We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Chlorhexidine-impregnated transparent dressings decrease catheter-related infections in hemodialysis patients: a quality improvement project.
Journal of Vascular Access 2017 March 22
PURPOSE: Central venous catheters (CVC) are associated with increased infection rates, morbidity and mortality compared to other hemodialysis vascular access. Chlorhexidine-impregnated transparent (CHG-transparent) dressings allow for continuous antimicrobial exposure and easy visibility of the CVC insertion site. We conducted a quality improvement project to compare catheter-related infection (CRI) rates in two dressing regimens - CHG-transparent dressings and adhesive dry gauze dressing in hemodialysis patients with tunneled CVCs.
METHODS: The study was conducted in two phases. In phase 1, CHG-transparent dressing was introduced to EDC hemodialysis unit, while EDG and EDN hemodialysis units, served as the control sites and maintained adhesive dry gauze dressing. Phase 2 of the study involved replacing the adhesive dry gauze dressing with CHG-transparent dressing at EDG and EDN and maintaining CHG-transparent dressing at EDC. CRI rates at each hemodialysis unit during the 12-month intervention were compared to CRI rates for the 12-month pre-intervention period for each study phase. CRI rates were also compared between all three hemodialysis units.
RESULTS: In phase 1, CRI rates (per 1000 days) in EDC (intervention site) decreased by 52% (1.69 vs. 0.82, p<0.05) and increased by 12% (1.80 vs. 2.02, p = 0.75) at EDG, and 35% (0.91 vs. 1.23, p = 0.40) at EDN. In phase 2, CRI rates at EDG and EDN (intervention sites) decreased by 86% (1.86 vs. 0.26 p<0.05), and 53% (1.89 vs. 0.88, p<0.05), respectively, and decreased by 20% at EDC (0.73 vs. 0.58, p = 0.65).
CONCLUSIONS: Replacing adhesive dry gauze dressing with CHG-transparent dressing for hemodialysis patients with tunneled CVC was associated with decreased CRI rates.
METHODS: The study was conducted in two phases. In phase 1, CHG-transparent dressing was introduced to EDC hemodialysis unit, while EDG and EDN hemodialysis units, served as the control sites and maintained adhesive dry gauze dressing. Phase 2 of the study involved replacing the adhesive dry gauze dressing with CHG-transparent dressing at EDG and EDN and maintaining CHG-transparent dressing at EDC. CRI rates at each hemodialysis unit during the 12-month intervention were compared to CRI rates for the 12-month pre-intervention period for each study phase. CRI rates were also compared between all three hemodialysis units.
RESULTS: In phase 1, CRI rates (per 1000 days) in EDC (intervention site) decreased by 52% (1.69 vs. 0.82, p<0.05) and increased by 12% (1.80 vs. 2.02, p = 0.75) at EDG, and 35% (0.91 vs. 1.23, p = 0.40) at EDN. In phase 2, CRI rates at EDG and EDN (intervention sites) decreased by 86% (1.86 vs. 0.26 p<0.05), and 53% (1.89 vs. 0.88, p<0.05), respectively, and decreased by 20% at EDC (0.73 vs. 0.58, p = 0.65).
CONCLUSIONS: Replacing adhesive dry gauze dressing with CHG-transparent dressing for hemodialysis patients with tunneled CVC was associated with decreased CRI rates.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app