["Getting to zero infections" in hemodialysis]. / "Getting to zero infections" in emodialisi: un obiettivo raggiungibile. Ruolo della formazione del personale sanitario e dell'impiego di nuovi presidi nella prevenzione delle infezioni cvc correlate.

INTRODUCTION: We describe two measures adopted in hemodialysis outpatient population in order to reduce Central Venous Catheter (CVC) related infections. The first is a nurse staff training in the field project and the second deals with the employment of chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing devices. These actions were performed after high infection rates were observed through a dedicated register. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the limited assistance dialysis center, direct observation (12/2012-02/2013) quantified the gap between the observed and expected health care behaviour. Training needs were defined and a 40 hours nurse staff training in the field was performed on two occasions. In the hospital dialysis center, we introduced alcoholic 2% chlorhexidine solution and chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing devices to the exit site (CHG-Tegaderm and BioPatch). Infections (cumulatively bacteremia/sepsis/skin exit/subcutaneous tunnel) were monitored continuously. RESULTS: Infection rates at the two locations were progressively reduced, reaching a value of zero at the limited assistance center. Nurse staff training in the field produced: two patient reports and three CVC management protocols, Italian language translation of the "The 5 moments of dialysis" WHO poster, alcoholic 2% chlorhexidine adoption to exit-site medication and improvement of environment cleaning/sanitation actions. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience shows that continuously monitoring infection rates represents the first step for timely corrective action. The continuous updating of health personnel, codified prevention measures and an ongoing commitment to raise awareness in a routine practice, allows us to obtain the goal of "getting to zero infections". The staff training produced equal or superior results compared to the isolated use of new chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing devices.

Three methods for estimating days of hospitalization because of hospital-acquired infection: a comparison.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to compare the three methods internationally used for estimating days of hospitalization attributable to hospital infections by applying them to the same population. The methods are: (1) unmatched comparison group; (2) matched control method-based; and (3) Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol method. A study of the prevalence of infections was performed among patients during hospitalization for an ordinary single sampling department. The survey was completed within eight working days between 15 and 24 October 2007. All patients admitted at least 24 hours to the survey day in each department were included in the study, as well as patients discharged/transferred to another hospital or department. During the prevalence study 621 patients were observed, 70 of which with infection (equal to 11.27%). METHOD: The 70 uninfected patients needed for comparison using method 1 were selected through a procedure based on propensity score on demographic variables and clinical trials of patients. The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to verify the normality of quantitative variables. In comparing the three methods Kruskall-Wallis test was used (alpha = 0.05), while comparisons between pairs of methods were performed with the Mann-Whitney test (alpha = 0.017). RESULTS: Estimation results of recovery days with infection using the three comparison tests showed that there is a statistically significant difference between the three methods (P = 0.016) and there is a significant difference between 1 versus 3 (P = 0.013) and between 2 and 3 (P = 0.017), whereas between 1 and 2 no difference was found (P = 0.82). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the three methods are not showing the same estimations and thus may not be exchangeable.

Endoscopic Saphenous harvesting with an Open CO2 System (ESOS) trial for coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In coronary artery bypass grafting surgery, arterial conduits are preferred because of more favourable long-term patency and outcome. Anyway the greater saphenous vein continues to be the most commonly used bypass conduit. Minimally invasive endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting is increasingly being investigated in order to reduce the morbidity associated with conventional open vein harvesting, includes postoperative leg wound complications, pain and patient satisfaction. However, to date the short and the long-term benefits of the endoscopic technique remain controversial. This study provides an interesting opportunity to address this gap in the literature. METHODS/DESIGN: Endoscopic Saphenous harvesting with an Open CO2 System trial includes two parallel vein harvesting arms in coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. It is an interventional, single centre, prospective, randomized, safety/efficacy, cost/effectiveness study, in adult patients with elective planned and first isolated coronary artery disease. A simple size of 100 patients for each arm will be required to achieve 80% statistical power, with a significant level of 0.05, for detecting most of the formulated hypotheses. A six-weeks leg wound complications rate was assumed to be 20% in the conventional arm and less of 4% in the endoscopic arm. Previously quoted studies suggest a first-year vein-graft failure rate of about 20% with an annual occlusion rate of 1% to 2% in the first six years, with practically no difference between the endoscopic and conventional approaches. Similarly, the results on event-free survival rates for the two arms have barely a 2-3% gap. Assuming a 10% drop-out rate and a 5% cross-over rate, the goal is to enrol 230 patients from a single Italian cardiac surgery centre. DISCUSSION: The goal of this prospective randomized trial is to compare and to test improvement in wound healing, quality of life, safety/efficacy, cost-effectiveness, short and long-term outcomes and vein-graft patency after endoscopic open CO2 harvesting system versus conventional vein harvesting.The expected results are of high clinical relevance and will show the safety/efficacy or non-inferiority of one treatment approach in terms of vein harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicalTrials.gov NCT01121341.

Vacuum-based preservation of surgical specimens: an environmentally-safe step towards a formalin-free hospital.

Formalin as a fixative has no practical substitutes, but is toxic and potentially carcinogenic, so caution of its use in hospitals and elsewhere is mandatory. In our hospital, preservation of surgical specimens into formalin to be transferred to pathology labs was replaced by under-vacuum sealing (UVS) tissues into plastic bags and preservation at 4 degrees C until transfer. Data analysis showed UVS processing to be superior in terms of staff satisfaction and of gross anatomic preservation; no problems in terms of technical feasibility or histopathologic preservation were encountered. Formalin was confined to pathology labs while its use on hospital premises was vastly reduced.

A comparative costs analysis of brachytherapy and radical retropubic prostatectomy therapies for clinically localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to perform a comparative costs analysis of brachytherapy (BT) and radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) for clinically localized prostate cancer and to shed light on the difficulties of comparing their relative economic effectiveness. METHODS: A systematic literature review of costing studies available in the Medline, Embase, DARE, and INAHTA databases. RESULTS: There is a lack of homogeneity among published studies in this field. Differences in the reported costs are related to different environments in which the two techniques (BT and RRP) are applied, and in particular due to the use of different methodology, cost items included, time frames, and different price levels in different settings. CONCLUSION: Published studies of costing data of BT and RRP do not provide clear-cut evidence for a conclusion about which treatment may be more effective from an economic point of view.