|
|
|
Do antibiotic impregnated central lines prevent catheter-related bloodstream infection?
Lead author's name: Carrasco MN
Three-part Clinical Question: Patients: intensive care patients. Intervention: antiseptic-coated (silver sulphadiazine and chlorhexidine) CVCs vs heparin-coated CVCs. Outcomes: catheter colonisation and catheter related bloodstream infection (CRBSI).
Search Terms: intensive care, critical care, central venous catheters, infection, prevention, controlled trial The Study: Randomised, controlled trial without intention-to treat analysis
The Study Patients: 276 catheters inserted into 196 patients.
Experimental group n=128; chlorhexidine & silver sulphadiazine-coated catheters. 9 not cultured
The Evidence:
EBM questions:
1) Do the methods allow accurate testing of the hypothesis? No, the study was underpowered.
2) Do the statistical tests correctly test the results to allow differentiation of statistically significant results? No, the study was underpowered.
3) Are conclusions valid in light of the results? Yes
4) Did results get omitted, and why? Yes, some catheters were not cultured on removal
5) Did they suggest areas of further research? Yes, a larger study
6) Did they make any recommendations based on the results and were they appropriate? No
7) Is the study relevant to my clinical practice? Yes
8) What level of evidence does this study represent? 1-
9) What grade of recommendation can I make on this result alone? N/A
10) What grade of recommendation can I make when this study is considered along with other available evidence? A
11) Should I change my practice because of these results? Perhaps- it depends on your views about the validity and importance of pooled analysis of RCTs.
12) Should I audit my current practice because of these results? No, but you should be auditing CRBSI rates anyway.
Appraised by Dr David Swann, Consultant, ICU, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh.
Email: d.g.swann@ad.ac.uk
June 2005
Kill by Date: 2010
Edited by CC
©SICS EBM 2005
| |||||||||||||||||||||||