• Ayse Betul Ergul, Ikbal Gokcek, Alper Ozcan, Serife Cetin, Nurkan Gultekin, and TorunYasemin AltunerYADr. Yasemin Altuner Torun, Associate, Professor. Department of Pediatric Hematology, University of Health Sciences, Kayseri Training and Research Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey..
• Ayse Betul Ergul, M.D. Department of Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, University of Health Sciences, Kayseri Training and Research Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey.
• Pak J Med Sci. 2018 Mar 1; 34 (2): 347-351.

ObjectiveWe compared the protective effects of secure Chlorhexidine Gluconate (CHG)-containing dressings with those of non-antimicrobial transparent dressings.MethodsThis prospective, comparative, single-center clinical study was conducted in a tertiary pediatric intensive care unit from October 2014 to March 2017. The inclusion criterion was catheterization of the jugular vein for ≥48 hour. The study was conducted in two phases. Non-antimicrobial standard dressings were applied both before and after the CHG- dressing phase to negate any coincidental temporal effect. During the standard-dressing phases, the dressings did not include any antimicrobial; transparent CHG-impregnated dressings were applied during the test phase. All patients were divided into two groups by the type of dressing applied (standard and CHG-containing dressings).ResultsThe standard- and CHG-dressing groups contained 68 and 63 patients, respectively. The median durations of catheterization were 13 (8-22) and 14 (2-28) days, respectively (p>0.05). The Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection (CRBSI) rate was somewhat lower in the CHG-dressing group (20.6 vs. 26.5%), but the difference was not statistically significant (p>0.05). In the CHG-dressing group, CRBSIs caused by Gram-positive microorganisms totaled 0%, but the figure was 8.8% in the control group (p=0.028).ConclusionsCHG dressings reduced CRBSIs caused by Gram-positive microorganisms.

4 keywords...

hide…