Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34533191›Full record

Observational studyJAMA internal medicine2021

Comparison of Routine Replacement With Clinically Indicated Replacement of Peripheral Intravenous Catheters.

Niccolò Buetti, Mohamed Abbas, Didier Pittet, Marlieke E A de Kraker, Daniel Teixeira, Marie-Noëlle Chraiti, Valérie Sauvan, Julien Sauser, Stephan Harbarth, Walter Zingg

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JAMA internal medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Preventing healthcare-associated MRSA bacteremia: getting to the root of the problem.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Niccolò BuettiInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Mohamed AbbasInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Didier PittetInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Marlieke E A de KrakerInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Daniel TeixeiraInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Marie-Noëlle ChraitiInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Valérie SauvanInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Julien SauserInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Stephan HarbarthInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Walter ZinggInfection Control Program and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PVCs) are the most frequently used indwelling devices in hospitals worldwide. Peripheral intravenous catheter bloodstream infections (PVC-BSIs) are rare, but severe and preventable, adverse events. Objective: To investigate the incidence of PVC-BSIs after changing the policy of routine PVC replacement every 96 hours to clinically indicated replacement. Design, Setting, and Participants: This institution-wide, observational cohort study evaluated all patients hospitalized at a large university-affiliated hospital with 10 sites in Western Switzerland with a PVC insertion between January 1, 2016, and February 29, 2020. Exposures: Peripheral intravenous catheters were routinely replaced every 96 hours until March 31, 2018 (baseline period). Between April 1, 2018, and October 15, 2019, PVCs were replaced if clinically indicated (intervention period). From October 16, 2019, PVCs were again routinely replaced every 96 hours (reversion period). Main Outcomes and Measures: The PVC-BSI rates and PVC-BSI incidence rate ratios (IRRs) during each period. Results: A total of 412 631 PVCs with documented catheter duration were included (164 331 patients; median [interquartile range] patient age, 51 [33-72] years; 88 928 [54.1%] female): 241 432 PVCs at baseline, 130 779 at intervention, and 40 420 at reversion. Eleven PVC-BSIs were observed during the baseline period, 46 during the intervention, and 4 during the reversion period. Although the monthly number of PVC-days remained stable during all study periods, the number of monthly inserted PVCs decreased during the intervention period. The number of PVCs still in place more than 4 or more than 7 days was higher during the intervention period compared with the baseline and reversion periods. A significantly increased IRR of PVC-BSIs was observed for the intervention period (IRR, 7.20; 95% CI, 3.65-14.22; P < .001) compared with baseline, whereas during the reversion period there was no significant increase (IRR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.30 6.17; P = .69). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study using a large, prospective surveillance database suggest that replacement of PVCs only when clinically indicated may be associated with an increased risk of PVC-BSI compared with routine replacement. Even if PVC-associated BSI is a rare event, the use of PVCs in most patients makes this outcome relevant.

Indexed as

Catheterization, PeripheralCatheter-Related InfectionsGuideline AdherenceDuration of TherapyFemaleHospitals, UniversityHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePractice Guidelines as TopicSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID34533191
PMCPMC8561330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.