Search

Background: Our objective was to identify central line (CL)-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) rates and risk factors (RF) in Asia., Methods: From 03/27/2004 to 02/11/2022, we conducted a multinational multicenter prospective cohort study in 281 ICUs of 95 hospitals in 44 cities in 9 Asian countries (China, India, Malaysia, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam). For estimation of CLABSI rate we used CL-days as denominator and number of CLABSI as numerator. To estimate CLABSI RF for we analyzed the data using multiple logistic regression, and outcomes are shown as adjusted odds ratios (aOR)., Results: A total of 150,142 patients, hospitalized 853,604 days, acquired 1514 CLABSIs. Pooled CLABSI rate per 1000 CL-days was 5.08; per type of catheter were: femoral: 6.23; temporary hemodialysis: 4.08; jugular: 4.01; arterial: 3.14; PICC: 2.47; subclavian: 2.02. The highest rates were femoral, temporary for hemodialysis, and jugular, and the lowest PICC and subclavian. We analyzed following variables: Gender, age, length of stay (LOS) before CLABSI acquisition, CL-days before CLABSI acquisition, CL-device utilization ratio, CL-type, tracheostomy use, hospitalization type, ICU type, facility ownership and World Bank classifications by income level. Following were independently associated with CLABSI: LOS before CLABSI acquisition, rising risk 4% daily (aOR = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.03-1.04; p  < 0.0001); number of CL-days before CLABSI acquisition, rising risk 5% per CL-day (aOR = 1.05; 95% CI 1.05-1.06; p  < 0.0001); medical hospitalization (aOR = 1.21; 95% CI 1.04-1.39; p  = 0.01); tracheostomy use (aOR = 2.02;95% CI 1.43-2.86; p  < 0.0001); publicly-owned facility (aOR = 3.63; 95% CI 2.54-5.18; p  < 0.0001); lower-middle-income country (aOR = 1.87; 95% CI 1.41-2.47; p  < 0.0001). ICU with highest risk was pediatric (aOR = 2.86; 95% CI 1.71-4.82; p  < 0.0001), followed by medical-surgical (aOR = 2.46; 95% CI 1.62-3.75; p  < 0.0001). CL with the highest risk were internal-jugular (aOR = 3.32; 95% CI 2.84-3.88; p  < 0.0001), and femoral (aOR = 3.13; 95% CI 2.48-3.95; p  < 0.0001), and subclavian (aOR = 1.78; 95% CI 1.47-2.15; p  < 0.0001) showed the lowest risk., Conclusions: The following CLABSI RFs are unlikely to change: country income level, facility-ownership, hospitalization type, and ICU type. Based on these findings it is suggested to focus on reducing LOS, CL-days, and tracheostomy; using subclavian or PICC instead of internal-jugular or femoral; and implementing evidence-based CLABSI prevention recommendations., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: All authors declare that don’t have any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work. All authors declare that don’t have potential competing interests, such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Submission of this article implies that the work described has not been published previously, that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent of the copyright-holder.

Background: This study assessed the mobility levels among critically ill patients and the association of early mobility with incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality., Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of the multicenter PREVENT trial, which evaluated adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h and found no effect on the primary outcome of incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis. Mobility levels were documented daily up to day 28 in the ICU using a tool with an 8-point ordinal scale. We categorized patients according to mobility levels within the first 3 ICU days into three groups: early mobility level 4-7 (at least active standing), 1-3 (passive transfer from bed to chair or active sitting), and 0 (passive range of motion). We evaluated the association of early mobility and incident lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality by Cox proportional models adjusting for randomization and other co-variables., Results: Of 1708 patients, only 85 (5.0%) had early mobility level 4-7 and 356 (20.8%) level 1-3, while 1267 (74.2%) had early mobility level 0. Patients with early mobility levels 4-7 and 1-3 had less illness severity, femoral central venous catheters, and organ support compared to patients with mobility level 0. Incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis occurred in 1/85 (1.3%) patients in the early mobility 4-7 group, 7/348 (2.0%) patients in mobility 1-3 group, and 50/1230 (4.1%) patients in mobility 0 group. Compared with early mobility group 0, mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 were not associated with differences in incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 8.90; p = 0.87 and 0.91, 95% CI 0.39, 2.12; p = 0.83, respectively). However, early mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 had lower 90-day mortality (aHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 1.01; p = 0.052, and 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62; p < 0.0001, respectively)., Conclusions: Only a small proportion of critically ill patients with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h were mobilized early. Early mobility was associated with reduced mortality, but not with different incidence of deep-vein thrombosis. This association does not establish causality, and randomized controlled trials are required to assess whether and to what extent this association is modifiable., Trial Registration: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013)., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background and Purpose: Short-term central venous catheterization (CVC) is one of the commonly used invasive interventions in ICU and other patient-care areas. Practice and management of CVC is not standardized, varies widely, and need appropriate guidance. Purpose of this document is to provide a comprehensive, evidence-based and up-to-date, one document source for practice and management of central venous catheterization. These recommendations are intended to be used by critical care physicians and allied professionals involved in care of patients with central venous lines. Methods: This position statement for central venous catheterization is framed by expert committee members under the aegis of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine (ISCCM). Experts group exchanged and reviewed the relevant literature. During the final meeting of the experts held at the ISCCM Head Office, a consensus on all the topics was made and the recommendations for final document draft were prepared. The final document was reviewed and accepted by all expert committee members and after a process of peer-review this document is finally accepted as an official ISCCM position paper. Modified grade system was utilized to classify the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. The draft document thus formulated was reviewed by all committee members; further comments and suggestions were incorporated after discussion, and a final document was prepared. Results: This document makes recommendations about various aspects of resource preparation, infection control, prevention of mechanical complication and surveillance related to short-term central venous catheterization. This document also provides four appendices for ready reference and use at institutional level. Conclusion: In this document, committee is able to make 54 different recommendations for various aspects of care, out of which 40 are strong and 14 weak recommendations. Among all of them, 42 recommendations are backed by any level of evidence, however due to paucity of data on 12 clinical questions, a consensus was reached by working committee and practice recommendations given on these topics are based on vast clinical experience of the members of this committee, which makes a useful practice point. Committee recognizes the fact that in event of new emerging evidences this document will require update, and that shall be provided in due time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]