Impact of measurement and feedback on chlorhexidine gluconate bathing among intensive care unit patients: A multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether measurement and feedback of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) skin concentrations can improve CHG bathing practice across multiple intensive care units (ICUs). DESIGN: A before-and-after quality improvement study measuring patient CHG skin concentrations during 6 point-prevalence surveys (3 surveys each during baseline and intervention periods). SETTING: The study was conducted across 7 geographically diverse ICUs with routine CHG bathing. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients in the medical ICU. METHODS: CHG skin concentrations were measured at the neck, axilla, and inguinal region using a semiquantitative colorimetric assay. Aggregate unit-level CHG skin concentration measurements from the baseline period and each intervention period survey were reported back to ICU leadership, which then used routine education and quality improvement activities to improve CHG bathing practice. We used multilevel linear models to assess the impact of intervention on CHG skin concentrations. RESULTS: We enrolled 681 (93%) of 736 eligible patients; 92% received a CHG bath prior to survey. At baseline, CHG skin concentrations were lowest on the neck, compared to axillary or inguinal regions (P < .001). CHG was not detected on 33% of necks, 19% of axillae, and 18% of inguinal regions (P < .001 for differences in body sites). During the intervention period, ICUs that used CHG-impregnated cloths had a 3-fold increase in patient CHG skin concentrations as compared to baseline (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Routine CHG bathing performance in the ICU varied across multiple hospitals. Measurement and feedback of CHG skin concentrations can be an important tool to improve CHG bathing practice.

Durapore vs. Hy-Tape for securing endotracheal tubes during general anaesthesia: a prospective randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

INTRODUCTION: Adhesive tape is commonly used to secure endotracheal tubes (ETT) during general anaesthesia. Although a variety of adhesives are used in practice, few studies have investigated the likelihood of different adhesives in producing facial skin injury. Given that differences in cost exist between adhesives that are often used interchangeably, it would be prudent to use the most economical option. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial of patients undergoing general anaesthesia with an ETT was conducted. Patients were randomised in a blinded fashion to use Durapore (DP) on either the right or left side of the face to secure the ETT, with Hy-Tape (HT) on the contralateral side. Skin photographs were taken prior to tape application and following tape removal. These were evaluated by three dermatologists to determine presence or absence of facial skin erythema, scaling, oedema, and tearing. Differences were compared using McNemar's test. For outcomes analysis, a non-inferiority margin of 20% difference was used with respect to the 95% CI. RESULTS: Among 112 patients, 33.0% were male, with a mean (SD) age of 55.6 (15.9) years. Comparing DP vs. HT, noninferiority was demonstrated in the patients with skin erythema (1.8% difference, 95% CI: -5.6 to 9.2, P = 0.79), oedema (3.6% difference, 95% CI: -2.8 to 10.0%, P = 0.34), scaling (5.4% difference, 95% CI: -4.1 to 14.8, P = 0.31), and tearing (0.9% difference, 95% CI: -5.2 to 7.3, P > 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: There is a non-inferior difference in the proportion of patients with facial skin erythema after use of DP vs. HT to secure the ETT.

Impact of a Central-Line Insertion Site Assessment (CLISA) score on localized insertion site infection to prevent central-line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a newly developed Central-Line Insertion Site Assessment (CLISA) score on the incidence of local inflammation or infection for CLABSI prevention. DESIGN: A pre- and postintervention, quasi-experimental quality improvement study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Adult inpatients with central venous catheters (CVCs) hospitalized in an intensive care unit or oncology ward at a large academic medical center. METHODS: We evaluated CLISA score impact on insertion site inflammation and infection (CLISA score of 2 or 3) incidence in the baseline period (June 2014-January 2015) and the intervention period (April 2015-October 2017) using interrupted times series and generalized linear mixed-effects multivariable analyses. These were run separately for days-to-line removal from identification of a CLISA score of 2 or 3. CLISA score interrater reliability and photo quiz results were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 6,957 CVCs assessed 40,846 times, percentage of lines with CLISA score of 2 or 3 in the baseline and intervention periods decreased by 78.2% (from 22.0% to 4.7%), with a significant immediate decrease in the time-series analysis (P < .001). According to the multivariable regression, the intervention was associated with lower percentage of lines with a CLISA score of 2 or 3, after adjusting for age, gender, CVC body location, and hospital unit (odds ratio, 0.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.34; P < .001). According to the multivariate regression, days to removal of lines with CLISA score of 2 or 3 was 3.19 days faster after the intervention (P < .001). Also, line dwell time decreased 37.1% from a mean of 14 days (standard deviation [SD], 10.6) to 8.8 days (SD, 9.0) (P < .001). Device utilization ratios decreased 9% from 0.64 (SD, 0.08) to 0.58 (SD, 0.06) (P = .039). CONCLUSIONS: The CLISA score creates a common language for assessing line infection risk and successfully promotes high compliance with best practices in timely line removal.