scholarly journals Differences in Central Line–Associated Bloodstream Infection Rates Based on the Criteria Used to Count Central Line Days

JAMA ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 323 (2) ◽  
pp. 183 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Scheinker ◽  
Andrew Ward ◽  
Andrew Y. Shin ◽  
Grace M. Lee ◽  
Roshni Mathew ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bloodstream Infection ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Infection Rates

scholarly journals Impact of State Reporting Laws on Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection Rates in U.S. Adult Intensive Care Units

2016 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 1079-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hangsheng Liu ◽  
Carolyn T. A. Herzig ◽  
Andrew W. Dick ◽  
E. Yoko Furuya ◽  
Elaine Larson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Bloodstream Infection ◽  
Intensive Care Units ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Reporting Laws

scholarly journals Impact of Medicare’s Hospital-Acquired Condition Policy on Infections in Safety Net and Non–Safety Net Hospitals

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 649-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Elaine Vaz ◽  
Kenneth P. Kleinman ◽  
Alison Tse Kawai ◽  
Robert Jin ◽  
William J. Kassler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bloodstream Infection ◽  
Financial Incentives ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
The United States ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Healthcare Associated Infection ◽  
Hospital Acquired Conditions ◽  
Hospital Acquired

BACKGROUNDPolicymakers may wish to align healthcare payment and quality of care while minimizing unintended consequences, particularly for safety net hospitals.OBJECTIVETo determine whether the 2008 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Conditions policy had a differential impact on targeted healthcare-associated infection rates in safety net compared with non–safety net hospitals.DESIGNInterrupted time-series design.SETTING AND PARTICIPANTSNonfederal acute care hospitals that reported central line–associated bloodstream infection and ventilator-associated pneumonia rates to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Health Safety Network from July 1, 2007, through December 31, 2013.RESULTSWe did not observe changes in the slope of targeted infection rates in the postpolicy period compared with the prepolicy period for either safety net (postpolicy vs prepolicy ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.84–1.09]) or non–safety net (0.99 [0.90–1.10]) hospitals. Controlling for prepolicy secular trends, we did not detect differences in an immediate change at the time of the policy between safety net and non–safety net hospitals (P for 2-way interaction, .87).CONCLUSIONSThe Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Conditions policy did not have an impact, either positive or negative, on already declining rates of central line–associated bloodstream infection in safety net or non–safety net hospitals. Continued evaluations of the broad impact of payment policies on safety net hospitals will remain important as the use of financial incentives and penalties continues to expand in the United States.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;00(0): 1–7

Impact of International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium’s multidimensional approach on central line–associated bloodstream infection rates in Bahrain

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 481-489
Author(s):  
Safaa Alkhawaja ◽  
Nermeen Kamal Saeed ◽  
Victor Daniel Rosenthal ◽  
Sana Abdul-Aziz ◽  
Ameena Alsayegh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Nosocomial Infection ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Bloodstream Infection ◽  
Infection Rate ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Multidimensional Approach ◽  
Infection Rates

Background: Central line–associated bloodstream infections are serious life-threatening infections in the intensive care unit setting. Methods: To analyze the impact of the International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) Multidimensional Approach (IMA) and INICC Surveillance Online System (ISOS) on central line–associated bloodstream infection rates in Bahrain from January 2013 to December 2016, we conducted a prospective, before-after surveillance, cohort, observational study in one intensive care unit in Bahrain. During baseline, we performed outcome and process surveillance of central line–associated bloodstream infection on 2320 intensive care unit patients, applying Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Healthcare Safety Network definitions. During intervention, we implemented IMA through ISOS, including (1) a bundle of infection prevention interventions, (2) education, (3) outcome surveillance, (4) process surveillance, (5) feedback on central line–associated bloodstream infection rates and consequences, and (6) performance feedback of process surveillance. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed using a logistic regression model to estimate the effect of the intervention on the central line–associated bloodstream infection rate. Results: During baseline, 672 central line days and 7 central line–associated bloodstream infections were recorded, accounting for 10.4 central line–associated bloodstream infections per 1000 central line days. During intervention, 13,020 central line days and 48 central line–associated bloodstream infections were recorded. After the second year, there was a sustained 89% cumulative central line–associated bloodstream infection rate reduction to 1.2 central line–associated bloodstream infections per 1000 central line days (incidence density rate, 0.11; 95% confidence interval 0.1–0.3; p, 0.001). The average extra length of stay of patients with central line–associated bloodstream infection was 23.3 days, and due to the reduction of central line–associated bloodstream infections, 367 days of hospitalization were saved, amounting to a reduction in hospitalization costs of US$1,100,553. Conclusion: Implementing IMA was associated with a significant reduction in the central line–associated bloodstream infection rate in Bahrain.

Statewide NICU Central-Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection Rates Decline After Bundles and Checklists

PEDIATRICS ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 127 (3) ◽  
pp. 436-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Schulman ◽  
R. Stricof ◽  
T. P. Stevens ◽  
M. Horgan ◽  
K. Gase ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bloodstream Infection ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Infection Rates

Multicenter study in Colombia: Impact of a multidimensional International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) approach on central line–associated bloodstream infection rates

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (11) ◽  
pp. e235-e241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos A. Álvarez-Moreno ◽  
Sandra L. Valderrama-Beltrán ◽  
Víctor D. Rosenthal ◽  
Beatriz E. Mojica-Carreño ◽  
Ismael A. Valderrama-Márquez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nosocomial Infection ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Bloodstream Infection ◽  
Multicenter Study ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Infection Rates

Clinical impact of needle-free connector design: A systematic review of literature

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 847-853 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Daniel Rosenthal
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bloodstream Infection ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Microbial Contamination ◽  
Open Systems ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Positive Displacement ◽  
Control And Prevention

The objective of this systematic review is to analyze types of needle-free connectors and open systems and their effects on central line–associated bloodstream infection rates and other adverse outcomes through a research protocol consistent with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews’ recommendations. MEDLINE and Cochrane databases of systematic reviews were searched for relevant comparative studies published from January 2000 to September 2017. Eighteen studies compared central line–associated bloodstream infection (according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Healthcare Safety Network definition), internal microbial contamination, occlusions, phlebitis, and other outcomes associated with needle-free connectors with a positive displacement device, negative displacement device, neutral displacement device, or three-way stopcock. Ten studies reported central line–associated bloodstream infection rates, which were lower with positive displacement devices versus negative displacement devices/neutral displacement devices (one study) and with negative displacement devices versus three-way stopcocks (three studies), but varied with different positive displacement device and negative displacement device/neutral displacement device designs (four studies). Seven studies reported internal microbial contamination rates, which were higher with three-way stopcocks versus negative displacement devices (two studies) and positive displacement devices (two studies), lower when positive displacement devices were used versus neutral displacement devices (one study), and varied with different types of negative displacement device (one study). Central line–associated bloodstream infection rates and most other outcomes analyzed were statistically significantly higher with three-way stopcocks (open devices) versus positive displacement device, negative displacement devices, and neutral displacement devices, but varied among closed device designs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document