Trial reportIntensive care medicine2016
Comparison of alcoholic chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine cutaneous antiseptics for the prevention of central venous catheter-related infection: a cohort and quasi-experimental multicenter study.
Trial report in Intensive care medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01479153 (Comparison of Subclavian, Femoral and Internal Jugular Venous Catheterization in Term of Complications in the Intensive Care Unit), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Comparison of Subclavian, Femoral and Internal Jugular Venous Catheterization in Term of Complications in the Intensive Care Unit: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chlorhexidine vs Povidone-Iodine and Incidence of Catheter-Related Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Article
- Development and validation of a multivariable model predicting the required catheter dwell time among mechanically ventilated critically ill patients in three randomized trials.Annals of intensive care · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a multivariable prediction model of central venous catheter-tip colonization in a cohort of five randomized trials.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Article
- Central venous catheter-related infection - back to basics.African journal of thoracic and critical care medicine · 2022Article
- Expert consensus-based clinical practice guidelines management of intravascular catheters in the intensive care unit.Annals of intensive care · 2020Review
- The Effects of Chlorhexidine Dressing on Health Care-Associated Infection in Hospitalized Patients: A Meta-Analysis.Iranian journal of public health · 2019Review
- A state of the art review on optimal practices to prevent, recognize, and manage complications associated with intravascular devices in the critically ill.Intensive care medicine · 2018Review
- Peripherally inserted central catheters are associated with lower risk of bloodstream infection compared with central venous catheters in paediatric intensive care patients: a propensity-adjusted analysis.Intensive care medicine · 2017Observational
- What's new in skin antisepsis for short-term intravascular catheters: new data to address old problems?Intensive care medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCompare the effectiveness of different cutaneous antiseptics in reducing risk of catheter-related infection in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.
methodsWe compared the risk of central venous catheter-related infection according to four-step (scrub, rinse, dry, and disinfect) alcoholic 5 % povidone-iodine (PVI-a, n = 1521), one-step (disinfect) alcoholic 2 % chlorhexidine (2 % CHX-a, n = 1116), four-step alcoholic <1 % chlorhexidine (<1 % CHX-a, n = 357), and four-step aqueous 10 % povidone-iodine (PVI, n = 368) antiseptics used for cutaneous disinfection and catheter care during the 3SITES multicenter randomized controlled trial. Within this cohort, we performed a quasi-experimental study (i.e., before-after) involving the four ICUs which switched from PVI-a to 2 % CHX-a. We used propensity score matching (PSM, n = 776) and inverse probability weighting treatment (IPWT, n = 1592). The end point was the incidence of catheter-related infection (CRI) defined as catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) or a positive catheter tip culture plus clinical sepsis on catheter removal.
resultsIn the cohort analysis and compared with PVI-a, the incidence of CRI was lower with 2 % CHX-a [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 0.51; 95 % confidence interval (CI) (0.28-0.96), p = 0.037] and similar with <1 % CHX-a [aHR, 0.73; (0.36-1.48), p = 0.37] and PVI [aHR, 1.50; 95 % CI (0.85-2.64), p = 0.16] after controlling for potential confounders. In the quasi-experimental study and compared with PVI-a, the incidence of catheter-related infection was again lower with 2 % CHX-a after PSM [HR, 0.35; 95 % CI (0.15, 0.84), p = 0.02] and in the IPWT analysis [HR, 0.31; 95 % CI (0.14, 0.70), p = 0.005]. The incidence of CRBSI or adverse event was not significantly different between antiseptics in all analyses.
conclusionsIn comparison with PVI-a, the use of 2 % CHX-a for cutaneous disinfection of the central venous catheter insertion site and maintenance catheter care was associated with a reduced risk of catheter infection, while the benefit of <1 % CHX-a was uncertain. CLINICAL TRIALS IDENTIFIER: NCT01479153.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.