Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMJ Qual Saf ; 31(9): 652-661, 2022 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35086961

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Little is known about peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) use, appropriateness and device outcomes in Brazil. METHODS: We conducted an observational, prospective, cohort study spanning 16 Brazilian hospitals from October 2018 to August 2020. Patients ≥18 years receiving a PICC were included. PICC placement variables were abstracted from medical records. PICC-related major (deep vein thrombosis (DVT), central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and catheter occlusion) and minor complications were collected. Appropriateness was evaluated using the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC). Devices were considered inappropriate if they were in place for <5 days, were multi-lumen, and/or were placed in patients with a creatinine >2.0 mg/dL. PICCs considered appropriate met none of these criteria. Mixed-effects logistic regression models adjusting for patient-level and hospital-level characteristics assessed the association between appropriateness and major complications. RESULTS: Data from 12 725 PICCs were included. Mean patient age was 66.4±19 years and 51.0% were female. The most common indications for PICCs were intravenous antibiotics (81.1%) and difficult access (62.7%). Most PICCs (72.2%) were placed under ultrasound guidance. The prevalence of complications was low: CLABSI (0.9%); catheter-related DVT (1.0%) and reversible occlusion (2.5%). Of the 12 725 devices included, a total of 7935 (62.3%) PICCs were inappropriate according to MAGIC. With respect to individual metrics for appropriateness, 17.0% were placed for <5 days, 60.8% were multi-lumen and 11.3% were in patients with creatinine >2.0 mg/dL. After adjusting for patient and hospital-level characteristics, multi-lumen PICCs considered inappropriate were associated with greater odds of major complications (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.61 to 4.02). CONCLUSIONS: Use of PICCs in Brazilian hospitals appears to be safe and comparable with North America. However, opportunities to improve appropriateness remain. Future studies examining barriers and facilitators to improving device use in Brazil would be welcomed.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres , Cateterismo Venoso Central , Cateterismo Periférico , Catéteres Venosos Centrales , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Brasil/epidemiología , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/epidemiología , Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Catéteres , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Estudios de Cohortes , Creatinina , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA