ArticleJournal of Korean Academy of Nursing2020
[The Incidences of Catheter Colonization and Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection According to Tegaderm vs. Chlorhexidine Gluconate (CHG)-Tegaderm Dressing].
Article in Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Practice guideline on the prevention and treatment of central line-associated bloodstream infection: Part 2 - Treatment.Journal of intensive medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn spite of the recent application of a general infection control method, central line-associated infections is still relatively high in Korea. Central line bundle with Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) tegaderm dressing was reported to be effective in reducing catheter colonization and central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI). Therefore, this study aimed to examine the incidences of catheter colonization occurrence and CLABSI while using Tegaderm vs. CHG Tegaderm dressings.
methodsWe used a descriptive design. 400 patients who had central venous catheters were selected from four hospitals in the Korean National Healthcare-associated Infections Surveillance System. Of all subjects, 200 used Tegaderm™ (Tegaderm group), and the remaining 200 used CHG Tegaderm (CHG Tegaderm group) dressing at the catheter insertion site. Data were analyzed using the χ² test or Fisher's exact test, t-test, and logistic regression analysis using SPSS WIN 21.0.
resultsIn the Tegaderm and CHG Tegaderm groups, CLABSI incidences were 5.89 and 1.79 per 1,000 catheter-days, catheter colonization incidences were 3.93 and 1.43 per 1,000 catheter-days, and central line bundle compliance rates were 26.0% and 49.0%, respectively. Catheter colonization risk factors were 'reinsertion after failure' and 'Tegaderm dressing' at the central line insertion site. CLABSI risk factors were 'incomplete performance of 7 central line bundle items' and 'Tegaderm dressing' at the central line insertion site.
conclusionA further prospective study is needed to examine the effects of central line bundle with CHG Tegaderm dressing, avoiding central line reinsertion after failure, and improving the bundle compliance in reducing catheter colonization and CLABSI.
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.