RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Short-term peripheral venous catheter-associated bloodstream infections (PVC-associated BSI) are disregarded in the literature because of their relatively low incidence. No data are available on the association between PVC diameter size and the risk of PVC-associated BSI. METHODS: Using a prospective database, we performed an observational study at the University of Geneva Hospitals from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021, including all patients with a PVC. We used univariable and multivariable marginal Cox regression models for clustered data to investigate the association between catheter size and PVC-associated BSI. The main variable of interest 'catheter size' was forced into our multivariable models. Confounders, which are thought to influence the risk of PVC-associated BSI, were used as adjustment factors. RESULTS: A total of 206 804 PVCs were included. In all, 10 806 of 201 413 (5.4%), 80 274 of 201 413 (39.9%), 93 047 of 201 413 (46.2%) and 17 286 of 201 413 (8.6%) PVCs measured ≤16G, 18G, 20G and ≥22G, respectively. The univariable analysis showed that diameters of ≤16G were significantly associated with a higher risk of PVC-associated BSI (hazard ratio [HR] 4.52, 95% CI, 1.14-18.00). Multivariable models confirmed these results (HR 4.65, 95% CI, 1.19-18.20). Sensitivity analyses including PVC inserted only in 2021 (HR 4.80, 95% CI, 1.21-19.10), for dwell time >2 days (HR 3.67, 95% CI, 0.92-14.65) and only in adults (HR 3.97, 95% CI, 0.97-15.39) showed similar results. DISCUSSION: Larger PVC size may increase the risk of PVC-associated BSI. Diameter size should be considered when selecting PVCs to reduce the burden of PVC-associated BSI.
Assuntos
Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter , Cateterismo Periférico , Sepse , Adulto , Humanos , Cateterismo Periférico/efeitos adversos , Catéteres , Hospitais , Incidência , Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the initial phase of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, masking has been widely accepted in healthcare institutions to mitigate the risk of healthcare-associated infection. Evidence, however, is still scant and the role of masks in preventing healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 acquisition remains unclear.We investigated the association of variation in institutional mask policies with healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections in acute care hospitals in Switzerland during the BA.4/5 2022 wave. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 infections in hospitalized patients between June 1 and September 5, 2022, were obtained from the "Hospital-based surveillance of COVID-19 in Switzerland"-database and classified as healthcare- or community-associated based on time of disease onset. Institutions provided information regarding institutional masking policies for healthcare workers and other prevention policies. The percentage of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections was calculated per institution and per type of mask policy. The association of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections with mask policies was tested using a negative binominal mixed-effect model. RESULTS: We included 2'980 SARS-CoV-2 infections from 13 institutions, 444 (15%) were classified as healthcare-associated. Between June 20 and June 30, 2022, six (46%) institutions switched to a more stringent mask policy. The percentage of healthcare-associated infections subsequently declined in institutions with policy switch but not in the others. In particular, the switch from situative masking (standard precautions) to general masking of HCW in contact with patients was followed by a strong reduction of healthcare-associated infections (rate ratio 0.39, 95% CI 0.30-0.49). In contrast, when compared across hospitals, the percentage of health-care associated infections was not related to mask policies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest switching to a more stringent mask policy may be beneficial during increases of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections at an institutional level.