Suppr超能文献

大型三级保健中心中心静脉导管的临时使用模式:追踪“闲置的中心静脉导管”。

Temporary central venous catheter utilization patterns in a large tertiary care center: tracking the "idle central venous catheter".

机构信息

Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia 30322, USA.

出版信息

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2012 Jan;33(1):50-7. doi: 10.1086/663645. Epub 2011 Dec 1.

Abstract

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.

摘要

目的

虽然中心静脉导管(CVC)留置时间是导管相关血流感染(CR-BSI)的主要危险因素,但很少有研究揭示不需要时(“闲置”)CVC 保留的频率。我们描述了非 ICU 病房中临时 CVC(包括外周静脉置入中心导管[PICC])的使用模式。

设计

回顾性观察性研究。

地点

一家拥有 579 张病床的急性护理、学术性三级保健设施。

方法

对住院病房中随机抽取的临时、非植入性 CVC 患者进行回顾性观察性研究,重点关注每日病房 CVC 适应证。使用统一的闲置 CVC 天数定义。

结果

我们分析了 89 例患者的 146 个 CVC(其中 56%为 PICC);在 1433 个病房 CVC 日中,361 个(25.2%)为闲置。63%的患者至少有 1 个闲置日。患者平均有 4.1 个闲置日和 3.4 个同时有 CVC 和外周静脉导管(PIV)的日子。在调整了病房住院时间后,PICC 患者的平均 CVC 留置时间为 14.4 天,而非 PICC 临时 CVC 患者(其他 CVC)为 9.0 天(P<.001)。PICC 患者中有 5.4 天同时还使用 PIV,而其他 CVC 患者为 10 天(P<.001)。PICC 患者中有更多天数仅因静脉内给予抗菌药物而保留 CVC(8.5 天与 1.6 天;P=.0013)。

结论

相当比例的病房 CVC 天数没有正当理由。减少“闲置 CVC 天数”并促进 PIV 的合理使用可能会减少 CVC 天数和 CR-BSI 风险。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验