A Retrospective Cohort Design And Measuring Characteristics Of Patients With Piccs

It can also occur during blood transfusion or during dressing change. The insertion of central catheters can occur in the Interventional Radiology or sometimes at the bedside. Regardless of the where the insertion process occur, a sterile field must always be maintained and sterile techniques must always be employed to prevent any organisms from being introduced to the central line into the patient. According to The Joint Commission (2013), many organizations such as Michigan Keystone Intensive Care Unit Project and Institute for Healthcare Improvement are actually adhering to insertion bundles to reduce the CLABSI rates. The bundles include hand hygiene, maximal barrier precautions, chlorhexidine skin preparation, avoidance of femoral vein, and prompt removal of central catheter. Furuya et al. (2011) studied the effectiveness of the insertion bundle and how it impacts the bloodstream infections for patients in the Intensive Care Unit. As a result, lesser infection have occurred when the compliance is high. As mentioned, the site of the catheter also needs to be considered in the insertion process. Avoiding areas such as the groin to access the femoral artery is recommended because this area can be easily contaminated with urine or feces. In addition, after the insertion of a new central line, all the used IV tubing

1) Summary of Article: Indwelling catheter use is common, but so are infections associated with them. About 80 percent of all urinary tract infections in hospitals are caused by catheters, and about 20 percent of all hospital infections total are UTIs. Evidence-based practice should be used for insertion, maintenance, and removal. Catheters should not be left in longer than they need to be. Unfortunately, this research shows poor administrative efforts are to blame for

Joint Commission released national patient safety goals for hospitals in January of 2016. These patient safety goals were “established to help accredited organizations address specific areas of concern in regards to patient safety” (Facts about the National Patient Safety Goals, 2015). National patient safety goal 07.06.01 focuses on the prevention of catheter associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) in hospitalized patients. Evidence based practice should be implemented to stop these common infections occurring in patients nationwide. Indwelling urinary catheters are only recommended in certain patients, for example to prevent further breakdown of sacral wounds or pressure ulcers in incontinent patients, for comfort in end of life care

National Patient Safety Goals (NPSGs), established in 2002 by the Joint Commission, is to help accredited organizations address specific areas of concern in regard to patient safety ("Catheter-Associated," 2015). NPSG.07.06.01 Implement evidence-based practices to prevent indwelling catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) is a 2015 NPSG ("The Joint Commission," 2015). Our facility has 1.32 CAUTIs per 1000 device days (Carson, 2015). Decreasing CAUTIs can be achieved with a strict goal, addressing the financial implications, interdisciplinary collaboration, nursing leadership, a measurement tool, and discussing the future healthcare delivery methods.

Urinary tract infections are one of the most hospital-acquired infections in the country. With so much technology and evidence based practice, why is this still an ongoing problem worldwide? Could it simply be the basics of hygiene or just patient negligence? The purpose of this paper is to identify multiple studies that have been done to reduce or prevent hospital associated urinary tract infections. In these articles you will find the use of different interventions that will aid in lowering the risk of these hospital acquired infections.

The PICO question is as follows: In hospitalized patients who are susceptible to catheter associated Urinary Tract infection (CAUTI), if nurses and other assistive personnel develop an action plan with a systematic team approach of evidence-based infection control practices, compared to current practices, could it reduce or eliminate incidences of CAUTI?

Getting an infection from improper care during or after insertion of a central line is the last thing you want to get while in the hospital. This paper will discuss Kaiser Permanente’s policy on central venous catheter, also known as a central line, care and dressing change, and whether it follows the current evidence-based practice on preventing bloodstream infection in patients who have them inserted. I will explain about what a central line is, why evidence-based practice is important in the clinical setting, what Kaiser Permanente’s policy about central line care and dressing change is, if Kaiser is currently following evidence-based practice based on current articles about preventing central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs), and what my role in using evidence-based practice is as a future registered nurse.

The three questions addressed were: Who should receive urinary catheters, what are the best practices for those who require urinary catheters and for preventing CAUTI’s acquired from urinary obstruction. This updated guideline offers recommendations for the appropriate use of indwelling catheters utilizing appropriate indications for usage, proper techniques for insertion of indwelling catheters, proper techniques for indwelling catheter maintenance, quality improvement programs, administrative infrastructure and surveillance including identifying those at risk for CAUTI (Gould et al, 2009). The strengths of this guideline are that many questions and scenarios are examined in this document and answered in explicit detail. Any healthcare professional can refer to the document to answer most practice based questions that are posed to them regarding indwelling urinary catheters. One weakness identified is the lack of an alternative explored for the external catheterization for female patients, for example the Purewick solution. However, the Purewick was not released until January 2016 and this guideline was last updated in 2009. Integrative Review

Article by Clancy (2009) explained central lines were a result of an estimated 250,000 blood stream infections and accounted for 30,000 to 62,000 patient deaths, then adding that each infection cost upwards of $36,000 and cumulatively add up to at least $9 billion in preventable costs annually. The article also explains how the mindset has changed from the cost of having a central line in place and expecting complications to lowering infection rates by an intentional interventional process/s. The article speaks of 5 basic steps to reduce CLABSI, hand washing, insertion techniques, skin cleansing, avoidance of certain sites and earlier removal of the CVC. Studies showed that these guidelines were only followed 62% of the time. The system was changed to ascertain that all the clinicians were in compliance. This prompted 5 interventions, education, a CVC insertion cart with all necessary equipment, physicians having to validate central line necessity, a concise checklist for bedside clinicians and the empower of nurses to stop procedures if guidelines were not followed. These low cost interventions from 11.3/1000 in catheter days in 1998 to zero in the fourth quarter of 2002.

The IC department performs about 20 reviews a quarter utilizing the Bloodstream surveillance checklist tool to monitor for PICC/Central Line compliance. Hand sanitizer rewards are now being given to staff that has 100% in the process measure to increase CLABSI compliance. Our facility is engaged in the Hospital Improvement and Innovative Network (HIIN) formerly the Maryland-Virginia HAI Improvement Network is the hospital-wide collaborative to reduce CLABSIs. This 5-year initiative is an affiliation of the Medicare Quality Innovation Network Quality Improvement Organization for Maryland and Virginia, through Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The initiative offers support efforts to improve health care quality and achieve

This article does not provide the search strategy including a number of databases and other resources which identify key published and unpublished research. In this article, both the primary sources and the theoretical literatures are collected and appraised in order to generate the research question and to conduct knowledge-based research. In the section of the literature review, nineteen professional articles are appraised in order to provide the significance and background of the study. Saint develops the research question based on these analyses. “Catheter-associated urinary tract infections in surgical patients: A controlled study on the excess morbidity and costs” is one of the primary sources written by Givens and Wenzel who conduct and analyze this study. In addition, “Clinical and economic consequences of nosocomial catheter-related bacteriuria” is a review of a literature article which is the secondary source. Although many studies state that patient safety is a top priority and CAUTI can be controlled by the caution of health care providers, the infection rate is relatively high among other nosocomial infections. One of the reasons Saint and colleagues uncovered is unawareness and negligence by health care

A PICC line (peripherally inserted central catheter) is a thin tube that is inserted in a vein in a patient’s arm and is advanced toward the heart until it reaches the superior vena cava. A chest x-ray confirms the placement of the PICC line. It is used for IV administration of medications and antibiotics. Chemotherapy and TPN (total parenteral nutrition) can also be administered and blood samples can be drawn. The PICC line can last up to a year. Trained professionals such as PICC-certified nurses are able to do both insertion and removal. Do not put a blood pressure cuff on the same arm as the PICC line because it could fracture the IV line.

The Quality Improvement nursing process that I have chosen to research is patient safety. I have chosen to focus specifically on the topic of catheter associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI’s) during hospitalization and their preventions. It is estimated that 15-25% of hospitalized patients receive a urinary catheter throughout their stay, whether or not they need it. A large 80% of all patients diagnosed with a urinary tract infection (UTI) can be attributed to a catheter (Bernard, Hunter, and Moore, 2012). The bacteria may gain entry into the bladder during insertion of the catheter, during manipulation of the catheter or drainage system, around the catheter, and after removal.

I enjoyed reading your post. I concur with you that searching through the database for the article to answer a research question can be overwhelming with arrays of literature review accessible. Indeed, it is imperative for health care professionals to be knowledgeable and competency in understanding appraised evidence-based resources related to reliability and validity of article (Polit & Beck, 2017). Your PICOT question is very interesting and I look forward to reading your result. I searched through the Cochrane database searching for your PICOT topic using keywords, catheter, and urinary tract infection; arrays of the systemic reviews came up. Cooper et al., (2016) was one of the articles that came up, it indicated that approximately 107

The use of intravenous therapy in the hospitals is now considered a routine therapy. In 2016, DeVries and Valentine stated that 70% to 80% of hospital patients have peripheral intravenous lines at some time during their stay. A peripheral intravenous (PIV) line is a small hollow tube (catheter) that is inserted into a vein and can be connected to special tubing. PIV line is commonly used to administer medications or fluids directly into the vein. The article “Intravenous Therapy: A Review of Complications and Economic Considerations of Peripheral Access,” states that the history of intravenous (IV) therapy dates back to the Middle Ages. Dr. Thomas Latta pioneered the use of IV saline infusion during the cholera epidemic and in the 20th century, two world wars established a role for IV therapy as routine medical practice (Dychter, Gold, Carson, & Haller, 2012).