Indwell times, complications and costs of open vs closed safety peripheral intravenous catheters: A randomized study

Journal of Hospital Infection

Volumn 86, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 117-126

  Gonzalez Lopez J L ^a,b   Arribi Vilela, A ^a   Fernandez del Palacio E ^a   Olivares Corral, J ^a   Benedicto Marti C ^a   Herrera Portal, P ^a  

^a HOSPITAL CLÍNICO SAN CARLOS   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Catheter related infection; Closed system; Cost analysis; Indwell time; Phlebitis; Safety peripheral intravenous catheters

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL COLONIZATION; CATHETER COMPLICATION; CATHETER INFECTION; CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER; CLOSED SYSTEM PERIPHERAL INTRAVENOUS CATHETER; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEVICE SAFETY; HEMATOMA; HUMAN; INDWELLING CATHETER; KNOWLEDGE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OPEN SYSTEM PERIPHERAL INTRAVENOUS CATHETER; PAIN; PERIPHERAL VENOUS CATHETER; PERIPHERALLY INSERTED CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER; PHLEBITIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK FACTOR; RISK REDUCTION; VEIN CATHETERIZATION;

CATHETER-RELATED INFECTION; CLOSED SYSTEM; COST ANALYSIS; INDWELL TIME; PHLEBITIS; SAFETY PERIPHERAL INTRAVENOUS CATHETERS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CATHETER-RELATED INFECTIONS; CATHETERIZATION, PERIPHERAL; CATHETERS, INDWELLING; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84893639555     PISSN: 01956701     EISSN: 15322939     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2013.10.008     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Mermel L.A., Farr B.M., Sherertz R.J., et al. Guidelines for the management of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Infect Dis 2001, 32:1249-1272.
2. Pujol M., Hornero A., Saballs M., et al. Clinical epidemiology and outcomes of peripheral venous catheter-related bloodstream infections at a university-affiliated hospital. J Hosp Infect 2007, 67:22-29.
3. Trinh T.T., Chan P.A., Edwards O., et al. Peripheral venous catheter-related Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011, 32:579-583.
4. Pearson M.L. The Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Guideline for prevention of intravascular device-related infections. Am J Infect Control 1996, 24:262-293.
5. O'Grady N.P., Alexander M., Dellinger E.P., et al. Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC). Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2002, 23:759-769.
6. Maki D.G., Kluger D.M., Crnich C.J. The risk of bloodstream infection in adults with different intravascular devices: a systematic review of 200 published prospective studies. Mayo Clin Proc 2006, 81:1159-1171.
7. Maki D.G., Ringer M. Risk factors for infusion-related phlebitis with small peripheral venous catheters. A randomized controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1991, 114:845-854.
8. Bregenzer T., Conen D., Sakman P., Widmer A.F. Is routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters necessaryα. Arch Intern Med 1998, 158:151-156.
9. Tagalakis V., Kahn S.R., Libman M., et al. The epidemiology of peripheral vein infusion thrombophlebitis: a critical review. Am J Med 2002, 113:146-151.
10. Collin J., Collin C., Constable F.L., Johnston I.D.A. Infusion thrombophlebitis and infection with various cannulas. Lancet 1975, 2:150-153.
11. Maki D.G., Botticelli J.T., LeRoy M.L., Thielke T.S. Prospective study of replacing administration sets for intravenous therapy at 48- vs. 72-hour intervals. 72 hours is safe and cost-effective. JAMA 1987, 258:1777-1781.
12. Lai K.K. Safety of prolonging peripheral cannula and IV tubing use from 72 hours to 96 hours. Am J Infect Control 1998, 26:66-70.
13. Bouza E., Muñoz P., López-Rodríguez J., et al. A needleless closed system device (CLAVE™) protects from intravascular catheter tip and hub colonization: a prospective randomized study. J Hosp Infect 2003, 54:279-287.
14. Casey A.L., Burnell S., Whinn H., Worthington T., Faroqui M.H., Elliott T.S. A prospective clinical trial to evaluate the microbial barrier of a needleless connector. J Hosp Infect 2007, 65:212-218.
15. Van Zundert A. New closed IV catheter system. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg 2005, 56:283-285.
16. Maki D.G., Weise C.E., Sarafin H.W. A semiquantitative culture method for identifying intravenous catheter related infection. N Eng J Med 1977, 296:1305-1309.
17. Aygun G., Yasar H., Yilmaz M., et al. The value of gram staining of catheter segments for rapid detection of peripheral venous catheter infections. Diag Microbiol Infect Dis 2006, 54:165-167.
18. Adams D., Karpanen T., Worthington T., Lambert P., Elliott T.S.J. Infection risk associated with a closed luer access device. J Hosp Infect 2006, 62:353-357.
19. Saghaei M. Random allocation software for parallel group randomized trials. BMC Med Res Methodol 2004, 4:26.
20. González López J.L., Fernández del Palacio E., Benedicto Martí C., Olivares Corral J., Herrera Portal P., Arribi Vilela A. COSMOS: a study comparing peripheral intravenous systems. Br J Nurs 2009, 18:844-853.
21. Webster J., Clarke S., Paterson D., et al. Routine care of peripheral intravenous catheters versus clinically indicated replacement: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2008, 337:157-160.
22. Rickard C.M., McCann D., Munnings J., McGrail M.R. Routine resite of peripheral intravenous devices every 3 days did not reduce complications compared with clinically indicated resite: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Med 2010, 8:53.
23. Schulz K.F., Altman D.G., Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010, 340:c332. for the CONSORT Group.
24. Uslusoy E., Mete S. Predisposing factors to phlebitis in patients with peripheral intravenous catheters: a descriptive study. J Am Acad Nurse Pract 2008, 20:172-180.
25. Curran E.T., Coia J.E., Gilmour H., et al. Multi-centre research surveillance project to reduce infection/phlebitis associated with peripheral vascular catheters. J Hosp Infect 2000, 46:194-202.
26. Arduino M.J., Bland L.A., Danzig L.E., McAllister S.K., Aguero S.M. Microbiologic evaluation of needleless and needle-access devices. Am J Infect Control 1997, 25:377-380.
27. Esteve F., Pujol M., Limón E., et al. Bloodstream infections related to catheters connections: a prospective trial of two connections systems. J Hosp Infect 2007, 67:30-34.
28. Tager I.B., Ginsberg M.B., Ellis S.E., et al. An epidemiologic study of the risks associated with peripheral intravenous catheters. Am J Epidemiol 1983, 118:839-851.
29. Soifer N.E., Borzak S., Edlin B.R., Weinstein R.A. Prevention of peripheral venous catheter complications with an intravenous therapy team: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 1998, 158:473-477.
30. Wisplinghoff H., Bischoff T., Tallent S.M., Seifert H., Wenzel R.P., Edmond M.B. Nosocomial bloodstream infections in US hospitals: analysis of 24,179 cases from a prospective nationwide surveillance study. Clin Infect Dis 2004, 39:309-317.
31. Gaynes R., Edwards J.R. Overview of nosocomial infections caused by Gram-negative bacilli. Clin Infect Dis 2005, 41:848-854.
32. Gaukroger P.B., Roberts J.G., Manners T.A. Infusion thrombophlebitis: a prospective comparison of 645 Vialon and Teflon cannulae in anesthetic and postoperative use. Anesth Intens Care 1988, 16:265-271.
33. McKee J.M., Shell J.A., Warren T.A., Campbell V.P. Complications of intravenous therapy: a randomised prospective study - Vialon vs Teflon. J Intraven Nurs 1989, 129:288-295.
34. O'Grady N.P., Alexander M., Burns L.A., et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Infect Dis 2011, 52:e162-e193. Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC).
35. Webster J., Lloyd S., Hopkins T., Osborne S., Yaxley M. Developing a research base for intravenous peripheral cannula re-sites (DRIP trial). A randomised controlled trial of hospital in-patients. Int J Nurs Stud 2007, 44:664-671.
36. Van Donk P., Rickard C.M., McGrail M.R., Doolan G. Routine replacement versus clinical monitoring of peripheral intravenous catheters in a regional hospital in the home program: a randomized controlled trial. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009, 30:915-917.
37. Webster J., Osborne S., Rickard C., Hall J. Clinically-indicated replacement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010, 3:CD007798.
38. Rickard C.M., Webster J., Wallis M.C., et al. Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Lancet 2012, 380:1066-1074.