Loading…

Peripheral intravenous catheter needleless connector decontamination study—Randomized controlled trial

Needleless connectors (NCs) were introduced to reduce health care work needlestick injuries (NSIs). If not decontaminated prior to use, NCs can be a portal for patient blood stream infections. The optimal disinfectant, and its application duration, for NC decontamination has not been empirically est...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:American journal of infection control 2020-09, Vol.48 (9), p.1013-1018
Main Authors: Slater, Karen, Cooke, Marie, Fullerton, Fiona, Whitby, Michael, Hay, Jennine, Lingard, Scott, Douglas, Joel, Rickard, Claire M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-12413ee92e9f436a97e81ad002435a4159338e629691de177fb17207506bc6993
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-12413ee92e9f436a97e81ad002435a4159338e629691de177fb17207506bc6993
container_end_page 1018
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1013
container_title American journal of infection control
container_volume 48
creator Slater, Karen
Cooke, Marie
Fullerton, Fiona
Whitby, Michael
Hay, Jennine
Lingard, Scott
Douglas, Joel
Rickard, Claire M.
description Needleless connectors (NCs) were introduced to reduce health care work needlestick injuries (NSIs). If not decontaminated prior to use, NCs can be a portal for patient blood stream infections. The optimal disinfectant, and its application duration, for NC decontamination has not been empirically established. Factorial design randomized controlled trial comparing 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) and 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) in 70% IPA for 5, 10, or 15 seconds, in adult medical patients with peripheral intravenous catheters. At baseline, 153 of 300 NCs (51%) grew microorganisms commonly found on the skin. Decontamination was successful in 150/153 (98%). There was no significant difference in decontamination between 70% IPA or 2% CHG in 70% IPA (P = .62), or decontamination for 5, 10, or 15 seconds (P = .21). There was no difference in the effectiveness of 70% IPA and 2% CHG in 70% IPA for NC decontamination for peripheral intravenous catheters in the clinical environment. Successful decontamination was not different for applications of 5, 10, and 15 seconds; 15 seconds did not always remove all microorganisms. Factors such as cost, feasibility of compliance, and low risk of allergy support 5 seconds decontamination with 70% IPA as an acceptable approach. •PIVC NC cleaning successful 98%•No difference 70% IPA and 2% CHG and 70% IPA•No difference 5, 10, 15 seconds decontamination
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ajic.2019.11.030
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2338068291</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S019665531931017X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2338068291</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-12413ee92e9f436a97e81ad002435a4159338e629691de177fb17207506bc6993</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFqGzEQhkVJaNy0L9BD2WMuu9VIXu0KeikhSQOBhJKchSyNsYxWciQ54J76EHnCPEllnOTY0wwz___D_xHyFWgHFMT3dafXznSMguwAOsrpBzKDng0tZ1IckVl9iFb0PT8hn3JeU0olF_1HcsJBsnGUdEZWd5jcZoVJ-8aFkvQThrjNjdFlhQVTExCtR4-53mIIaEpMjcW6Fz25oIuLoclla3cvf59_62Dj5P6g3YtLit7XtSSn_WdyvNQ-45fXeUoeLi_uz3-1N7dX1-c_b1rDe1FaYHPgiJKhXM650HLAEbSllM15r-fQS85HFLWfBIswDMsFDIwOPRULI6Tkp-TskLtJ8XGLuajJZYPe64C1mGLVT8XIJFQpO0hNijknXKpNcpNOOwVU7QmrtdoTVnvCCkBVwtX07TV_u5jQvlvekFbBj4MAa8snh0ll4zAYtC5VespG97_8fy_ljwc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2338068291</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Peripheral intravenous catheter needleless connector decontamination study—Randomized controlled trial</title><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Slater, Karen ; Cooke, Marie ; Fullerton, Fiona ; Whitby, Michael ; Hay, Jennine ; Lingard, Scott ; Douglas, Joel ; Rickard, Claire M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Slater, Karen ; Cooke, Marie ; Fullerton, Fiona ; Whitby, Michael ; Hay, Jennine ; Lingard, Scott ; Douglas, Joel ; Rickard, Claire M.</creatorcontrib><description>Needleless connectors (NCs) were introduced to reduce health care work needlestick injuries (NSIs). If not decontaminated prior to use, NCs can be a portal for patient blood stream infections. The optimal disinfectant, and its application duration, for NC decontamination has not been empirically established. Factorial design randomized controlled trial comparing 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) and 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) in 70% IPA for 5, 10, or 15 seconds, in adult medical patients with peripheral intravenous catheters. At baseline, 153 of 300 NCs (51%) grew microorganisms commonly found on the skin. Decontamination was successful in 150/153 (98%). There was no significant difference in decontamination between 70% IPA or 2% CHG in 70% IPA (P = .62), or decontamination for 5, 10, or 15 seconds (P = .21). There was no difference in the effectiveness of 70% IPA and 2% CHG in 70% IPA for NC decontamination for peripheral intravenous catheters in the clinical environment. Successful decontamination was not different for applications of 5, 10, and 15 seconds; 15 seconds did not always remove all microorganisms. Factors such as cost, feasibility of compliance, and low risk of allergy support 5 seconds decontamination with 70% IPA as an acceptable approach. •PIVC NC cleaning successful 98%•No difference 70% IPA and 2% CHG and 70% IPA•No difference 5, 10, 15 seconds decontamination</description><identifier>ISSN: 0196-6553</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-3296</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2019.11.030</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31928890</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>2-Propanol ; Adult ; Blood stream infection ; Catheters ; Chlorhexidine ; Decontamination ; Disinfectants ; Humans ; Infection Control ; Microbiology ; Skin</subject><ispartof>American journal of infection control, 2020-09, Vol.48 (9), p.1013-1018</ispartof><rights>2019</rights><rights>Crown Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-12413ee92e9f436a97e81ad002435a4159338e629691de177fb17207506bc6993</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-12413ee92e9f436a97e81ad002435a4159338e629691de177fb17207506bc6993</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6341-7415 ; 0000-0002-9928-4685</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31928890$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Slater, Karen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooke, Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fullerton, Fiona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitby, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hay, Jennine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lingard, Scott</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Douglas, Joel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rickard, Claire M.</creatorcontrib><title>Peripheral intravenous catheter needleless connector decontamination study—Randomized controlled trial</title><title>American journal of infection control</title><addtitle>Am J Infect Control</addtitle><description>Needleless connectors (NCs) were introduced to reduce health care work needlestick injuries (NSIs). If not decontaminated prior to use, NCs can be a portal for patient blood stream infections. The optimal disinfectant, and its application duration, for NC decontamination has not been empirically established. Factorial design randomized controlled trial comparing 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) and 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) in 70% IPA for 5, 10, or 15 seconds, in adult medical patients with peripheral intravenous catheters. At baseline, 153 of 300 NCs (51%) grew microorganisms commonly found on the skin. Decontamination was successful in 150/153 (98%). There was no significant difference in decontamination between 70% IPA or 2% CHG in 70% IPA (P = .62), or decontamination for 5, 10, or 15 seconds (P = .21). There was no difference in the effectiveness of 70% IPA and 2% CHG in 70% IPA for NC decontamination for peripheral intravenous catheters in the clinical environment. Successful decontamination was not different for applications of 5, 10, and 15 seconds; 15 seconds did not always remove all microorganisms. Factors such as cost, feasibility of compliance, and low risk of allergy support 5 seconds decontamination with 70% IPA as an acceptable approach. •PIVC NC cleaning successful 98%•No difference 70% IPA and 2% CHG and 70% IPA•No difference 5, 10, 15 seconds decontamination</description><subject>2-Propanol</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Blood stream infection</subject><subject>Catheters</subject><subject>Chlorhexidine</subject><subject>Decontamination</subject><subject>Disinfectants</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infection Control</subject><subject>Microbiology</subject><subject>Skin</subject><issn>0196-6553</issn><issn>1527-3296</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMFqGzEQhkVJaNy0L9BD2WMuu9VIXu0KeikhSQOBhJKchSyNsYxWciQ54J76EHnCPEllnOTY0wwz___D_xHyFWgHFMT3dafXznSMguwAOsrpBzKDng0tZ1IckVl9iFb0PT8hn3JeU0olF_1HcsJBsnGUdEZWd5jcZoVJ-8aFkvQThrjNjdFlhQVTExCtR4-53mIIaEpMjcW6Fz25oIuLoclla3cvf59_62Dj5P6g3YtLit7XtSSn_WdyvNQ-45fXeUoeLi_uz3-1N7dX1-c_b1rDe1FaYHPgiJKhXM650HLAEbSllM15r-fQS85HFLWfBIswDMsFDIwOPRULI6Tkp-TskLtJ8XGLuajJZYPe64C1mGLVT8XIJFQpO0hNijknXKpNcpNOOwVU7QmrtdoTVnvCCkBVwtX07TV_u5jQvlvekFbBj4MAa8snh0ll4zAYtC5VespG97_8fy_ljwc</recordid><startdate>202009</startdate><enddate>202009</enddate><creator>Slater, Karen</creator><creator>Cooke, Marie</creator><creator>Fullerton, Fiona</creator><creator>Whitby, Michael</creator><creator>Hay, Jennine</creator><creator>Lingard, Scott</creator><creator>Douglas, Joel</creator><creator>Rickard, Claire M.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6341-7415</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9928-4685</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202009</creationdate><title>Peripheral intravenous catheter needleless connector decontamination study—Randomized controlled trial</title><author>Slater, Karen ; Cooke, Marie ; Fullerton, Fiona ; Whitby, Michael ; Hay, Jennine ; Lingard, Scott ; Douglas, Joel ; Rickard, Claire M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-12413ee92e9f436a97e81ad002435a4159338e629691de177fb17207506bc6993</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>2-Propanol</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Blood stream infection</topic><topic>Catheters</topic><topic>Chlorhexidine</topic><topic>Decontamination</topic><topic>Disinfectants</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infection Control</topic><topic>Microbiology</topic><topic>Skin</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Slater, Karen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooke, Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fullerton, Fiona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitby, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hay, Jennine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lingard, Scott</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Douglas, Joel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rickard, Claire M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>American journal of infection control</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Slater, Karen</au><au>Cooke, Marie</au><au>Fullerton, Fiona</au><au>Whitby, Michael</au><au>Hay, Jennine</au><au>Lingard, Scott</au><au>Douglas, Joel</au><au>Rickard, Claire M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Peripheral intravenous catheter needleless connector decontamination study—Randomized controlled trial</atitle><jtitle>American journal of infection control</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Infect Control</addtitle><date>2020-09</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1013</spage><epage>1018</epage><pages>1013-1018</pages><issn>0196-6553</issn><eissn>1527-3296</eissn><abstract>Needleless connectors (NCs) were introduced to reduce health care work needlestick injuries (NSIs). If not decontaminated prior to use, NCs can be a portal for patient blood stream infections. The optimal disinfectant, and its application duration, for NC decontamination has not been empirically established. Factorial design randomized controlled trial comparing 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) and 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) in 70% IPA for 5, 10, or 15 seconds, in adult medical patients with peripheral intravenous catheters. At baseline, 153 of 300 NCs (51%) grew microorganisms commonly found on the skin. Decontamination was successful in 150/153 (98%). There was no significant difference in decontamination between 70% IPA or 2% CHG in 70% IPA (P = .62), or decontamination for 5, 10, or 15 seconds (P = .21). There was no difference in the effectiveness of 70% IPA and 2% CHG in 70% IPA for NC decontamination for peripheral intravenous catheters in the clinical environment. Successful decontamination was not different for applications of 5, 10, and 15 seconds; 15 seconds did not always remove all microorganisms. Factors such as cost, feasibility of compliance, and low risk of allergy support 5 seconds decontamination with 70% IPA as an acceptable approach. •PIVC NC cleaning successful 98%•No difference 70% IPA and 2% CHG and 70% IPA•No difference 5, 10, 15 seconds decontamination</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>31928890</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ajic.2019.11.030</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6341-7415</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9928-4685</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0196-6553
ispartof American journal of infection control, 2020-09, Vol.48 (9), p.1013-1018
issn 0196-6553
1527-3296
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2338068291
source Elsevier
subjects 2-Propanol
Adult
Blood stream infection
Catheters
Chlorhexidine
Decontamination
Disinfectants
Humans
Infection Control
Microbiology
Skin
title Peripheral intravenous catheter needleless connector decontamination study—Randomized controlled trial
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T22%3A53%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Peripheral%20intravenous%20catheter%20needleless%20connector%20decontamination%20study%E2%80%94Randomized%20controlled%20trial&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20infection%20control&rft.au=Slater,%20Karen&rft.date=2020-09&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1013&rft.epage=1018&rft.pages=1013-1018&rft.issn=0196-6553&rft.eissn=1527-3296&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ajic.2019.11.030&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2338068291%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-12413ee92e9f436a97e81ad002435a4159338e629691de177fb17207506bc6993%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2338068291&rft_id=info:pmid/31928890&rfr_iscdi=true