1Division of Infectious Diseases,Department of Internal Medicine,Michigan Medicine,Ann Arbor,Michigan.
4Division of Hospital Medicine,Department of Internal Medicine,Michigan Medicine,Ann Arbor,Michigan.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017 Oct;38(10):1155-1166. doi: 10.1017/ice.2017.167. Epub 2017 Aug 15.
BACKGROUND Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are associated with central-line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs). However, no tools to predict risk of PICC-CLABSI have been developed. OBJECTIVE To operationalize or prioritize CLABSI risk factors when making decisions regarding the use of PICCs using a risk model to estimate an individual's risk of PICC-CLABSI prior to device placement. METHODS Using data from the Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety consortium, patients that experienced PICC-CLABSI between January 2013 and October 2016 were identified. A Cox proportional hazards model with robust sandwich standard error estimates was then used to identify factors associated with PICC-CLABSI. Based on regression coefficients, points were assigned to each predictor and summed for each patient to create the Michigan PICC-CLABSI (MPC) score. The predictive performance of the score was assessed using time-dependent area-under-the-curve (AUC) values. RESULTS Of 23,088 patients that received PICCs during the study period, 249 patients (1.1%) developed a CLABSI. Significant risk factors associated with PICC-CLABSI included hematological cancer (3 points), CLABSI within 3 months of PICC insertion (2 points), multilumen PICC (2 points), solid cancers with ongoing chemotherapy (2 points), receipt of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) through the PICC (1 point), and presence of another central venous catheter (CVC) at the time of PICC placement (1 point). The MPC score was significantly associated with risk of CLABSI (P<.0001). For every point increase, the hazard ratio of CLABSI increased by 1.63 (95% confidence interval, 1.56-1.71). The area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve was 0.67 to 0.77 for PICC dwell times of 6 to 40 days, which indicates good model calibration. CONCLUSION The MPC score offers a novel way to inform decisions regarding PICC use, surveillance of high-risk cohorts, and utility of blood cultures when PICC-CLABSI is suspected. Future studies validating the score are necessary. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1155-1166.
外周静脉置入中心静脉导管(PICC)与中心静脉相关血流感染(CLABSI)有关。然而,目前还没有开发出用于预测 PICC-CLABSI 风险的工具。目的:在放置导管之前,使用风险模型估计个体发生 PICC-CLABSI 的风险,以实现 PICC 使用决策中的 CLABSI 风险因素的操作化或优先级排序。方法:使用密歇根医院医学安全联盟的数据,确定 2013 年 1 月至 2016 年 10 月期间发生 PICC-CLABSI 的患者。然后,使用具有稳健沙盒标准误差估计的 Cox 比例风险模型,识别与 PICC-CLABSI 相关的因素。基于回归系数,为每个预测因子分配分数,并为每位患者求和,以创建密歇根 PICC-CLABSI(MPC)评分。使用时间依赖性曲线下面积(AUC)值评估评分的预测性能。结果:在研究期间,23088 名接受 PICC 的患者中,有 249 名(1.1%)发生了 CLABSI。与 PICC-CLABSI 显著相关的危险因素包括血液系统恶性肿瘤(3 分)、PICC 插入后 3 个月内发生 CLABSI(2 分)、多腔 PICC(2 分)、正在接受化疗的实体瘤(2 分)、通过 PICC 接受全胃肠外营养(TPN)(1 分)和 PICC 置管时存在另一个中心静脉导管(CVC)(1 分)。MPC 评分与 CLABSI 风险显著相关(P<.0001)。每增加 1 分,CLABSI 的风险比增加 1.63(95%置信区间,1.56-1.71)。当 PICC-CLABSI 疑似时,AUC 为 0.67 至 0.77,用于 PICC 留置时间为 6 至 40 天,表明模型校准良好。结论:MPC 评分提供了一种新方法,用于告知 PICC 使用决策、高危人群的监测以及在怀疑发生 PICC-CLABSI 时进行血培养。需要进一步验证该评分的研究。感染控制与医院流行病学 2017;38:1155-1166.