The Journal of hospital infection
-
Globally, millions of patients undergo urethral catheterization every year. Our objective was to study the current use of prophylactic antibiotics on urinary catheter withdrawal. A questionnaire (N = 300) was sent to healthcare professionals involved in the management of patients with urinary catheters (consultant microbiologists, infection control nurses, consultant urologists, specialist nurses in urology, continence advisers and consultants in the care of older people). ⋯ At present, just over one-half of patients with urinary catheters are being given antibiotics, although there is no evidence to suggest that such an intervention confers any benefit. If benefits do not exist, these patients are being exposed to the harm of antibiotics and providers are incurring costs unnecessarily. A formal trial to address this issue is urgently needed.
-
Bloodstream infection (BSI) is a serious complication of critical illness but it is uncertain whether acquisition of BSI in the intensive care unit (ICU) increases the risk of death. A study was conducted among all Calgary health region (population approximately 1 million) adults admitted to ICUs for 48 h or more during a three-year period to investigate the occurrence, microbiology and risk factors for developing an ICU-acquired BSI and to determine whether these infections independently predict mortality. ⋯ Admission to the regional neurosurgery/trauma ICU [odds ratio (OR) 2.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.10-3.90] and increasing Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score (OR 1.05 per point, 95% CI 1.03-1.07) were associated with higher risk, whereas a surgical diagnosis (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.52-0.93) was associated with lower risk of developing ICU-acquired BSI in logistic regression analysis. The crude in-hospital death rate was 45% for patients with ICU-acquired BSI compared with 21% for those without (P < 0.0001) Development of an ICU-acquired BSI was an independent risk factor for death (OR 1.79; 95% CI 1.3-2.5) and increases the risk of dying from critical illness.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Comparison of the effect of closed versus open endotracheal suction systems on the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia.
The aim of this study was to compare the effect of closed versus open endotracheal suction systems on the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was performed in a medical intensive care unit (MICU) of a university hospital in patients who received mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h. Patients were randomized to receive endotracheal suction with either closed catheters (closed suction group; N-41) or single-use catheters (open suction group; N=37). ⋯ Thirteen patients in the open suction group and 16 patients in the closed suction group became colonized (P=0.14). The colonization rates by Acinetobacter spp. and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were more frequent in the closed suction group than in the open suction group (P<0.01 and P=0.04, respectively). In conclusion, closed endotracheal suction resulted in increased colonization rates of ventilator tubing with multi drug-resistant micro-organisms but did not increase the development of VAP and MICU outcome compared with open endotracheal suction.