ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024
Bundle care approach to reduce device associated infections in post-living-donor-liver transplantation in a tertiary care hospital, Egypt.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. 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.
- Bundled management improves clinical outcome and reduces healthcare cost in multidrug-resistant bacterial infections: a retrospective study.American journal of translational research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDevice-associated infections (DAIs) are a significant cause of morbidity following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We aimed to assess the impact of bundled care on reducing rates of device-associated infections.
methodsWe performed a before-and-after comparative study at a liver transplantation facility over a three-year period, spanning from January 2016 to December 2018. The study included a total of 57 patients who underwent LDLT. We investigated the implementation of a care bundle, which consists of multiple evidence-based procedures that are consistently performed as a unified unit. We divided our study into three phases and implemented a bundled care approach in the second phase. Rates of pneumonia related to ventilators [VAP], bloodstream infections associated with central line [CLABSI], and urinary tract infections associated with catheters [CAUTI] were assessed throughout the study period. Bacterial identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing were performed using the automated Vitek-2 system. The comparison between different phases was assessed using the chi-square test or the Fisher exact test for qualitative values and the Kruskal-Wallis H test for quantitative values with non-normal distribution.
resultsIn the baseline phase, the VAP rates were 73.5, the CAUTI rates were 47.2, and the CLABSI rates were 7.4 per one thousand device days (PDD). During the bundle care phase, the rates decreased to 33.3, 18.18, and 4.78. In the follow-up phase, the rates further decreased to 35.7%, 16.8%, and 2.7% PDD. The prevalence of Klebsiella pneumonia (37.5%) and Methicillin resistance Staph aureus (37.5%) in VAP were noted. The primary causative agent of CAUTI was Candida albicans, accounting for 33.3% of cases, whereas Coagulase-negative Staph was the predominant organism responsible for CLABSI, with a prevalence of 40%.
conclusionThis study demonstrates the effectiveness of utilizing the care bundle approach to reduce DAI in LDLT, especially in low socioeconomic countries with limited resources. By implementing a comprehensive set of evidence-based interventions, healthcare systems can effectively reduce the burden of DAI, enhance infection prevention strategies and improve patient outcomes in resource-constrained settings.
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.