Eliminating Central Line–Associated Bloodstream Infections: A National Patient Safety Imperative

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean M. Berenholtz ◽  
Lisa H. Lubomski ◽  
Kristina Weeks ◽  
Christine A. Goeschel ◽  
Jill A. Marsteller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
The United States ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Program Goal ◽  
National Patient ◽  
National Initiative ◽  
Adjusted Incidence Rate ◽  
Rate Ratios ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Clabsi Rate

Background.Several studies demonstrating that central line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) are preventable prompted a national initiative to reduce the incidence of these infections.Methods.We conducted a collaborative cohort study to evaluate the impact of the national “On the CUSP: Stop BSI” program on CLABSI rates among participating adult intensive care units (ICUs). The program goal was to achieve a unit-level mean CLABSI rate of less than 1 case per 1,000 catheter-days using standardized definitions from the National Healthcare Safety Network. Multilevel Poisson regression modeling compared infection rates before, during, and up to 18 months after the intervention was implemented.Results.A total of 1,071 ICUs from 44 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, reporting 27,153 ICU-months and 4,454,324 catheter-days of data, were included in the analysis. The overall mean CLABSI rate significantly decreased from 1.96 cases per 1,000 catheter-days at baseline to 1.15 at 16–18 months after implementation. CLABSI rates decreased during all observation periods compared with baseline, with adjusted incidence rate ratios steadily decreasing to 0.57 (95% confidence intervals, 0.50–0.65) at 16–18 months after implementation.Conclusion.Coincident with the implementation of the national “On the CUSP: Stop BSI” program was a significant and sustained decrease in CLABSIs among a large and diverse cohort of ICUs, demonstrating an overall 43% decrease and suggesting the majority of ICUs in the United States can achieve additional reductions in CLABSI rates.

scholarly journals Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infections (MBI-LCBI): Descriptive Analysis of Data Reported to National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN), 2013

2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Epstein ◽  
Isaac See ◽  
Jonathan R. Edwards ◽  
Shelley S. Magill ◽  
Nicola D. Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Acute Care ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Mucosal Barrier ◽  
National Healthcare ◽  
National Healthcare Safety Network ◽  
Mucosal Barrier Injury ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Clabsi Rate

OBJECTIVESTo determine the impact of mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections (MBI-LCBIs) on central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates during the first year of MBI-LCBI reporting to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN)DESIGNDescriptive analysis of 2013 NHSN dataSETTINGSelected inpatient locations in acute care hospitalsMETHODSA descriptive analysis of MBI-LCBI cases was performed. CLABSI rates per 1,000 central-line days were calculated with and without the inclusion of MBI-LCBIs in the subset of locations reporting ≥1 MBI-LCBI, and in all locations (regardless of MBI-LCBI reporting) to determine rate differences overall and by location type.RESULTSFrom 418 locations in 252 acute care hospitals reporting ≥1 MBI-LCBIs, 3,162 CLABSIs were reported; 1,415 (44.7%) met the MBI-LCBI definition. Among these locations, removing MBI-LCBI from the CLABSI rate determination produced the greatest CLABSI rate decreases in oncology (49%) and ward locations (45%). Among all locations reporting CLABSI data, including those reporting no MBI-LCBIs, removing MBI-LCBI reduced rates by 8%. Here, the greatest decrease was in oncology locations (38% decrease); decreases in other locations ranged from 1.2% to 4.2%.CONCLUSIONSAn understanding of the potential impact of removing MBI-LCBIs from CLABSI data is needed to accurately interpret CLABSI trends over time and to inform changes to state and federal reporting programs. Whereas the MBI-LCBI definition may have a large impact on CLABSI rates in locations where patients with certain clinical conditions are cared for, the impact of MBI-LCBIs on overall CLABSI rates across inpatient locations appears to be more modest.Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2015;37(1):2–7

scholarly journals 771. COVID-19 on the Line: A Significant Increase in CLABSI in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 at a Major Teaching Hospital

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S482-S483
Author(s):  
Pishoy Haroun ◽  
Michael Ben-Aderet ◽  
Meghan Madhusudhan ◽  
Matthew J Almario ◽  
Ryan C Raypon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Teaching Hospital ◽  
Nurse Staffing ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Contributing Factors ◽  
Subjective Data ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Clabsi Rate

Abstract Background We observed an increase in central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) associated with the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic and performed a retrospective analysis to better understand the impact of COVID-19 on CLABSI rates. Figure 1. CLABSI rate in 2019 vs CLABSI rate in 2020 A comparison of CLABSI rates (displayed in infections/1000 catheter days) in all adult inpatients at our institution for calendar-years 2019 and 2020 Methods Retrospective review was done for all CLABSI in adults meeting National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) criteria in 2020 at an 889-bed teaching hospital. CLABSIs in encounters with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 (COVID CLABSI) were compared with CLABSIs in encounters without a COVID diagnosis (non-COVID CLABSI). As a secondary analysis, we also reviewed all CLABSI occurrence in 2019. Characteristics were compared using Mid-P Exact (Poisson) and Chi Squared (categorical) Tests. Subjective data collected by infection preventionists during real-time case reviews with clinical staff of each CLABSI was also reviewed. Results In 2020, the rate of COVID CLABSI (CLABSI/1000 catheter days) was 6.6 times greater than the rate of non-COVID CLABSI (5.47 vs. 0.83, p< 0.001). In the COVID CLABSI group we observed higher rates of occurrence in the ICU setting (94% vs 28%, p< 0.001), in house mortality (53% vs 26% P=0.0187), presence of arterial lines (91% vs 20%, p< 0.001) and increased number of catheter lumens (4 vs 3, p< 0.001). No significant difference was observed in the distribution of pathogens. No significant differences were observed between 2019 CLABSI and 2020 non-COVID CLABSI. Real-time case reviews identified changes in nurse staffing, increased nurse: patient ratios, delays in routine central line dressing changes, and inconsistent use of alcohol-impregnated port protectors as possible contributing factors. Table 1. 2020 COVID CLABSI vs 2020 non-COVID CLABSI A comparison of selected patient and catheter characteristics in COVID CLABSI vs non-COVID CLABSI in 2020 Table 2. 2019 CLABSI vs 2020 non-COVID CLABSI A comparison of selected patient and catheter characteristics in CLABSI in 2019 vs non-COVID CLABSI in 2020 Figure 2. CLABSI rate in 2019 vs COVID CLABSI and non-COVID CLABSI in 2020 A comparison of CLABSI rates (displayed in infections/1000 catheter days) in all adult inpatients at our institution for calendar years 2019 and 2020, with the infections in 2020 divided into those that occurred during an encounter with a PCR -confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and those without. Conclusion We observed a dramatically higher rate of CLABSI in patients with COVID-19 in 2020, while the rate of CLABSI in patients without COVID-19 remained unchanged from the year prior. Higher rates of ICU admission, critical illness, increased numbers of lumens, increased presence of arterial lines, nurse staffing changes, and gaps in routine line prevention processes associated with emergency measures in the COVID-19 cohort ICU may have contributed to this finding. Further work is needed to better understand how to minimize process-related disruptions in central line care during a hospital response to a pandemic. Disclosures Jonathan Grein, MD, Gilead (Other Financial or Material Support, Speakers fees)

The Impact of a Dedicated Nurse on the Prevention of Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections in the NICU

2021 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-97
Author(s):  
Sabra Curry ◽  
Ellen Mallard ◽  
Elizabeth Marrero ◽  
Melinda Walker ◽  
Robin Weeks ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rate Increase ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Rate Reduction ◽  
Cause Analysis ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Bundle Compliance ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Neonatal Population ◽  
Clabsi Rate

BackgroundThe neonatal population is at increased risk for central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) related to prematurity, critical illness, and compromised immune function.1,4,5MethodsTo address a 30 percent CLABSI rate increase, a quality improvement (QI) project in a Level IV NICU was developed and implemented by the NICU CLABSI team in 2018. The project trialed a dedicated CLABSI prevention-registered nurse (DCP-RN) role with select responsibilities aimed at rate reduction. The DCP-RN spearheaded an RN education plan, addressed prevention bundle compliance, and aided in establishing a reliable apparent cause analysis (ACA) process.ResultsThe outcome resulted in an over 50% reduction in the CLABSI rate and permanent adoption of the DCP-RN role in the NICU.

scholarly journals Impact of the Revised Non–Culture-Based Methodology Criteria on Central-Line–Associated Bloodstream Infections

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s266-s266
Author(s):  
Geehan Suleyman ◽  
Thomas Chevalier ◽  
Nisreen Murad ◽  
George Alangaden
Keyword(s):  
Blood Culture ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Molecular Test ◽  
Current Definition ◽  
Previous Definition ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Positive Results ◽  
Clabsi Rate

Background: The current NHSN guideline states that positive results from both blood cultures and non–culture-based testing (NCT) methodologies are to be used for central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) surveillance determination. A positive NCT result in the absence of blood cultures or negative blood cultures in patients who meet CLABSI criteria is to be reported to NHSN. However, the reporting criteria for NCT changed starting January 1, 2020: If NCT is positive and the blood culture is negative 2 days before or 1 day after, the NCT result is not reported. If the NCT is positive with no blood culture within the 3-day window period, the NCT result is reported in patients who meet CLABSI criteria. We estimated the impact of the new NCT criteria on CLABSI numbers and rates compared to the previous definition. Methods: At our facility, the T2Candida Panel (T2), an NCT, was implemented for clinical use for the detection of early candidemia and invasive candidiasis. The T2 is a rapid molecular test performed directly on blood samples to detect DNA of 5 Candida spp: C. albicans/C. tropicalis, C. glabrata/C. krusei, and C. parapsilosis. In this retrospective study performed at an 877-bed teaching hospital in Detroit, we reviewed the impact of discordant T2 results (positive T2 with negative blood cultures) on CLABSI rates from January 1, 2017, to September 30, 2019, based on the current definition, and we applied the revised criteria to estimate the new CLABSI numbers and rates for the same period. Results: Of 343 positive T2 results, 202 (58.9%) were discordant and qualified for CLABSI determination during the study period. Of these, 109 (54%) met CLABSI criteria based on the current definition and 11 (5%) met CLABSI criteria using the new definition (proportional P < .001), resulting in an 89.9% reduction. The CLABSI rate per 1,000 central-line days, which includes discordant T2 results, based on the current and new NCT criteria, are listed in Table 1. Conclusions: In institutions that utilize NCT such as T2, application of the new 2020 NCT NHSN definition would significantly reduce the CLABSI number and have a significant impact on the CLABSI rates and standardized infection ratios (SIRs).Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

scholarly journals Employment of Young Adult Cancer Caregivers, Other Disease Caregivers, and Non-Caregiving Adults

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (14) ◽  
pp. 7452
Author(s):  
Echo L. Warner ◽  
Andrew R. Wilson ◽  
Jessica G. Rainbow ◽  
Lee Ellington ◽  
Anne C. Kirchhoff
Keyword(s):  
Young Adult ◽  
The United States ◽  
Behavioral Risk ◽  
Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance ◽  
Adjusted Incidence Rate ◽  
Cancer Caregivers ◽  
Employment Goals ◽  
Caregiving Roles ◽  
Rate Ratios ◽  
Young Adult Cancer

Young adults are increasingly taking on caregiving roles in the United States, and cancer caregivers often experience a greater burden than other caregivers. An unexpected caregiving role may disrupt caregiver employment, leading to lost earning potential and workforce re-entry challenges. We examined caregiving employment among young adult caregivers (i.e., family or friends) using the 2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), which included caregiving, employment, and sociodemographic variables. Respondents’ ages varied between 18 and 39, and they were categorized as non-caregivers (n = 16,009), other caregivers (n = 3512), and cancer caregivers (n = 325). Current employment was compared using Poisson regressions to estimate adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), including gender-stratified models. We estimated employment by cancer caregiving intensity (low, moderate, high). Cancer caregivers at all other income levels were more likely to be employed than those earning below USD 20,000 (aIRR ranged: 1.88–2.10, all p< 0.015). Female cancer caregivers who were 25–29 (aIRR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.51–1.00) and single (aIRR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.52–0.95) were less likely to be employed than their counterparts. College-educated males were 19% less likely to be employed than high school-educated caregivers (95% CI = 0.68–0.98). Evaluating caregiver employment goals and personal financial situations may help identify those at risk for employment detriments, especially among females, those with lower educational attainment, and those earning below USD 20,000 annually.

scholarly journals Effect of Removing Contact Precautions for Multidrug-Resistant Organisms on Hospital Infections in a Pediatric Health System

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s199-s200
Author(s):  
Matthew Linam ◽  
Dorian Hoskins ◽  
Preeti Jaggi ◽  
Mark Gonzalez ◽  
Renee Watson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Antibiotic Stewardship ◽  
Infection Prevention ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Contact Precautions ◽  
Stewardship Program ◽  
Tract Infections ◽  
The Impact

Background: Discontinuation of contact precautions for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE) have failed to show an increase in associated transmission or infections in adult healthcare settings. Pediatric experience is limited. Objective: We evaluated the impact of discontinuing contact precautions for MRSA, VRE, and extended-spectrum β-lactamase–producing gram-negative bacilli (ESBLs) on device-associated healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Methods: In October 2018, contact precautions were discontinued for children with MRSA, VRE, and ESBLs in a large, tertiary-care pediatric healthcare system comprising 2 hospitals and 620 beds. Coincident interventions that potentially reduced HAIs included blood culture diagnostic stewardship (June 2018), a hand hygiene education initiative (July 2018), a handshake antibiotic stewardship program (December 2018) and multidisciplinary infection prevention rounding in the intensive care units (November 2018). Compliance with hand hygiene and HAI prevention bundles were monitored. Device-associated HAIs were identified using standard definitions. Annotated run charts were used to track the impact of interventions on changes in device-associated HAIs over time. Results: Average hand hygiene compliance was 91%. Compliance with HAI prevention bundles was 81% for ventilator-associated pneumonias, 90% for catheter-associated urinary tract infections, and 97% for central-line–associated bloodstream infections. Overall, device-associated HAIs decreased from 6.04 per 10,000 patient days to 3.25 per 10,000 patient days after October 2018 (Fig. 1). Prior to October 2018, MRSA, VRE and ESBLs accounted for 10% of device-associated HAIs. This rate decreased to 5% after October 2018. The decrease in HAIs was likely related to interventions such as infection prevention rounds and handshake stewardship. Conclusions: Discontinuation of contact precautions for children with MRSA, VRE, and ESBLs were not associated with increased device-associated HAIs, and such discontinuation is likely safe in the setting of robust infection prevention and antibiotic stewardship programs.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

scholarly journals COVID-19 Pandemic, CLABSI, and CAUTI: The Urgent Need to Refocus on Hardwiring Prevention Efforts

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Mohamad G. Fakih ◽  
Angelo Bufalino ◽  
Lisa Sturm ◽  
Ren-Huai Huang ◽  
Allison Ottenbacher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urinary Catheter ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus ◽  
Safe Environment ◽  
Candida Sp ◽  
Optimal Line ◽  
Considerable Impact ◽  
Tract Infections ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a considerable impact on US hospitalizations, affecting processes and patient population. Methods: We evaluated the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in 78 US hospitals on central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) and catheter associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) events 12 months pre-COVID-19 and 6 months during COVID-19 pandemic. Results: There were 795,022 central line-days and 817,267 urinary catheter-days over the two study periods. Compared to pre-COVID-19 period, CLABSI rates increased during the pandemic period from 0.56 to 0.85 (51.0%) per 1,000 line-days (p<0.001) and from 1.00 to 1.64 (62.9%) per 10,000 patient-days (p<0.001). Hospitals with monthly COVID-19 patients representing >10% of admissions had a NHSN device standardized infection ratio for CLABSI that was 2.38 times higher compared to those with <5% prevalence during the pandemic period (p=0.004). Coagulase-negative staphylococcus CLABSI increased by 130% from 0.07 to 0.17 events per 1,000 line-days (p<0.001), and Candida sp. by 56.9% from 0.14 to 0.21 per 1,000 line-days (p=0.01). In contrast, no significant changes were identified for CAUTI (0.86 vs. 0.77 per 1,000 catheter-days; p=0.19). Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with substantial increases in CLABSI but not CAUTI events. Our findings underscore the importance of hardwiring processes for optimal line care, and regular feedback on performance to maintain a safe environment.

scholarly journals Review of Best Practices for CLABSI Prevention and the Impact of Recent Legislation on CLABSI Reporting

SAGE Open ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 215824401667774 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Woodward ◽  
Reba Umberger
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Mandatory Reporting ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Common Source ◽  
Healthcare Associated Infection ◽  
Extrinsic Factors ◽  
The Impact

Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) are a very common source of healthcare-associated infection (HAI). Incidence of CLABSI has been significantly reduced through the efforts of nurses, healthcare providers, and infection preventionists. Extrinsic factors such as recently enacted legislation and mandatory reporting have not been closely examined in relation to changes in rates of HAI. The following review will examine evidence-based practices related to CLABSI and how they are reported, as well as how the Affordable Care Act, mandatory reporting, and pay-for-performance programs have affected these best practices related to CLABSI prevention. There is a disconnect in the methods and guidelines for reporting CLABSI between these programs, specifically among local monitoring agencies and the various federal oversight organizations. Future research will focus on addressing the gap in what defines a CLABSI and whether or not these programs to incentivize hospital to reduce CLABSI rates are effective.

Use of a Structured Panel Process to Define Quality Metrics for Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs

2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 500-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew M. Morris ◽  
Stacey Brener ◽  
Linda Dresser ◽  
Nick Daneman ◽  
Timothy H. Dellit ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
The United States ◽  
Community Acquired Pneumonia ◽  
Public Reporting ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Days Of Therapy ◽  
The Impact

Introduction.Antimicrobial stewardship programs are being implemented in health care to reduce inappropriate antimicrobial use, adverse events, Clostridium difficile infection, and antimicrobial resistance. There is no standardized approach to evaluate the impact of these programs.Objective.To use a structured panel process to define quality improvement metrics for evaluating antimicrobial stewardship programs in hospital settings that also have the potential to be used as part of public reporting efforts.Design.A multiphase modified Delphi technique.Setting.Paper-based survey supplemented with a 1-day consensus meeting.Participants.A 10-member expert panel from Canada and the United States was assembled to evaluate indicators for relevance, effectiveness, and the potential to aid quality improvement efforts.Results.There were a total of 5 final metrics selected by the panel: (1) days of therapy per 1000 patient-days; (2) number of patients with specific organisms that are drug resistant; (3) mortality related to antimicrobial-resistant organisms; (4) conservable days of therapy among patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTI), or sepsis and bloodstream infections (BSI); and (5) unplanned hospital readmission within 30 days after discharge from the hospital in which the most responsible diagnosis was one of CAP, SSTI, sepsis or BSI. The first and second indicators were also identified as useful for accountability purposes, such as public reporting.Conclusion.We have successfully identified 2 measures for public reporting purposes and 5 measures that can be used internally in healthcare settings as quality indicators. These indicators can be implemented across diverse healthcare systems to enable ongoing evaluation of antimicrobial stewardship programs and complement efforts for improved patient safety.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document