Gilmore Nathan T, Metz Terrence
Department of Critical Care, Hoag Hospital, Newport Beach, California, USA.
Department of Radiology, Division of Interventional Radiology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA.
Int J Vasc Med. 2025 Aug 1;2025:1427129. doi: 10.1155/ijvm/1427129. eCollection 2025.
This review assessed the burden of catheter-related infections (CRI), existing gaps in catheter care, and prevention recommendations for catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs). The review further discusses how the emergence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) influenced CRBSI rates and prevention strategies in the post-COVID-19 era. A targeted literature search was conducted of Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, and EBM Reviews. Where applicable, supplemental hand searches were performed to identify evidence for gaps in the targeted search results. The authors reviewed each study and selected those for inclusion based on the population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) criteria. Relevant studies were assessed for inclusion in the present review. Both "active" methods (scrubbing, flushing, and locking) and "passive" methods (disinfection caps) have consistently been shown to reduce CRBSI risk when assessed individually. These practices have markedly improved CRBSI rates over the past two decades, although there are ongoing gaps in catheter care and adherence to best practices. COVID-19 reversed the trend towards improving CRBSI rates, and persistent challenges for nurse staffing and training have resulted in a failure to return to pre-COVID-19 CRBSI rates in the current post-COVID-19 era. These challenges are further compounded by limited rigorous comparative evidence assessing the relative efficacy of individual CRBSI prevention methods. Improving adherence to hub disinfection, along with catheter care and maintenance protocols, is essential for the prevention of CRIs. Further, innovative approaches for simplifying protocols and "forcing function" may increase compliance with CRBSI prevention strategies. In our practice, we routinely use disinfection caps in addition to standard scrubbing and flushing, alongside increased training and monitoring procedures. Additional studies are needed to assess which individual or combination prevention strategies are most efficacious and feasible in the post-COVID-19 era.
本综述评估了导管相关感染(CRI)的负担、导管护理中存在的差距以及导管相关血流感染(CRBSI)的预防建议。该综述还讨论了冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的出现如何影响了COVID-19后时代的CRBSI发生率和预防策略。对Embase、Ovid MEDLINE和循证医学综述进行了针对性文献检索。在适用的情况下,进行了补充手工检索,以确定目标检索结果中差距的证据。作者对每项研究进行了审查,并根据人群、干预措施、对照、结局和研究设计(PICOS)标准选择纳入的研究。评估相关研究是否纳入本综述。单独评估时,“主动”方法(擦洗、冲洗和封管)和“被动”方法(消毒帽)均一直显示可降低CRBSI风险。在过去二十年中,这些做法显著提高了CRBSI发生率,尽管在导管护理和最佳实践的依从性方面仍存在差距。COVID-19扭转了CRBSI发生率改善的趋势,护士人员配备和培训方面的持续挑战导致在当前COVID-19后时代未能恢复到COVID-19前的CRBSI发生率。评估个体CRBSI预防方法相对疗效的严格比较证据有限,使这些挑战更加复杂。提高对枢纽消毒的依从性以及导管护理和维护方案对于预防CRI至关重要。此外,简化方案和“强制功能”的创新方法可能会提高对CRBSI预防策略的依从性。在我们的实践中,除了标准的擦洗和冲洗外,我们还常规使用消毒帽,并增加培训和监测程序。需要进一步的研究来评估哪些个体或联合预防策略在COVID-19后时代最有效和可行。