↓ Skip to main content

Second-Generation central venous catheter in the prevention of bloodstream infection: a systematic review1

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Second-Generation central venous catheter in the prevention of bloodstream infection: a systematic review1
Published in
Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem, August 2016
DOI 10.1590/1518-8345.0756.2722
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janislei Gislei Dorociaki Stocco, Hellen Hoers, Franciele Soares Pott, Karla Crozeta, Dulce Aparecida Barbosa, Marineli Joaquim Meier

Abstract

to evaluate the effectiveness and safety in the use of second-generation central venous catheters impregnated in clorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine when compared with other catheters, being them impregnated or not, in order to prevent the bloodstream infection prevention. systematic review with meta-analysis. Databases searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS/SciELO, Cochrane CENTRAL; search in Congress Proceedings and records from Clinical Trials. 1.235 studies were identified, 97 were pre-selected and 4 were included. In catheter-related bloodstream infection, there was no statistical significance between second-generation impregnated catheter compared with the non-impregnated ones, absolute relative risk 1,5% confidence interval 95% (3%-1%), relative risk 0,68 (confidence interval 95%, 0,40-1,15) and number needed to treat 66. In the sensitivity analysis, there was less bloodstream infection in impregnated catheters (relative risk 0,50, confidence interval 95%, 0,26-0,96). Lower colonization, absolute relative risk 9,6% (confidence interval 95%, 10% to 4%), relative risk 0,51 (confidence interval 95% from 0,38-0,85) and number needed to treat 5. the use of second-generation catheters was effective in reducing the catheter colonization and infection when a sensitivity analysis is performed. Future clinical trials are suggested to evaluate sepsis rates, mortality and adverse effects. evaluar la efectividad y seguridad del uso de catéteres venosos centrales de segunda generación, impregnados en clorhexidina y sulfadiazina de plata, comparados con otros catéteres impregnados o no impregnados, para prevención de infección de la corriente sanguínea. revisión sistemática con metaanálisis. La búsqueda fue realizada en las bases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS/SciELO, Cochrane CENTRAL; fueron consultados anales de congresos y registros de ensayos clínicos. fueron identificados 1.235 estudios, 97 preseleccionados y cuatro incluidos. En la infección de la corriente sanguínea, relacionada al catéter, no hubo significación estadística entre catéter de segunda generación impregnado en comparación a los no impregnados, riesgo relativo absoluto 1,5%, intervalo de confianza 95% (3%-1%), riesgo relativo 0,68 (intervalo de confianza 95%, 0,40-1,15) y número necesario para tratar 66. En el análisis de sensibilidad, hubo disminución de la infección de la corriente sanguínea en los catéteres impregnados (riesgo relativo 0,50, intervalo de confianza 95%, 0,26-0,96). Reducción de la colonización, riesgo relativo absoluto de 9,6% (intervalo de confianza 95%, 10% a 4%), riesgo relativo 0,51 (intervalo de confianza 95% de 0,38-0,85) y número necesario para tratar 5. el uso de los catéteres de segunda generación fue efectivo en la reducción de la colonización del catéter y de infección cuando realizado análisis de sensibilidad. Se sugirieron ensayos clínicos futuros que evalúen tasas de sepsis, mortalidad y efectos adversos. avaliar a efetividade e segurança do uso de cateteres venosos centrais de segunda geração, impregnados em clorexidina e sulfadiazina de prata, comparados com outros cateteres impregnados ou não, na prevenção de infecção de corrente sanguínea. revisão sistemática com metanálise. Busca realizada nas bases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS/SciELO, Cochrane CENTRAL; consulta em anais de congresso e registro de ensaios clínicos. foram identificados 1.235 estudos, 97 pré-selecionados e quatro incluídos. Na infecção de corrente sanguínea, relacionada ao cateter, não houve significância estatística entre cateter de segunda geração impregnado em comparação aos não impregnados risco relativo absoluto 1,5%, intervalo de confiança 95% (3%-1%), risco relativo 0,68 (intervalo de confiança 95%, 0,40-1,15) e número necessário para tratar 66. Na análise de sensibilidade, houve diminuição da infecção de corrente sanguínea nos cateteres impregnados (risco relativo 0,50, intervalo de confiança 95%, 0,26-0,96). Redução da colonização, risco relativo absoluto de 9,6% (intervalo de confiança 95%, 10% a 4%), risco relativo 0,51 (intervalo de confiança 95% de 0,38-0,85) e número necessário para tratar 5. o uso dos cateteres de segunda geração foi efetivo na redução de colonização do cateter e de infecção quando realizada análise de sensibilidade. Sugerem-se ensaios clínicos futuros que avaliem taxas de sepse, mortalidade e efeitos adversos.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 20%
Other 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 11%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 16 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 19 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 27%
Unspecified 2 4%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 16 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 November 2018.
All research outputs
#7,204,882
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
#123
of 842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,807
of 378,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
#8
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 842 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 378,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.