A randomized trial comparing povidone-iodine to a chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressing for prevention of central venous catheter infections in neonates
Authors
Garland, Jeffery S.Alex, Colleen P.
Mueller, Chris d.
Otten, Dewey
Shivpuri, Chandra
Harris, Mary C.
Naples, Mary
Pellegrini, James
Buck, Rosanne
McAuliffe, Timothy L.
Goldmann, Donald A.
Maki, Dennis G.
UMass Chan Affiliations
Department of PediatricsDocument Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2001-06-01Keywords
Administration, Cutaneous; Administration, Topical; Bacteremia; Bacterial Infections; *Bandages; Catheterization, Central Venous; Catheters, Indwelling; Chlorhexidine; Disinfection; Equipment Contamination; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal; Povidone-Iodine; Treatment OutcomePediatrics
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Neonates who require a central venous catheter (CVC) for prolonged vascular access experience high rates of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI). PURPOSE: A multicenter randomized clinical trial was undertaken to ascertain the efficacy of a novel chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing (Biopatch Antimicrobial Dressing) on the CVC sites of neonates for the prevention of catheter tip colonization, CRBSI, and bloodstream infection (BSI) without a source. Setting. Six level III neonatal intensive care units. Patients Studied. Neonates admitted to study units who would require a CVC for at least 48 hours. METHODS: Eligible infants were randomized before catheter placement to 1 of the 2 catheter site antisepsis regimens: 1) 10% povidone-iodine (PI) skin scrub, or 2) a 70% alcohol scrub followed by placement of a chlorhexidine-impregnated disk over the catheter insertion site. A transparent polyurethane dressing (Bioclusive Transparent Dressing) was used to cover the insertion site in both study groups. Primary study outcomes evaluated were catheter tip colonization, CRBSI, and BSI without an identified source. RESULTS: Seven hundred five neonates were enrolled in the trial, 335 randomized to receive the chlorhexidine dressing and 370 to skin disinfection with PI (controls). Neonates randomized to the antimicrobial dressing group were less likely to have colonized CVC tips than control neonates (15.0% vs 24.0%, relative risk [RR]: 0.6 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.5-0.9). Rates of CRBSI (3.8% vs 3.2%, RR: 1.2, CI: 0.5-2.7) and BSI without a source (15.2% vs 14.3%, RR: 1.1, CI: 0.8-1.5) did not differ between the 2 groups. Localized contact dermatitis from the antimicrobial dressing, requiring crossover into the PI treatment group, occurred in 15 (15.3%) of 98 exposed neonates weighingSource
Pediatrics. 2001 Jun;107(6):1431-6. doi: 10.1542/peds.107.6.1431DOI
10.1542/peds.107.6.1431Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/43511PubMed ID
11389271Related Resources
Link to Article in PubMedae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1542/peds.107.6.1431