No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Risk of Peripheral Vein Phlebitis Associated With Chlorhexidine-Coated Catheters A Randomized, Double-Blind Trial
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2015
Abstract
Objective:
To evaluate the risk of phlebitis associated with chlorhexidine-coated polyurethane catheters in peripheral veins.
Design:
A randomized, double-blinded trial comparing chlorhexidine-coated polyurethane catheters with uncoated polyurethane catheters.
Setting:
A university hospital.
Patients:
Adult medicine and surgery patients.
Interventions:
Certified registered nurse anesthetists or an infusion team consisting of nurses and physicians inserted the catheters. Catheter insertion sites were scored twice daily for evidence of phlebitis. At the time catheters were removed, a quantitative blood culture was performed, and catheters were sonicated for quantitative culture.
Results:
Of 221 evaluable catheters, phlebitis developed in 18 (17%) of 105 coated catheters, compared to 27 (23%) of 116 uncoated catheters (relative risk [RR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI95], 0.43-1.26; P=.32). By survival analysis, chlorhexidine-coated catheters had a lower risk of phlebitis during the first 3 days (P=.06), but not when all catheters were considered in both patient groups (P=.31). In the absence of catheter colonization, the incidence of phlebitis was 21% (16/76) and 24% (20/86) for coated and uncoated catheters, respectively (P=.85), whereas in the presence of catheter colonization, the incidence of phlebitis was 14% (1/7) and 80% (4/5) for coated and uncoated catheters, respectively (RR, 0.18; CI95, 0.03-1.15; P=.07).
Conclusion:
The risk of phlebitis in the presence of catheter colonization was 82% lower for chlorhexidinecoated polyurethane catheters compared to otherwise identical uncoated catheters.
- Type
- Original Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1997
References
1.Sherertz, RJ, Forman, DM, Solomon, DD. Efficacy of dicloxacillin-coated polyurethane catheters in preventing subcutaneous Staphylococcus aureus infection in mice. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989;33:1174–1188.Google Scholar
2.Sherertz, RJ, Carruth, WA, Hampton, AA, Byron, MP, Solomon, DD. Efficacy of antibiotic-coated catheters in preventing subcutaneous Staphylococcus aureus infection in rabbits. J Infect Dis 1993;167:98–106.Google Scholar
3.Rosenberg, A, Alatary, SD, Peterson, AF. Safety and efficacy of the antiseptic chlorhexidine gluconate. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1976;143:789–792.Google Scholar
4.Roberts, DL, Summerly, R, Byrne, JPH. Contact dermatitis to the constituents of Hibiscrub. Contact Dermatitis 1981;7:326–328.Google Scholar
5.Osmundsen, PE. Contact dermatitis to chlorhexidine. Contact Dermatitis 1982;8:81–83.Google Scholar
6.Cheung, J, O'Leary, JJ. Allergic reaction to chlorhexidine in an anaesthetized patient. Anaesth Intensive Care 1985;13:429–439.Google Scholar
7.Ohtoshi, T, Yamauchi, N, Tadokoro, K, et al. IgE antibody-mediated shock reaction caused by topical application of chlorhexidine. Clin Allergy 1986;16:155–161.Google Scholar
8.Gog, CL. Contact sensitivity to topical antimicrobials, II: sensitizing potentials of some topical antimicrobials. Contact Dermatitis 1989;21:166–171.Google Scholar
9.Ramselaar, CG, Craenen, A, Bijleveld, RT. Severe allergic reaction to an intraurethral preparation containing chlorhexidine. Br J Urol 1992;70:451–452.Google Scholar
10.Solomon, DD, Arnold, WL, Martin, ND, Lentz, DJ. An in vivo method for the evaluation of catheter thrombogenicity. J Biomed Mater Res 1987;21:43–57.Google Scholar
11.Carruth, WA, Byron, MP, Solomon, DD, White, WL, Stoddard, GJ, Sherertz, RJ. Subcutaneous catheter-related inflammation in a rabbit model is predictive of peripheral vein phlebitis in human volunteers. J Biomed Mater Res 1994;28:259–267.Google Scholar
12.Maki, DG, Ringer, M. Risk factors for infusion-related phlebitis with small peripheral venous catheters. Ann Intern Med 1991;114:845–854.Google Scholar
13.Heard, SO, Davis, RF, Sherertz, RJ, et al. Influence of sterile protective sleeves on the sterility of pulmonary artery catheters. Crit Care Med 1987;15:499–502.Google Scholar
14.Sherertz, RJ, Raad, II, Belani, A, et al. Three-year experience with sonicated vascular catheter cultures in a clinical microbiology laboratory. J Clin Microbiol 1990;28:76–82.Google Scholar
15.Sherertz, R, Heard, S, Raad, S, Gentry, L. Triple-lumen catheters coated with a low concentration of chlorhexidine were not efficacious at preventing catheter infections in ICU patients. Presented at the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 10 1993; New Orleans, LA. Abstract 1623.Google Scholar
16.Hamp, SE, Rosling, B, Lindhe, J. Effect of chlorhexidine on gingival wound healing in the dog. A histometric study. J Clin Periodontol 1975;2:143–152.Google Scholar
17.Knuuttila, ML, Paunio, KU, Mielityinen, H. Effect of chlorhexidine gluconate on acute nonmicrobial inflammation reaction. J Periodontol 1978;49:96–101.Google Scholar
18.Seymour, KG, Watts, TL, Addison, IE, Johnson, B. An in vivo study of neutrophil locomotion in relation to periodontal disease status and local chlorhexidine. Oral Microbiol Immunol 1990;5:95–97.Google Scholar
19.Watts, TL, Addison, I, Johnson, B. Effects of chlorhexidine solution on neutrophil locomotion in vitro. J Dent 1989;17:287–289.Google Scholar
20.Gabler, WL, Bullock, WW, Creamer, HR. The influence of chlorhexidine on superoxide generation by induced human neutrophils. J Periodontal Res 1987;22:445–450.Google Scholar
21.Goultschin, J, Levy, H. Inhibition of superoxide generation by human polymorphonuclear leukocytes with chlorhexidine. Its possible relation to periodontal disease. J Periodontol 1986;57:422–425.Google Scholar
22.Collin, J, Collin, C, Constable, FL, Johnston, ID. Infusion phlebitis and infection with various cannulas. Lancet 1975;2:150–153.Google Scholar
23.Linder, LE, Curelaru, I, Gustavsson, B, Hansson, HA, Stenqvist, O, Wojciechowski, J. Material thrombogenicity in central venous catheterization; a comparison between soft, antebrachial catheters of silicone elastomer and polyurethane. J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1984;8:399–406.Google Scholar
24.Gaukroger, PB, Roberts, JG, Manners, TA. Infusion thrombophlebitis: a prospective comparison of 645 Vialon and Teflon cannulae in anaesthetic and postoperative use. Anaesth Intensive Care 1988;16:265–271.Google Scholar
25.McKee, JM, Shell, JA, Warren, TA, Campbell, VP. Complications of intravenous therapy: a randomized prospective study—Vialon vs. Teflon. J Intraven Nurs 1989;12:288–295.Google Scholar
26.Jacquot, C, Fauvage, B, Bru, JP, Croize, J, Calop, J. Peripheral venous catheterization: influence of catheter composition on the occurrence of thrombophlebitis. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 1989;8:620–624.Google Scholar
27.Tully, JL, Friedland, GH, Baldini, LM, Goldmann, DA. Complications of intravenous therapy with steel needles and Teflon catheters. A comparative study. Am J Med 1981;70:702–706.Google Scholar
28.Larson, E, Hargiss, C. A decentralized approach to maintenance of intravenous therapy. Am J Infect Control 1984;12:177–186.Google Scholar
29.Williams, DN, Gibson, J, Vos, J, Kind, AC. Infusion thrombophlebitis and infiltration associated with intravenous cannulae: a controlled study comparing three different cannula types. NITA 1982;5:379–382.Google Scholar
30.Elam, J-H, Elam, M. Surface modification of intravenous catheters to reduce local tissue reactions. Biomaterials 1993;14:861–864.Google Scholar
- 7
- Cited by