Nav: Home

Catheter safeguards at hospitals reduce infections and save money, study shows

January 09, 2017

LOS ANGELES (Jan. 9, 2017) -- U.S. hospitals are reducing bloodstream infections related to catheters by implementing rigorous safeguards that also save millions of healthcare dollars each year, according to research led by Cedars-Sinai.

"Safety interventions are a win-win for both patients and hospitals," said Teryl Nuckols, MD, MSHS, director of the Division of General Internal Medicine in the Cedars-Sinai Department of Medicine.

Nuckols led a multicenter team that studied data published in the last decade on catheter-related bloodstream infections at 113 hospitals. The team found that safety interventions, on average, reduced the infection rate by 57 percent at these hospitals while producing net savings of $1.85 million for each site over three years. The savings came from reduced costs in treating infected patients.

The study, published in the JAMA Internal Medicine journal of the American Medical Association, focused on central venous catheters, also known as central lines, which are commonly used in intensive care units. These lines are placed in large veins in the arm, chest, neck or groin to deliver medications, fluids or blood to patients.

More than 60,000 primary bloodstream infections related to these catheters are estimated to occur each year in the U.S., with a fatality rate of 12 percent or more, according to recent studies.

To prevent these infections, hospitals in recent years have introduced new safety procedures. Checklists for attending staff include donning sterile gloves, covering catheters with antimicrobial dressings and checking catheters daily for signs of movement or infection. Many hospitals also have invested in extra training, equipment and supplies to improve safety.

The phasing-in of these safeguards correlated with a 49 percent reduction nationally in the rate of catheter-related bloodstream infections from 2010 to 2013, according to the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The new Cedars-Sinai-led study shows that these safeguards, while adding to equipment and labor costs, ultimately reduced infections and saved money.

In the hospitals studied, the median cost of implementing catheter safety programs was about $270,000 per site. But for every $100,000 that a hospital spent, it realized an average $315,000 savings because it treated fewer infected patients, the investigators found. Although savings were lower in certain hospitals that already had low infection rates, adding new precautions still paid off for them.

Nuckols said the study supports the value of medical centers upgrading their safety procedures to prevent catheter infections.

"Due to the high cost of caring for patients when central-line infections develop, even sizable up-front investments in infection prevention can be associated with large net savings," Nuckols said. "On the basis of our findings, hospitals that have not yet achieved very low rates of infection can consider implementing a variety of safety practices."
-end-
Besides Nuckols, the study's authors included Jonathan D. Grein, MD, medical director of the Cedars-Sinai Department of Hospital Epidemiology, infection control officer and instructor in Medicine; and investigators affiliated with the RAND Corp. in Santa Monica, California; the College of Science at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia; the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health in Los Angeles; and the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System. The team's work was supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

Related Infection Articles:

Revealed: How E. coli knows how to cause the worst possible infection
The discovery could one day let doctors prevent the infection by allowing E. coli to pass harmlessly through the body.
UK study shows most patients with suspected urinary tract infection and treated with antibiotics actually lack evidence of this infection
New research presented at this week's European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) in Amsterdam, Netherlands (April 13-16, 2019) shows that only one third of patients that enter the emergency department with suspected urinary tract infection (UTI) actually have evidence of this infection, yet almost all are treated with antibiotics, unnecessarily driving the emergence of antimicrobial resistance.
Bacteria in urine doesn't always indicate infection
Doctors should think carefully before testing patients for a urinary tract infection (UTI) to avoid over-diagnosis and unnecessary antibiotic treatment, according to updated asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) guidelines released by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and published in Clinical Infectious Diseases.
Subsidies for infection control to healthcare institutions help reduce infection levels
Researchers compared three types of infection control subsidies and found that under a limited budget, a dollar-for-dollar matching subsidy, in which policymakers match hospital spending for infection control measures, was the most effective at reducing the number of hospital-acquired infections.
Dengue virus infection may cause severe outcomes following Zika virus infection during pregnancy
This study is the first to report a possible mechanism for the enhancement of Zika virus progression during pregnancy in an animal model.
More Infection News and Infection Current Events

Best Science Podcasts 2019

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2019. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Rethinking Anger
Anger is universal and complex: it can be quiet, festering, justified, vengeful, and destructive. This hour, TED speakers explore the many sides of anger, why we need it, and who's allowed to feel it. Guests include psychologists Ryan Martin and Russell Kolts, writer Soraya Chemaly, former talk radio host Lisa Fritsch, and business professor Dan Moshavi.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#537 Science Journalism, Hold the Hype
Everyone's seen a piece of science getting over-exaggerated in the media. Most people would be quick to blame journalists and big media for getting in wrong. In many cases, you'd be right. But there's other sources of hype in science journalism. and one of them can be found in the humble, and little-known press release. We're talking with Chris Chambers about doing science about science journalism, and where the hype creeps in. Related links: The association between exaggeration in health related science news and academic press releases: retrospective observational study Claims of causality in health news: a randomised trial This...