-
Intensive care medicine · Sep 2016
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter StudyComparison of alcoholic chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine cutaneous antiseptics for the prevention of central venous catheter-related infection: a cohort and quasi-experimental multicenter study.
- Justine Pages, Pascal Hazera, Bruno Mégarbane, Damien du Cheyron, Marie Thuong, Jean-Jacques Dutheil, Xavier Valette, François Fournel, Leonard A Mermel, Jean-Paul Mira, Cédric Daubin, Jean-Jacques Parienti, and 3SITES Study Group.
- Department of Biostatistics and Clinical Research, Caen University Hospital, Caen, France.
- Intensive Care Med. 2016 Sep 1; 42 (9): 1418-26.
PurposeCompare the effectiveness of different cutaneous antiseptics in reducing risk of catheter-related infection in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.MethodsWe compared the risk of central venous catheter-related infection according to four-step (scrub, rinse, dry, and disinfect) alcoholic 5 % povidone-iodine (PVI-a, n = 1521), one-step (disinfect) alcoholic 2 % chlorhexidine (2 % CHX-a, n = 1116), four-step alcoholic <1 % chlorhexidine (<1 % CHX-a, n = 357), and four-step aqueous 10 % povidone-iodine (PVI, n = 368) antiseptics used for cutaneous disinfection and catheter care during the 3SITES multicenter randomized controlled trial. Within this cohort, we performed a quasi-experimental study (i.e., before-after) involving the four ICUs which switched from PVI-a to 2 % CHX-a. We used propensity score matching (PSM, n = 776) and inverse probability weighting treatment (IPWT, n = 1592). The end point was the incidence of catheter-related infection (CRI) defined as catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) or a positive catheter tip culture plus clinical sepsis on catheter removal.ResultsIn the cohort analysis and compared with PVI-a, the incidence of CRI was lower with 2 % CHX-a [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 0.51; 95 % confidence interval (CI) (0.28-0.96), p = 0.037] and similar with <1 % CHX-a [aHR, 0.73; (0.36-1.48), p = 0.37] and PVI [aHR, 1.50; 95 % CI (0.85-2.64), p = 0.16] after controlling for potential confounders. In the quasi-experimental study and compared with PVI-a, the incidence of catheter-related infection was again lower with 2 % CHX-a after PSM [HR, 0.35; 95 % CI (0.15, 0.84), p = 0.02] and in the IPWT analysis [HR, 0.31; 95 % CI (0.14, 0.70), p = 0.005]. The incidence of CRBSI or adverse event was not significantly different between antiseptics in all analyses.ConclusionsIn comparison with PVI-a, the use of 2 % CHX-a for cutaneous disinfection of the central venous catheter insertion site and maintenance catheter care was associated with a reduced risk of catheter infection, while the benefit of <1 % CHX-a was uncertain.Clinical Trials IdentifierNCT01479153.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.