Use of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection prevention practices by US hospitals

Sarah L. Krein, Timothy P. Hofer, Christine P. Kowalski, Russell N. Olmsted, Carol A. Kauffman, Jane H. Forman, Jane Banaszak-Holl, Sanjay Saint

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

88 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which US acute care hospitals have adopted recommended practices to prevent central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections (CR-BSIs). PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Between March 16, 2005, and August 1, 2005, a survey of infection control coordinators was conducted at a national random sample of nonfederal hospitals with an intensive care unit and more than 50 hospital beds (n=600) and at all Department of Vetarans Affairs (VA) medical centers (n=119). Primary outcomes were regular use of 5 specific practices and a composite approach for preventing CR-BSIs. RESULTS: The overall survey response rate was 72% (n=516). A higher percentage of VA compared to non-VA hospitals reported using maximal sterile barrier precautions (84% vs 71%; P=.01); chlorhexidine gluconate for insertion site antisepsis (91% vs 69%; P<.001); and a composite approach (62% vs 44%; P=.003) combining concurrent use of maximal sterile barrier precautions, chlorhexidine gluconate, and avoidance of routine central line changes. Those hospitals having a higher safety culture score, having a certified infection control professional, and participating in an infection prevention collaborative were more likely to use CR-BSI prevention practices. CONCLUSION: Most US hospitals are using maximal sterile barrier precautions and chlorhexidine gluconate, 2 of the most strongly recommended practices to prevent CR-BSIs. However, fewer than half of non-VA US hospitals reported concurrent use of maximal sterile barrier precautions, chlorhexidine gluconate, and avoidance of routine central line changes. Wider use of CR-BSI prevention practices by hospitals could be encouraged by fostering a culture of safety, participating in infection prevention collaboratives, and promoting infection control professional certification.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)672-678
Number of pages7
JournalMayo Clinic Proceedings
Volume82
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2007

Cite this