ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2017
Microbiological testing of devices used in maintaining peripheral venous catheters.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of disinfection procedures to reduceInfection prevention in practice · 2024Article
- Short Peripheral Venous Catheters Contamination and the Dangers of Bloodstream Infection in Portugal: An Analytic Study.Microorganisms · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: to evaluate the use of peripheral venous catheters based on microbiological analysis of devices (dressing and three-way stopcocks) and thus contribute to the prevention and infection control. Methods: this was a prospective study of microbiological analysis of 30 three-way stopcocks (external surfaces and lumens) and 30 dressing used in maintaining the peripheral venous catheters of hospitalized adult patients. Results: all external surfaces, 40% of lumens, and 86.7% of dressing presented bacterial growth. The main species isolated in the lumen were 50% coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, 14.3% Staphylococcus aureus, and 14.3% Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Fifty nine percent of multidrug-resistant bacteria were isolated of the three-way stopcocks, 42% of the lumens, and 44% of the dressing with a predominance of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus resistant to methicillin. Besides, 18% gram-negative bacteria with resistance to carbapenems were identified from multidrug-resistant bacteria on the external surfaces of the three-way stopcocks. Conclusion: it is important to emphasize the isolation of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus and gram-negative bacteria resistant to methicillin and carbapenems in samples of devices, respectively, which reinforces the importance of nursing care in the maintenance of the biologically safe environment as well as prevention and infection control practices.
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.