Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:32:57.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Outbreak of Bloodstream Infections in an Outpatient Hemodialysis Center

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Connie S. Price ,
Donna Hacek ,
Gary A. Noskin  and
Lance R. Peterson
Connie S. Price*
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Denver Health Medical Center, and theUniversity of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver, Colorado
Donna Hacek
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology, Evanston Northwestern Healthcare, Evanston, Illinois
Gary A. Noskin
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, and theNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
Lance R. Peterson
Affiliation:
Departments of Pathology and Medicine, Evanston Northwestern Healthcare, Evanston, and theNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
*
777 Bannock, MC-4000, Denver, CO 80204-4507
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives:

Investigate and control an increase in bloodstream infections (BSIs) in an outpatient hemodialysis center.

Patients and Design:

A retrospective cohort study was conducted for patients receiving dialysis at the center from February 2000 to April 2001. A case–control study compared microbiological data for all BSIs that occurred during the study period with those for BSIs that occurred during a baseline period Qanuary 1999 to January 2000). BSI rates before and after a 1-month intervention (May 2001) were assessed. A case was defined as a new BSI during the study period.

Results:

The outbreak was polymicrobial, with approximately 30 species. The baseline BSI rate was 0.7 per 100 patient-months. From February 2000 to April 2001, the BSI rate increased to 4.2 per 100 patient-months. Overall, 75% of the BSIs were associated with central venous catheters (CVCs), but CVC use did not fully explain the increase in BSIs. In January 2000, when the center changed ownership, prepackaged CVC dressing kits and biweekly infection control monitoring were discontinued. Beginning in May 2001, staff were educated on CVC care, chlorhexidine replaced povidone-iodine for cutaneous antisepsis, gauze replaced transparent dressings, antimicrobial ointments containing polyethylene glycol at CVC exit sites were discontinued, and patients with CVCs were educated on cutaneous hygiene. After the intervention period, by October 2001, rates decreased to less than 1 BSI per 100 patient-months.

Conclusions:

Proper cutaneous antisepsis and access site care is crucial in preventing BSIs in patients receiving hemodialysis. Infection control programs, staff and patient education, and use of optimal antisepsis agents or prepackaged kits are useful toward this end.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 23 , Issue 12 , December 2002 , pp. 725 - 729
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.D'Agata, EM, Mount, DB, Thayer, V, Schaffner, W. Hospital-acquired infections among chronic hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis 2000; 35:1083–1088.Google Scholar
2.Horl, WH. Neutrophil function and infections in uremia. Am J Kidney Dis 1999;33:xlv–xlvii.Google Scholar
3.Sexton, DJ. Vascular access infections in patients undergoing dialysis with special emphasis on the role and treatment of Staphylococcus aureus. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2001;15:731–742, vii.Google Scholar
4.Task Force on Reuse of Dialyzers, Council on Dialysis, National Kidney Foundation. National Kidney Foundation report on dialyzer reuse. Am J Kidney Dis 1997;30:859–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Outbreaks of gram-negative bacterial bloodstream infections traced to probable contamination of hemodialysis machines—Canada, 1995; United States, 1997; and Israel, 1997. MMWR 1998;47:55–58.Google Scholar
6.Alter, MJ, Favero, MS, Miller, JK, Coleman, PJ, Bland, LA. Reuse of hemodialyzers: results of nationwide surveillance for adverse effects. JAMA 1988;260:2073–2076.Google Scholar
7.Longfield, RN, Wortham, WG, Fletcher, LL, Nauscheutz, WF. Clustered bacteremias in a hemodialysis unit: cross-contamination of blood tubing from ultrafiltrate waste. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1992;13:160–164.Google Scholar
8.Grohskopf, LA, Roth, VR, Feikin, DR, et al. Serratia liquefaciens bloodstream infections from contamination of epoetin alfa at a hemodialysis center. N Engl J Med 2001;344:1491–1497.Google Scholar
9.Alfurayh, O, Sabeel, A, Al Ahdal, MN, et al. Hand contamination with hepatitis C virus in staff looking after hepatitis C-positive hemodialysis patients. Am J Nephrol 2000;20:103–106.Google Scholar
10.Garg, PP, Frick, KD, Diener-West, M, Powe, NR. Effect of the ownership of dialysis facilities on patients' survival and referral for transplantation. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1653–1660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Arnow, PM, Garcia-Houchins, S, Neagle, MB, Bova, JL, Dillon, JJ, Chou, T. An outbreak of bloodstream infections arising from hemodialysis equipment. J Infect Dis 1998;178:783–791.Google Scholar
12.Tokars, JI, Miller, ER, Alter, MJ, Arduino, MJ. National Surveillance of Dialysis Associated Diseases in the United States, 1999. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 1999.Google Scholar
13.Peterson, LR, Brossette, SE. Hunting healthcare-associated infections from the clinical microbiology laboratory: passive, active, and virtual surveillance. J Clin Microbiol 2002;40:1–4.Google Scholar
14.Yu, VL, Goetz, A, Wagener, M, et al. Staphylococcus aureus nasal carriage and infection in patients on hemodialysis: efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis. N Engl J Med 1986;315:91–96.Google Scholar
15.Montecalvo, MA, Shay, DK, Patel, P, et al. Bloodstream infections with vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Arch Intern Med 1996;156:1458–1462.Google Scholar
16.Smith, TL, Pearson, ML, Wilcox, KR, et al. Emergence of vancomycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus: Glycopeptide-Intermediate Staphylococcus aureus Working Group. N Engl J Med 1999;340:493–501.Google Scholar
17.Stevenson, KB, Hannah, EL, Lowder, CA, et al. Epidemiology of hemodialysis vascular access infections from longitudinal infection surveillance data: predicting the impact of NKF-DOQI clinical practice guidelines for vascular access. Am J Kidney Dis 2002;39:549–555.Google Scholar
18.Maki, DG, Ringer, M, Alvarado, CJ. Prospective randomized trial of povidone-iodine, alcohol, and Chlorhexidine for prevention of infection associated with central venous and arterial catheters. Lancet 1991;338:339–343.Google Scholar
19.Conly, JM, Grieves, K, Peters, B. A prospective, randomized study comparing transparent and dry gauze dressings for central venous catheters. J Infect Dis 1989;159:310–319.Google Scholar
20.Hoffmann, KK, Weber, DJ, Samsa, GP, Rutala, WA. Transparent Polyurethane film as an intravenous catheter dressing: a meta-analysis of the infection risks. JAMA 1992;267:2072–2076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Fitchie, C. Central venous catheter-related infection and dressing type. Intensive Critical Care Nursing 1992;8:199–202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.National Kidney Foundation. Prevention of complications: infection. In: National Kidney Foundation. NKF-K/DOQI Clinical Practice Guidelines for Vascular Access: Update 2000. New York: National Kidney Foundation; 2002.Google Scholar