, 16/216 = 7.4%, versus n = 15, 15/68 = 22.1%, P = 0.002). The adjusted odds ratio of double-lumen PICC was 3.83 (95% confidence interval, 1.46-10.07; P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed the intervention of a CP in the PICC insertion process could increase the use of single-lumen PICCs and tended to reduce associated complications.

Impact of implementing a Choosing Wisely educational intervention into clinical practice: The CW-SIMI study (a multicenter-controlled study)

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of an educational intervention based on the Italian Society of Internal Medicine Choosing Wisely (CW-SIMI) recommendations.

DESIGN

Multicenter, interventional, controlled study.

SETTING

Twenty-three acute-care hospital wards in Italy.

PARTICIPANTS

303 Physicians working in internal medicine wards.

INTERVENTION

An online educational course.

MAIN OUTCOMES

The rate of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) prescriptions, the number of days of central venous catheter (CVC) usage, and the duration of intravenous (IV) antibiotic prescriptions evaluated at one month (T1) and at six months (T2) after course completion. Patients admitted and discharged during a 30-day period before the educational intervention (T0, one year before T2) were considered the comparison group.

RESULTS

A total of 232 physicians completed the course, while 71 did not attend the course. Data from 608, 662, and 555 patients were analyzed at T0, T1, and T2, respectively. The rate of PPI prescriptions declined at one month (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52-0.87, p = 0.0005) and at six months (RR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.46-0.84, p = 0.003), and the number of days of CVC usage was reduced at six months (9.13 days at T0 vs. 5.52 days at T2, p = 0.007). The duration of IV antibiotic prescriptions displayed a decreasing trend (7.94 days at T0 vs. 7.42 days at T2, p = 0.081).

CONCLUSIONS

A simple online educational intervention based on the CW-SIMI recommendations was associated with a clinically relevant reduction in the usage of PPIs and CVCs. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and a possible benefit on patients' outcomes.

Positioning of Vascular Access in Pediatric Patients: An Observational Study Focusing on Adherence to Current Guidelines

Venous access devices (VADs) play an important role in different clinical contexts. In pediatric subjects, VAD placement is more complicated than in adults due to children’s poor cooperativity and reduced vascular access. Adherence to guidelines for the placement of VADs could prevent the occurrence of complications, but data in the literature are general and not exhaustive, especially with regard to the pediatric population. The objective of this study was to assess adherence to guidelines for the placement of VADs in a pediatric setting. A retrospective observational study was conducted in the general ward of a pediatric hospital in the northern region of Italy. Data related to consecutive admissions in the period from 1 January to 31 December 2019 were collected according to the availability of clinical documentation. A cohort of 251 subjects was considered, yielding a total of 367 VADs. Device permanence in situ and the effective administration of intravenous therapy were associated with an increased risk of complications, while adherence to guidelines was an important protective factor. Adherence to guidelines for the placement of VADs is an independent and positive predictive factor for the prevention of complications due to the presence of a vascular device.

Intravenous access placement and fluid administration appropriateness in the emergency department

The aim of this study is to assess practice and effectiveness of Peripheral Venous Catheter (PVC) insertion and intravenous fluid administration in the Emergency Department (ED). A prospective study was conducted at a single primary ED in Brescia, Italy. 455 participants were included in the analysis. PVC were placed in 88 % of patients, 18 gauge catheters were the most frequently used (63%). In 360 patients PVC placement required one attempt. In 99 % of patients PVCs were used at least once. Fluid administration was considered appropriate in 23 patients. Out of 402 PVC placements, 244 were not necessary (in 225 patients PVCs were used only for blood samples withdrawal, and in 16 patients they were used for blood samples withdrawal, and inappropriate fluid administration). We concluded that a large number of PVC placements in the ED was potentially avoidable, and, when PVCs were used for IV fluid administration, the indication was often inappropriate. Physicians should carefully assess the real need of PVC placement in patients admitted to the ED and critically assess some issues of everyday practice, like PVC placement or IV fluids prescription, with evaluation of cost savings.

Prevalence and risk factors of inappropriate use of intravenous and urinary catheters in surgical and medical patients

BACKGROUND

Previously, the RICAT (Reduction of Inappropriate use of intravenous and urinary CATheters) study had been conducted by ourselves to reduce inappropriate use of intravenous and urinary catheters in medical wards to prevent healthcare-associated infections.

AIM

To compare surgical and medical wards, and to determine risk factors for inappropriate catheter use.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed from October, 2017, to May, 2018, in surgical wards of two university hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were prospectively observed every other week for seven months. Inappropriate use was compared with non-surgical wards in the RICAT study.

FINDINGS

In all, 409 surgical patients were included, and they were compared with 1781 medical patients. Inappropriate use occurred in 36 (8.5%) out of 425 peripheral intravenous catheters in 373 surgical patients, compared to 400 (22.9%) out of 1747 peripheral intravenous catheters in 1665 medical patients, a difference of 14.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): 11.1-17.8; P < 0.001). Inappropriate use of urinary catheters occurred in 14 (10.4%) out of 134 surgical patients, compared to 105 (32.4%) out of 324 medical patients, a difference of 22.0% (95% CI: 14.7-29.2; P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis in the two university hospitals confirmed these differences. The main risk factor for inappropriate use of peripheral intravenous catheters was admission in medical wards (odds ratio (OR): 3.50; 95% CI: 2.15-5.69), which was also one of the main risk factors for urinary catheters (OR: 2.75; 95% CI: 1.36-5.55).

CONCLUSION

Inappropriate use of catheters is more common in medical wards compared to surgical wards. Prevention strategies to reduce healthcare-associated infections should primarily focus on sites with high prevalence of inappropriate use.

Prevalence of idle peripherally inserted central catheters in adult patients: A multicenter cross-sectional study

Background:

Increasing studies concern about idle vascular access devices, but still scant data on idle peripherally inserted central catheters. We aimed to assess the prevalence and risks of idle peripherally inserted central catheters in adult patients.

Methods:

A multicenter cross-sectional observational study was performed between April 2018 and July 2018. Patient demographics and peripherally inserted central catheters–related information were abstracted using a site questionnaire by directly inquiring and medical records reviewing right after their peripherally inserted central catheters were removed.

Results:

Three hundred and fifty-eight patients with peripherally inserted central catheter episodes who met the inclusion criteria were studied. Of the 58,000 total catheter-days recorded, 5311 (9.2%) were considered as idle based on our study criteria. Two hundred and fifty-five (71.2%) patients had at least 1 idle catheter-day with a mean duration of 14.84 (19.31) idle days. The incidence of catheter-related complications in patients with idle peripherally inserted central catheters was lower than that in patients without idle peripherally inserted central catheters, though the difference did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio = 0.635, 95% confidence interval = 0.367–1.099, p = 0.103).

Conclusion:

In conclusion, idle peripherally inserted central catheters were common in adult patients, but the low risks of catheter-related complications may justify maintaining a peripherally inserted central catheter for further observation when necessary.

Less Lumens-Less Risk: A Pilot Intervention to Increase the Use of Single-Lumen Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters

To reduce risk of complications, existing guidelines recommend use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) with the minimal number of lumens. This recommendation, however, is difficult to implement in practice. We conducted a pilot study to increase the use of single-lumen PICCs in hospitalized patients. The intervention included (1) education for physicians, pharmacists, and nurses; (2) changes to the electronic PICC order-set that set single lumen PICCs as default; and (3) criteria defining when use of multilumen PICCs is appropriate. The intervention was supported by real-time monitoring and feedback. Among 226 consecutive PICCs, 64.7% of preintervention devices were single lumen versus 93.6% postintervention (P < .001). The proportion of PICCs with an inappropriate number of lumens decreased from 25.6% preintervention to 2.2% postintervention (P < .001). No cases suggesting inadequate venous access or orders for the placement of a second PICC were observed. Implementing a single-lumen PICC default and providing education and indications for multilumen devices improved PICC appropriateness.

Vessel health and preservation: An integrative review

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To describe and synthesise current knowledge on the maintenance and preservation of vessels in patients who need the placement of a vascular access device.

INTRODUCTION

To administer drugs, blood or intravenous fluids, nurses or doctors insert a peripheral vascular access device on the arm using the traditional approach. This approach implies that devices are blindly inserted until flow is satisfactory and all possible sites have been exhausted. A proactive approach would ensure at the outset that the best device is used for each patient, eliminating repeated attempts at cannulation.

DESIGN

An integrative review was conducted using data recorded until July 2017. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Scopus.

REVIEW METHOD

A modified version of Cooper's five-stage method and the PRISMA guidelines were used to perform the integrative review.

RESULTS

Nine papers were included in this review. The patients were active participants in a proactive approach to vessel health and preservation. The involvement of each healthcare professional in vessel health and preservation improves outcomes and expands the use of a proactive approach to vascular device management. Because nurses are directly involved in the use of such devices and support patients during the decision-making process, they should take the lead in the use of the proactive approach.

CONCLUSION

Despite the many documented advantages of the proactive approach to preserving vessels in many settings and healthcare systems, it has not been widely tested. Future research is needed to guarantee high-quality vessel health and preservation care, thus contributing to the development and dissemination of the proactive approach.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The proactive approach preserves vessels for future needs, improves the delivery of the treatment plan and reduces length of stay, costs, risk of infection, complications and pain perceived by patients. This approach also ensures better use of nurses' time and vascular access device material.

Tissue adhesives to secure peripheral intravenous catheters: A randomized controlled trial in patients over 65 years

Introduction

Peripheral venous catheterization is one of the most used medical procedures in hospitals worldwide. Recent researches state that using intravascular devices is a risk factor for both local and systemic complications. In this study, we aimed to test that addition of tissue adhesive to the insertion site of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC) in the emergency department (ED) would reduce the device failure rate at 6 h and 24 h following insertion.

Material and methods

We designed a single-site, two-arm, randomized, controlled trial. We inserted 115 PIVCs into 115 adult patients.

Results

PIVC device failure for the 6th hour follow up was 15.4% in the tissue adhesive group (95% CI: 4.1–26.7) vs. 25.6% with standard care group (95% CI: 11.9–39.3). There was no statistically significant difference between two groups (p = 0.33).

The number of patients for 24 h follow-up was not enough and the obtained data could not be included in the study.

Discussion

In this study, the routine use of tissue adhesives in addition to standard care to reduce PIVC failure for patients 65 years or older in ED was not supported due to not clear benefits and cost effectivity.

Conclusion

Even though the routine use of tissue adhesives is not recommended according to the study results, it may be reasonable to use tissue adhesives for long term hospitalization expected patients to protect from related complications due to current literature.

IMPACTO DA IMPLEMENTAÇÃO DOS BUNDLES NA REDUÇÃO DAS INFECÇÕES DA CORRENTE SANGUÍNEA: UMA REVISÃO INTEGRATIVA

RESUMO Objetivo: analisar as produções científicas nacionais e internacionais sobre o impacto dos bundles na prevenção de infecção da corrente sanguínea relacionada ao cateter venoso central em unidade de terapia intensiva adulta. Método: revisão integrativa de artigos publicados no Portal Capes, Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde, PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane, CINAHL e SCOPUS, entre 2011 e 2016. Resultados: encontraram-se 16 artigos, 100% relacionados à implementação dos bundles para a inserção do cateter venoso central e 50% à manutenção deste dispositivo. O tempo de intervenção foi variado, bem como o número de medidas e o período analisado (inserção/manutenção do cateter). No entanto, a redução da infecção da corrente sanguínea relacionada ao dispositivo foi apontada em todos os estudos entre 26% e 100%. Conclusão: a adoção de bundle evidenciou um impacto positivo na redução da infecção. Todavia, não se observou uma relação direta entre o número de medidas descritas nos estudos ou o maior tempo de implementação e taxas mais altas de redução da infecção.

Tools, Clinical Prediction Rules, and Algorithms for the Insertion of Peripheral Intravenous Catheters in Adult Hospitalized Patients: A Systematic Scoping Review of Literature

BACKGROUND

First-time peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion success is dependent on patient, clinician, and product factors. Failed PIVC insertion are an under-recognized clinical phenomenon.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a scoping review of decision aids for PIVC insertion including tools, clinical prediction rules, and algorithms (TRAs) and their findings on factors associated with insertion success.

METHODS

In June 2016, a systematic literature search was performed using the medical subject heading of peripheral catheterization and tool* or rule* or algorithm*. Data extraction included clinician, patient, and/or product variables associated with PIVC insertion success. Information about TRA reliability, validity, responsiveness, and utility was also extracted.

RESULTS

We screened 36 studies, and included 13 for review. Seven papers reported insertion success ranging from 61%-90% (4030 insertion attempts), 6 on validity, and 5 on reliability, with none reporting on responsiveness and utility. Failed insertions were associated with obesity (odds ratio [OR], 0.71-1.7; 2 studies) and smaller gauge PIVCs (OR, 6.4; 95% Confidence Interval [CI}, 3.4-11.9). Successful inser tions were associated with visible veins (OR, 0.87-3.63; 3 studies) or palpable veins (OR, 0.79-5.05; 3 studies) and inserters with greater procedural volume (OR, 4.4; 95% CI, 1.6-12.1) or who predicted that insertion would be successful (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04-1.07). Definitions of insertion difficulty are heterogeneous such as time to insert to a number of failed attempts.

CONCLUSIONS

Few well-validated reliable TRAs exist for PIVC insertion. Patients would benefit from a validated, clinically pragmatic TRA that matches insertion difficulty with clinician competency.

Prevention of Vascular Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infections

Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) are responsible for significant morbidity, mortality, and excess health care costs. It is increasingly evident that many CRBSI can be prevented with current knowledge and techniques. Preventive measures can be broadly grouped into clinical practice-based interventions and technologic innovations. Clinical practice-based interventions require changes in human behavior and can be subdivided into interventions before and at the time of insertion and postinsertion. Despite recent successes with prevention of CRBSI, pertinent questions regarding pathogenesis and prevention remain unanswered and work on improved surveillance, devices less prone to infection, and more effective prevention techniques are needed.

Prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes of idle intravenous catheters: An integrative review

OBJECTIVE

Complications of intravenous catheters remain a major contributor to health care costs and are a patient safety problem. An intravenous catheter not actively in use-an idle catheter-may increase the risk of infectious and noninfectious complications. We conducted an integrative review of the available literature to evaluate the prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes associated with idle intravenous catheters.

METHODS

Searches of multiple computerized databases were conducted to identify studies on idle intravenous catheters. Data on definitions of idle catheter, type of catheter, prevalence, risk factors, and patient outcomes were extracted.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies met inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The location and setting of the studies were diverse, including cross-sectional, retrospective, and prospective, and were conducted in varied geographic locations. The definition of an idle catheter was variable across studies. Although studies varied in terms of line-days or number of catheters placed, the primary definition of idle device was based on number of days or percent of devices left in situ without use. Four studies evaluated patient outcomes associated with idle catheters and found increased risk of infection, intensive care unit admission, and phlebitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Idle intravenous catheters are common and are associated with adverse outcomes. Prospective studies incorporating uniform definitions of idle catheters to test interventions to reduce idle catheter use are urgently needed.

Variation in prevalence and patterns of peripherally inserted central catheter use in adults hospitalized with pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Although peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are often used in adults hospitalized with pneumonia, patterns related to PICC use in this context are unknown.

METHODS

Premier's inpatient database was used to identify patients hospitalized with pneumonia between July 1, 2007 and November 30, 2011. PICC placement was identified via billing codes. Generalized estimating equations were used to identify factors associated with PICC placement. Hospital risk-standardized rates of PICC insertion were estimated using hierarchical generalized linear models.

RESULTS

There were 545,250 patients (median age: 71 years; range: 57-82 years) included. A total of 41,849 (7.7%) patients received a PICC during hospitalization (median receipt: hospital day 4). PICC recipients were younger (median age: 69 years), had higher levels of comorbidity (Gagne score median: 4 vs 2) and were more often diagnosed with healthcare-associated pneumonia (43.1% vs 29.9%) than those who did not receive PICCs. The 3 patient variables most associated with PICC receipt included weight loss (odds ratio [OR]: 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.97-2.10), sepsis on admission (OR: 1.80, 95%CI: 1.75-1.85), and intensive care unit status on hospital day 1 or 2 (OR: 1.70, 95%CI: 1.64-1.75). Compared to internal medicine, admission by geriatricians and critical care physicians was associated with PICC placement (OR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.62-2.03 and OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.05-1.24, respectively). Risk-standardized rates of PICC utilization varied from 0.3% to 41.7%. Nearly 70% of the variability in PICC use could not be explained by available data.

CONCLUSIONS

In adults hospitalized with pneumonia, PICC use appears directed towards those with severe illness and varies substantially between hospitals. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2016;11:568-575. © 2016 Society of Hospital Medicine.

The Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC): Results From a Multispecialty Panel Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method

Use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has grown substantially in recent years. Increasing use has led to the realization that PICCs are associated with important complications, including thrombosis and infection. Moreover, some PICCs may not be placed for clinically valid reasons. Defining appropriate indications for insertion, maintenance, and care of PICCs is thus important for patient safety. An international panel was convened that applied the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to develop criteria for use of PICCs. After systematic reviews of the literature, scenarios related to PICC use, care, and maintenance were developed according to patient population (for example, general hospitalized, critically ill, cancer, kidney disease), indication for insertion (infusion of peripherally compatible infusates vs. vesicants), and duration of use (≤5 days, 6 to 14 days, 15 to 30 days, or ≥31 days). Within each scenario, appropriateness of PICC use was compared with that of other venous access devices. After review of 665 scenarios, 253 (38%) were rated as appropriate, 124 (19%) as neutral/uncertain, and 288 (43%) as inappropriate. For peripherally compatible infusions, PICC use was rated as inappropriate when the proposed duration of use was 5 or fewer days. Midline catheters and ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous catheters were preferred to PICCs for use between 6 and 14 days. In critically ill patients, nontunneled central venous catheters were preferred over PICCs when 14 or fewer days of use were likely. In patients with cancer, PICCs were rated as appropriate for irritant or vesicant infusion, regardless of duration. The panel of experts used a validated method to develop appropriate indications for PICC use across patient populations. These criteria can be used to improve care, inform quality improvement efforts, and advance the safety of medical patients.

Effectiveness of a training program in compliance with recommendations for venous lines care

Background

The impact of training programs on the care and maintenance of venous lines (VL) has been assessed mainly in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Data on the impact of such programs in a whole general hospital are scarce. The objective of this study was to assess compliance with VL care after an extensive training program aimed at nurses caring for adult ICU and non-ICU patients.

Methods

We performed 2 point prevalence studies in a general hospital. A specialized nurse visited all hospitalized adult patients, performed a bedside inspection, and reviewed the nursing records for patients with a VL before and after a 1-year training program. The program included an interactive on-line teaching component and distribution of pocket leaflets and posters with recommendations on VL care.

Results

Data recorded for the first and second prevalence studies were as follows: number of patients visited, 753 vs. 682; total number of patients with ≥ 1 VL implanted on the visit day, 653 (86.7 %) vs 585 (85.8 %); catheters considered unnecessary on the study day, 183 (22.9 %) vs 48 (7.1 %) (p < 0.001); number of catheters with local clinical evidence of infection on the study day, 18 (2.2 %) vs 12 (1.8 %) (p = 0.52); registration of insertion day (42.3 % vs 50.1 %; p = 0.003); and registration of day of dressing change (41.2 % vs 49.1 %; p = 0.003). Maintenance parameters improved more in non-ICU than in ICU patients.

Conclusion

A multidisciplinary teaching program to improve VL care and compliance with recommendations is effective. Point prevalence studies are easy to carry out and effective at demonstrating increases in compliance, mainly in non-ICU patients.

Insertion of Peripheral Intravenous Cannulae in the Emergency Department: Factors Associated with First-time Insertion Success

Background

We sought to identify the reasons for peripheral intravenous cannulae insertion in the emergency department (ED), and the first-time insertion success rate, along with patient and clinician factors influencing this phenomenon.

Methods

A prospective cohort study of patients requiring peripheral cannulae insertion in a tertiary ED. Clinical and clinician data were obtained.

Results

A total 734 peripheral intravenous cannula (PIVC) insertions were included in the study where 460 insertions were analysed. The first-time insertion success incidence was 86%. The antecubital fossa (ACF) site accounted for over 50% of insertions. Multivariate logistic regression modelling to predict first-time insertion success for patient factors found: age <40 versus 80+ years, emaciated versus normal patient size, having a visible or palpable vein/s, and ACF versus forearm insertion site to be statistically significant. Statistically significant clinician factors predicting success were: higher number of prior cannulation procedures performed, and increased clinician perception of the likelihood of a successful insertion. When patient and clinician factors were combined in a logistic regression model, emaciated versus normal, visible vein/s, ACF versus forearm site, higher number of prior PIVC procedures performed and increased clinician perceived likelihood of success were statistically associated with first-time insertion success.

Conclusions

Peripheral intravenous cannulation insertion success could be improved if performed by clinicians with greater procedural experience and increased perception of the likelihood of success. Some patient factors predict cannulation success: ‘normal’ body weight, visible vein/s and cubital fossa placement; venepuncture may be a cheaper alternative for others if intravenous therapy is not imperative.

Nationwide study on the use of intravascular catheters in internal medicine departments

BACKGROUND

The use of intravascular catheters (IVCs) in intensive care units (ICUs) has been well assessed in recent years. However, a high proportion of these devices are placed in patients outside the ICU, particularly in internal medicine departments (IMDs), where data on the quality of care are scarce.

AIM

To assess the use and management of IVCs in IMDs in Spain.

METHODS

We performed a point prevalence study of all adult inpatients on 47 IMDs from hospitals of different sizes on one day in June 2013. A local co-ordinator was appointed to assess patients and collect data from each site.

FINDINGS

Out of the 2080 adult patients hospitalized on the study day, 1703 (81.9%) had one or more IVCs (95.4% of which were peripheral devices). Infection was detected at the insertion site in 92 catheters (5.0%); 87 patients (5.2%) had signs of sepsis, but only one case was considered to be catheter-related. The local co-ordinators estimated that 19% of the catheters in place were no longer necessary. A daily record of the need for a catheter was available in only 40.6% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows clear opportunities for improvement regarding catheter use and care in Spanish IMDs. Strategies similar to those applied in ICUs should be implemented in IMDs.

Temporary Central Venous Catheter Utilization Patterns in a Large Tertiary Care Center Tracking the “Idle Central Venous Catheter”

Objectives.

Although central venous catheter (CVC) dwell time is a major risk factor for catheter-related bloodstream infections (CR-BSIs), few studies reveal how often CVCs are retained when not needed (“idle”). We describe use patterns for temporary CVCs, including peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs), on non-ICU wards.

Design.

A retrospective observational study.

Setting.

A 579-bed acute care, academic tertiary care facility.

Methods.

A retrospective observational study of a random sample of patients on hospital wards who have a temporary, nonimplanted CVC, with a focus on on daily ward CVC justification. A uniform definition of idle CVC-days was used.

Results.

We analyzed 89 patients with 146 CVCs (56% of which were PICCs); of 1,433 ward CVC-days, 361 (25.2%) were idle. At least 1 idle day was observed for 63% of patients. Patients had a mean of 4.1 idle days and a mean of 3.4 days with both a CVC and a peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV). After adjusting for ward length of stay, mean CVC dwell time was 14.4 days for patients with PICCs versus 9.0 days for patients with non-PICC temporary CVCs (other CVCs; P< .001). Patients with a PICC had 5.4 days in which they also had a PIV, compared with 10 days in other CVC patients (P< .001). Patients with PICCs had more days in which the only justification for the CVC was intravenous administration of antimicrobial agents (8.5 vs 1.6 days; P = .0013).

Conclusions.

Significant proportions of ward CVC-days were unjustified. Reducing “idle CVC-days” and facilitating the appropriate use of PIVs may reduce CVC-days and CR-BSI risk.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33(1):50-57

Do clinicians know which of their patients have central venous catheters?: a multicenter observational study

BACKGROUND

Complications associated with central venous catheters (CVCs) increase over time. Although early removal of unnecessary CVCs is important to prevent complications, the extent to which clinicians are aware that their patients have a CVC is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess how often clinicians were unaware of the presence of triple-lumen catheters or peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) in hospitalized patients.

DESIGN

Multicenter, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

3 academic medical centers in the United States.

PATIENTS

Hospitalized medical patients in intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU settings.

MEASUREMENTS

To ascertain awareness of CVCs, whether a PICC or triple-lumen catheter was present was determined; clinicians were then queried about device presence. Differences in device awareness among clinicians were assessed by chi-square tests.

RESULTS

990 patients were evaluated, and 1881 clinician assessments were done. The overall prevalence of CVCs was 21.1% (n=209), of which 60.3% (126 of 209) were PICCs. A total of 21.2% (90 of 425) of clinicians interviewed were unaware of the presence of a CVC. Unawareness was greatest among patients with PICCs, where 25.1% (60 of 239) of clinicians were unaware of PICC presence. Teaching attendings and hospitalists were more frequently unaware of the presence of CVCs than interns and residents (25.8% and 30.5%, respectively, vs. 16.4%). Critical care physicians were more likely to be aware of CVC presence than general medicine physicians (12.6% vs. 26.2%; P=0.003).

LIMITATIONS

Awareness was determined at 1 point in time and was not linked to outcomes. Patient length of stay and indication for CVC were not recorded.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians are frequently unaware of the presence of PICCs and triple-lumen catheters in hospitalized patients. Further study of mechanisms that ensure that clinicians are aware of these devices so that they may assess their necessity seems warranted.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None.

Influence of a multifaceted intervention on central line days in intensive care units: results of a national multisite study

BACKGROUND

Removing unnecessary central lines is a critical step in reducing risk of infection and was 1 focus of a national quality improvement collaborative. We examined if participating adult intensive care units (ICUs) reduced central line days during the project period compared with the period before implementation of the "On the CUSP: Stop BSI" program.

METHODS

We used a linear regression model on a total of 9,225 ICU-quarters of data to examine the effect of the intervention on total central line days of ICU participants in the national project (2008-2012), adjusting for ICU type, hospital characteristics, project cohort, season, and accounting for repeated measures on the same unit and clustering within states using random intercepts.

RESULTS

The regression results showed no significant change in preintervention quarters. However, significant decreases in total line days started during quarter 4 after intervention and differences were sustained through quarter 6. There were 4% fewer central line catheter days reported at the project's conclusion compared with the baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

To keep central lines from doing patients harm, clinicians must assess the need for lines and remove them as soon as clinically advisable to halt the possibility of infection via the line. Effective communication and empowering providers to identify unnecessarily extended use of central lines could accelerate the realization, someday, of eliminating central line associated bloodstream infections in ICUs.

A Prevalence Survey of Intravascular Catheter use in a General Hospital

Purpose

Survey of intravascular catheter management is an essential step in the control and prevention of catheter-related infection. In recent years, most surveillance studies only included catheters from intensive care units (ICUs). Data regarding the level of care and adherence to international guidelines in a whole general institution are scarce. Our objective was to evaluate the care situation of intravascular catheters in our adult units of a General Hospital.

Methods

We surveyed adults hospitalized in non-psychiatric/maternity wards. In a week, a nurse visited all the adult hospitalized patients. Data were registered in a protocol that included variables, such as no. of catheters, location of catheter, type of catheter, date of placement and the need of an indication of each catheter in the visit day.

Results

We included in the study a total of 753 adult patients. Of them, 653 (86.7%) had one or more inserted catheters at the moment of the study visit (total: 797 catheters). Of all the catheters, 144 (18.0%) were central venous catheters and 653 (81.9%) were peripheral lines. The hospitalization units where the patients were admitted were ICU, 52 (6.9%); and non-ICU, 601 (92.0%). There were 183 (22.9%) catheters with no need to remain in place in the day of the study. Overall, we found 464 (71.0%) patients with one or more opportunities for catheter care improvement.

Conclusions

A rapid survey of the care situation of intravascular catheters is feasible and easy to do with our methodology. The data show great opportunity for improvement, mainly in the non-ICU areas.

Hospital-wide survey of the adequacy in the number of vascular catheters and catheter lumens

BACKGROUND

Removal of unnecessary catheters has been proposed as an important measure to reduce catheter-related morbidity. Nevertheless, there is scarce information about the potential magnitude of such intervention.

OBJECTIVE

The present study was aimed at analyzing the appropriateness of use of vascular catheters and catheter lumens in the inpatient setting.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

The entire population of adult inpatients admitted to a 1368-bed tertiary-care hospital in a single day.

MEASUREMENTS

We used a set of preestablished criteria to evaluate the appropriateness of use of vascular catheters and catheter lumens according to the number and administration regimen of intravenous drugs.

RESULTS

Out of 834 patients, 575 (68.9%) had ≥1 vascular catheters in place on the day of the survey. The type and distribution of the 703 surveyed catheters were peripheral venous catheter, 80.6%; central venous catheter, 15.8%; and arterial catheter, 3.6%. We found an overall mean of 2.06 ± 0.82 lumens per catheter, with significant differences between intensive care units and conventional wards (P < 0.0001). Based on our criteria, 126 out of 575 patients (21.9%) had an inappropriate number of catheters (medical wards, 20.0%; surgical wards, 23.9%; intensive care units, 26.3%), and 631 out of 14248 nonarterial catheter lumens (43.6%) were considered unnecessary.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant room exists for improving the adequacy of the number of vascular catheters and catheter lumens as a potentially useful tool for decreasing the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection.

Epidemiology and impact of a multifaceted approach in controlling central venous catheter associated blood stream infections outside the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Outside ICUs, CVC-ABSIs epidemiology and the results of strategies for their prevention are not well known. The aim of this study was to investigate the epidemiology and the impact of a multifaceted "bundle" approach in controlling CVC-ABSIs outside ICU.

METHODS

From 1991 we performed prevalence studies of device and parenteral nutrition use, and prospective surveillance of all episodes of CVC-ABSIs in a 350-bed teaching hospital. CVC-ABSIs incidence/1,000 inpatient-days was calculated. An estimated CVC-ABSIs incidence/1,000 catheter-days was calculated based on the prevalence rates of catheter use and the total number of inpatient-days in each year. On november 2008, an education programme was instituted for care of catheter lines: reinforcing instructions in aseptic insertion technique, after care and hand-washing; in order to assess the adherence to these measures the quantity of alcohol-based hand-rub consumption/1,000 patient-days was quoted in litres. From January 2009, a checklist intervention for CVC insertion in ICU was started: hand hygiene, using full barrier precautions, cleaning the skin with alcoholic chlorhexidine, avoiding femoral access and removing unnecessary catheters. Compliance with the central line insertion checklist was measured by real-time audits and was achieved in 80% of cases.

RESULTS

Prevalence of use of CVC and parenteral nutrition was similar throughout the study. We followed-up 309 CVC-ABSIs cases. Estimated CVC-ABSIs rate progressively increased to 15.1/1,000 catheter-days in 2008 (0.36/1,000 inpatient-days). After the intervention, the alcohol-based hand-rub consumption increased slightly and estimated CVC-ABSIs rate fell to 10.1 /1,000 catheter-days in last three years (0.19/1,000 inpatient-days), showing a 32.9% decrease. The infection rates achieved were lower in Internal Medicine wards: decreased from 14.1/1,000 catheter-days (0.17/patient-days) in 2008 to 5.2/1,000 catheter-days (0.05/1,000 inpatient-days) in last three years, showing a 63.1% decrease. In 2009, the estimated CVC-ABSIs incidence rate was significantly lower in the Internal Medicine ward compared to the Surgery ward: rate ratio (RR) = 0.14, 95%CI: 0.03-0.60), and within the Internal Medicine ward, the estimated CVC-ABSIs incidence rate was significantly lower in 2009 compared to 2008 (RR = 0.20, 95%CI: 0.04-0.91).

CONCLUSION

The rate of CVC-ABSIs increased outside-ICU, and the implementation of multifaceted infection control programme decreased their clinical impact.