ArticleAnnals of intensive care2021
Practices and intravascular catheter infection during on- and off-hours in critically ill patients.
Article in Annals of intensive care, 2021. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe potential relationship between intravascular catheter infections with their insertion during weekend or night-time (i.e., off-hours or not regular business hours) remains an open issue. Our primary aim was to describe differences between patients and catheters inserted during on- versus off-hours. Our secondary aim was to investigate whether insertions during off-hours influenced the intravascular catheter infectious risks.
methodsWe performed a post hoc analysis using the databases from four large randomized-controlled trials. Adult patients were recruited in French ICUs as soon as they required central venous catheters or peripheral arterial (AC) catheter insertion. Off-hours started at 6 P.M. until 8:30 A.M. during the week; at weekend, we defined off-hours from 1 P.M. on Saturday to 8.30 A.M. on Monday. We performed multivariable marginal Cox models to estimate the effect of off-hours (versus on-hours) on major catheter-related infections (MCRI) and catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs).
resultsWe included 7241 patients in 25 different ICUs, and 15,208 catheters, including 7226 and 7982 catheters inserted during off- and on-hours, respectively. Catheters inserted during off-hours were removed after 4 days (IQR 2, 9) in median, whereas catheters inserted during on-hours remained in place for 6 days (IQR 3,10; p < 0.01) in median. Femoral insertion was more frequent during off-hours. Among central venous catheters and after adjusting for well-known risk factors for intravascular catheter infection, we found a similar risk between off- and on-hours for MCRI (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.61-1.37, p = 0.65) and CRBSI (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.65-1.68, p = 0.85). Among central venous catheters with a dwell-time > 4 or > 6 days, we found a similar risk for MCRI and CRBSI between off- and on-hours. Similar results were observed for ACs.
conclusionsOff-hours did not increase the risk of intravascular catheter infections compared to on-hours. Off-hours insertion is not a sufficient reason for early catheter removal, even if femoral route has been selected.
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.