Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T00:27:05.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reducing Central Venous Catheter–Associated Primary Bloodstream Infections in Intensive Care Units Is Possible: Data From The German Nosocomial Infection Surveillance System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Irina Zuschneid ,
Frank Schwab ,
Christine Geffers ,
Henning Rüden  and
Petra Gastmeier
Irina Zuschneid*
Affiliation:
Institute of Hygiene, Free University Berlin, Department of Hospital Epidemiology, Charité, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany
Frank Schwab
Affiliation:
Institute of Hygiene, Free University Berlin, Department of Hospital Epidemiology, Charité, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany
Christine Geffers
Affiliation:
Institute of Hygiene, Free University Berlin, Department of Hospital Epidemiology, Charité, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany
Henning Rüden
Affiliation:
Institute of Hygiene, Free University Berlin, Department of Hospital Epidemiology, Charité, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany
Petra Gastmeier
Affiliation:
Division of Hospital Epidemiology and Infection Control, Institute for Medical Microbiology and Hospital Epidemiology, Medical School Hanover, Hanover, Germany
*
Institute of Hygiene, Free University Berlin, Heubnerweg 6, 14059 Berlin, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background And Objective:

The German Nosocomial Infection Surveillance System (KISS) began in 1997 as a nationwide surveillance project for voluntary registration of nosocomial infections in intensive care units (ICUs). This study investigates trends in the rates of central venous catheter (CVC)–associated primary bloodstream infections (BSIs) in ICUs since participation in KISS.

Methods:

Eighty-four ICUs that had participated in KISS for at least 24 months were considered for more detailed analysis. Monthly rates of primary BSI for the 84 ICUs were pooled for the 24 months. The best model for describing the curve of reduction was sought. Additionally, incidence densities were compared using the z test.

Results:

For the 212 ICUs participating, a relative 25.7% decrease (from 2.1 to 1.6 primary BSIs per 1,000 CVC-days) was observed from January 1997 to June 2001. The 84 ICUs that participated in KISS for a minimum of 24 months accumulated 552,359 patient-days and 404,897 CVC-days during their 24 months. A linear regression model was selected to explain the curve of primary BSI reduction in the 84 ICUs. It showed a decrease from 2.1 to 1.5 primary BSIs per 1,000 CVC-days, meaning an overall relative reduction of 28.6% during the 2-year observation period. These results were significant (Student's t test for the monthly reduction coefficient; P = .04). The reduction of primary BSIs was shown for both clinical sepsis and laboratory-confirmed, CVC-associated primary BSIs.

Conclusion:

Performing surveillance with KISS was associated with a reduction of the rates of CVC-associated primary BSIs in ICU patients (Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003;24:501-505).

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 24 , Issue 7 , July 2003 , pp. 501 - 505
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2003

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.Haley, RW, Culver, DH, White, JW, et al. The efficacy of infection surveillance and control programs in preventing nosocomial infections in US hospitals. Am J Epidemiol 1985;121:182–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Gaynes, R, Richards, C, Edwards, J, et al. Feeding back surveillance data to prevent hospital-acquired infections. Emerg Infect Dis 2001;7:295–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Emori, TG, Culver, DH, Horan, TC, et al. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System (NNIS): description of surveillance methods. Am J Infect Control 1991;19:19–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Gastmeier, P, Sohr, D, Geffers, C, Nassauer, A, Daschner, F, Ruden, H. Are nosocomial infection rates in intensive care units useful benchmark parameters? Infection 2000;28:346–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Garner, JS, Jarvis, WR, Emori, TG, Horan, TC, Hughes, JM. CDC definitions for nosocomial infections, 1988. Am J Infect Control 1988;16:128–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Nationales Referenzzentrum für Surveillance von nosokomialen Infektionen. Nationales Referenzzentrum für Surveillance von nosokomialen Infektionen. Berlin: Nationales Referenzzentrum fur Surveillance von nosokomialen Infektionen; 2002. Available at www.nrz-hygiene.de.Google Scholar
7.National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System report: data summary from January 1992-April 2000, issued June 2000. Am J Infect Control 2000;28:429–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Haley, RW, Culver, DH, Morgan, WM, White, JW, Emori, TG, Hooton, TM. Increased recognition of infectious diseases in US hospitals through increased use of diagnostic tests, 1970-1976. Am J Epidemiol 1985;121:168–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Geffers, C, Gastmeier, P, Brauer, H, Daschner, F, Ruden, H. Surveillance of nosocomial infections in ICUs: is postdischarge surveillance indispensable? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2001;22:157–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Eckmanns, T, Rath, A, Ruden, H, Gastmeier, P, Daschner, F. Outbreak of Enterobacter cloacae related to understaffing, overcrowding, and poor hygiene practices. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000;21:305–307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Anonymous. Monitoring hospital-acquired infections to promote patient safety: United States, 1990-1999. MMWR 2000;49:149–153.Google Scholar
12.Zuschneid, I, Sohr, D, Kohlhase, C, et al. Accuracy of nosocomial infection (NI) data from Intensive Care Units (ICUs) within the German Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. Presented at the Fifth International Conference of the Hospital Infection Society; September 15-18, 2002; Edinburgh, Scotland.Google Scholar
13.Veenstra, DL, Saint, S, Saha, S, Lumley, T, Sullivan, SD. Efficacy of antiseptic-impregnated central venous catheters in preventing catheter-related bloodstream infection: a meta-analysis. JAMA 1999;281:261–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Marin, MG, Lee, JC, Skurnick, JH. Prevention of nosocomial bloodstream infections: effectiveness of antimicrobial-impregnated and heparin-bonded central venous catheters. Crit Care Med 2000;28:3332–3338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Mermel, LA. Prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Ann Intern Med 2000;132:391–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Civetta, JM, Hudson-Civetta, J, Ball, S. Decreasing catheter-related infection and hospital costs by continuous quality improvement. Crit Care Med 1996;24:1660–1665.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Bishop-Kurylo, D. The clinical experience of continuous quality improvement in the neonatal intensive care unit. Journal of Perinatal and Neonatal Nursing 1998;12:51–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Eggimann, P, Harbarth, S, Constantin, MN, Touveneau, S, Chevrolet, JC, Pittet, D. Impact of a prevention strategy targeted at vascular-access care on incidence of infections acquired in intensive care. Lancet 2000;355:1864–1868.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Sherertz, RJ, Ely, EW, Westbrook, DM, et al. Education of physicians-in-training can decrease the risk for vascular catheter infection. Ann Intern Med 2000;132:641–648.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed