Suppr超能文献

医院因导管相关血流感染而再次入院和使用乙醇锁治疗:比较在家中接受肠外营养或静脉输液与在熟练护理设施中接受治疗的患者。

Hospital readmissions for catheter-related bloodstream infection and use of ethanol lock therapy: comparison of patients receiving parenteral nutrition or intravenous fluids in the home vs a skilled nursing facility.

机构信息

Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA.

出版信息

JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2013 Jan;37(1):81-4. doi: 10.1177/0148607112448400. Epub 2012 May 29.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) is the most serious long-term infectious complication of long-term home parenteral nutrition (PN). Ethanol is being used more commonly as a catheter locking solution in the home PN setting for prevention of CRBSI; however, no current literature reports the use of ethanol lock (ETL) in skilled nursing facility (SNF) patients.

METHODS

The authors evaluated the number of hospital readmissions for CRBSI and length of stay between SNF (not receiving ETL) and home patients (receiving or not receiving ETL) receiving PN or intravenous fluid therapy.

RESULTS

SNF patients had a significantly longer length of stay (LOS) for CRBSI hospital admissions compared with patients receiving PN at home with or without ETL (P < .001; 16 vs 8 vs 8 days). There was no LOS difference for CRBSI between home patients with or without ETL. Home PN patients not receiving ETL were more likely to have a CRBSI from Staphylococcus sp (48% vs 27%; P = .015), whereas SNF PN patients not receiving ETL were more likely to have a CRBSI from Enterococcus sp (16% vs 3%; P = .004).

CONCLUSION

Despite different causative organisms and medical acuity likely affecting the differences observed in LOS, the SNF population is another setting ETL can be used to prevent CRBSI.

摘要

背景

导管相关血流感染(CRBSI)是长期家庭肠外营养(PN)最严重的长期感染并发症。在家 PN 环境中,乙醇作为导管封管液越来越多地用于预防 CRBSI;然而,目前尚无文献报道在熟练护理机构(SNF)患者中使用乙醇封管(ETL)。

方法

作者评估了因 CRBSI 再次住院的患者数量以及未接受 ETL 的 SNF 患者和接受或未接受 ETL 的家庭患者(接受 PN 或静脉补液治疗)的住院时间。

结果

与在家接受 PN 且接受或不接受 ETL 的患者相比,SNF 患者因 CRBSI 入院的住院时间明显更长(P <.001;16 天 vs 8 天 vs 8 天)。在家接受 PN 且不接受 ETL 的患者之间的 CRBSI 住院时间无差异。未接受 ETL 的家庭 PN 患者更有可能因金黄色葡萄球菌(48% vs 27%;P =.015)而发生 CRBSI,而未接受 ETL 的 SNF PN 患者更有可能因肠球菌(16% vs 3%;P =.004)而发生 CRBSI。

结论

尽管 LOS 观察到的差异可能与不同的病原体和医疗严重程度有关,但 SNF 人群是 ETL 可用于预防 CRBSI 的另一种环境。

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