...
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of hospital infection >Evaluation of colonisation of peripheral venous catheters inserted by prehospital emergency service teams (SMUR) in France.
【24h】

Evaluation of colonisation of peripheral venous catheters inserted by prehospital emergency service teams (SMUR) in France.

机译:法国院前急救小组(SMUR)对插入的外周静脉导管定植的评估。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

There are no data in the literature on colonisation of peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) inserted by French prehospital emergency and resuscitation service teams (SMUR). In a descriptive and prospective study we evaluated colonisation of PVCs inserted and managed solely by a SMUR team. A total of 171 PVCs were analysed. Bacteriological results were positive for seven catheters (4.09%/threshold=10(2)cfu/mL). Our analyses of the characteristics of patients and interventions show a significantly higher number of elderly patients among those colonised (P=0.02) with less satisfactory venous access (P=0.006) and smaller catheter bores (P=0.009). No differences were seen regarding the other evaluation criteria: gender, aetiology, site of intervention, number and site of venepuncture procedures, blood pressure and duration of catheterisation. The absolute value of colonisation seen in our study appears consistent with those reported in the literature, but no comparisons are possible due to widely divergent catheterisation times between published work (days) and our own data (minutes). Our results suggest a reassessment of current recommendations of routine changeover of these catheters, with the attendant discomfort for patients and cost in terms of time and money. We recommend a randomised study comparing catheter colonisation levels associated with routine catheter replacement with targeted replacement based on risk factors.
机译:法国院前急救和复苏服务小组(SMUR)尚未提供有关外周静脉导管(PVC)定植的文献资料。在一项描述性和前瞻性研究中,我们评估了仅由SMUR团队插入和管理的PVC的定植。总共分析了171个PVC。七个导管的细菌学结果均为阳性(4.09%/阈值= 10(2)cfu / mL)。我们对患者特征和干预措施的分析表明,定植的老年患者(P = 0.02)明显多于静脉通路(P = 0.006)和导管孔径较小(P = 0.009)的患者。在其他评估标准上没有发现差异:性别,病因,干预部位,静脉穿刺手术的数量和部位,血压和导管插入时间。在我们的研究中看到的定植的绝对值似乎与文献中报道的一致,但是由于发表的工作(天)与我们自己的数据(分钟)之间的导管插入时间差异很大,因此无法进行比较。我们的结果表明,对这些导管常规更换的当前建议进行了重新评估,随之而来的是患者的不适感以及时间和金钱方面的成本。我们建议进行一项随机研究,根据危险因素,比较与常规导管更换和靶向置换相关的导管定植水平。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号