Central venous access device
Insertion of a central venous access device (CVAD) is a common hospital procedure with an estimated 15,000 devices inserted in NSW Intensive Care Units every year.
Despite being a common procedure it is not one without significant risks which include risks in the insertion of the devices and those associated with having a CVAD in situ either short or long term. These risks can include infection, malposition, pneumothorax, thrombosis, vascular injury and air embolus.
In addition to recommendations for clinical practice the full guideline includes a description of all guideline development processes (1).
- Central venous access device – Post insertion management guideline
- Audit tool
- Central venous access device: post insertion management [poster]
- Clinical Focus Report - Central Venous Access Devices and Air Embolism. Clinical Excellence Commission
Vascular air embolism
Removal of CVAD
Scrub the hub
Vascular air embolism
The purpose of this guideline is to provide intensive care clinicians with best practice recommendations so that the evidence-based treatment and care can be delivered and patients can receive the therapy they need.
For the purposes of this document a CVAD refers to a temporary intravascular catheter for infusing drugs, fluids and delivering nutrition. In addition, CVADs are also used for taking blood samples, haemodynamic monitoring and for renal replacement therapies. It includes central venous catheters (CVC) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC). For the purposes of this guideline long-term devices (e.g. tunnelled and implantable ports) are excluded.
This guideline has been developed for clinicians practising in NSW Intensive Care Units (ICUs). This review was undertaken by a representative group (Guideline Development Network or GDN) of NSW clinicians with expertise in ICUs and/or CVAD management as part of a joint project between the NSW Intensive Care Coordination and Monitoring Unit (ICCMU) and the Nursing and Midwifery Office (NAMO). The GDN sought to answer the question:
“What nursing interventions can reduce the risk of device failure (i.e. bacteraemia/bloodstream infection, local infection, blockage, accidental removal or dislodgement, thrombosis, phlebitis) and reduce costs while improving satisfaction for patients with a CVAD?”
To answer these questions 45 randomised controlled trials or systematic reviews and 14 guideline documents were reviewed. Additionally, a number of clinicians were surveyed. As a result 50 recommendations for practice were generated and these recommendations have been classified into Assessment; Interventions; Infection prevention and Governance as set out in the Recommendations for Practice table.
Recommendations for Practice
The nurse must systematically assess the CVAD each shift covering the following elements:
The findings must be documented in the clinical record.
|2.||Appropriate securement techniques include suturing of the CVAD with monofilament non-graded nylon or the use of sutureless securement devices (2-4).||Grade B|
|3.||The CVAD must be secured at the insertion site and also at the anchor point (if present).||Consensus|
|4.||The securement of the CVAD must be assessed at least once per shift and more frequently if required.||Consensus|
|5.||Sutureless securement devices should be changed when the dressing is changed or if loose or soiled.||Consensus|
|6.||Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICC) are to be secured by sutureless fixation devices (4).||Grade B|
|7.||The weight of administration sets must be supported with additional fixation to reduce the risk of unplanned dislodgement of the CVAD .||Consensus|
|Interventions: Antiseptic solution and cleaning of skin and catheter|
|9.||Avoid organic solvents (e.g. acetone, ether or adhesive remover wipes) on the CVC or surrounding skin (13, 14).||Grade B|
|10.||Prior to cleaning with chlorhexidine in alcohol, Sterile 0.9% saline is to be used to remove dried blood and/or other fluids from around the catheter and under the securement hub.||Consensus|
|Interventions: Dressing of CVAD and insertion site|
|11.||A sterile transparent semi-permeable dressing or sterile gauze and hypoallergenic tape must be used to cover the CVC insertion site. An alternative dressing must be used if allergy is suspected (13, 15) (PD2010_036).||Grade B|
Regardless of the dressing type used for the CVAD , the dressing should:
Transparent dressings must be changed every seven days or sooner if (13, 16-19):
Sterile gauze and hypoallergenic tape dressing is preferable to a transparent dressing if the patient is diaphoretic or if the site is bleeding or oozing (13, 20).
|15.||Sterile gauze and hypoallergenic tape dressing should be changed every 48 hours and whenever loose, soiled or moist.||Grade B|
|16.||A chlorhexidine impregnated sponge must be placed around the catheter at the insertion site after insertion. It should be replaced at each dressing change (21-26).||Grade A|
|Interventions: Fluid and drug administration|
|17.||Ensure drugs are compatible when administering multiple intravenous medications via the CVAD lumen. Refer to drug resources such as Micromedex or the institutional pharmacist.||Consensus|
|18.||Crystalloid solutions without drug additives (e.g. 0.9% saline) should only be changed when the administration set is changed, when the catheter is changed and or when the infusion is complete.||Consensus|
|19.||All blood products should be infused as per the National Blood Authority Australia Patient Blood Management Guidelines.||National Guidelines|
|Interventions: Accessing connectors|
|20.||Catheter hubs (including needleless injection sites and blood sampling ports) must be vigorously cleaned with antiseptic swabs (containing no less than 0.5% chlorhexidine with alcohol, 70% alcohol, or if allergic 10% povidone-iodine) before and after use to ensure removal of microorganisms and particulate matter. The solution must be allowed to dry naturally prior to accessing the device i.e. scrub the hub (13,51).||Grade A|
|21.||When an unused lumen is accessed to administer a medication or commence an infusion, a small volume of blood should be gently aspirated and discarded and the lumen flushed with 10mL 0.9% saline prior to medication administration or fluid commencement (27).||Consensus|
|Interventions: Intravenous administration sets|
Intravenous administration sets attached to a CVAD must be attached to the patient so that no tension is applied to the catheter to reduce risk of dislodgement.
|23.||Administration sets (burettes, administration sets, multi-flow adapters, caps, connectors, extension devices) that are attached to antimicrobial or antibiotic-coated multi-lumen CVAD should be changed either after seven days or when clinically indicated (e.g. precipitate, particulate matter, blood in administration set, faulty set), or when the catheter is changed (28). This excludes blood products and lipids.||Grade B|
|24.||Administration sets (burettes, infusion sets, multi-flow adapters, caps, connectors, extension devices) attached to standard CVADs should be changed either after 96 hours, or when clinically indicated (e.g. precipitate, particulate matter or blood in apparent in the administration set or the set is faulty), or when the catheter is changed. This excludes blood products and lipids (13, 29-31).||Grade B|
|25.||Administration sets for lipid-based emulsions should be changed within 24 hours of starting the infusion or as recommended by the manufacturer.||Grade A|
|Interventions: Adjuncts to IV administration sets|
|26.||Needleless connectors that can be disinfected or decontaminated are to be placed on each lumen of a CVAD (27, 32-37).||Grade A|
|27.||Multi-flow adaptors and three-way taps and connectors are to be changed when the administration set is changed (27).||Consensus|
|28.||Clamps should be engaged (when in situ) on the device’s lumen when disconnecting the administration set from the lumen. This is to prevent complications such as air embolus, bleeding or inadvertent drug or fluid bolus administration.||Consensus|
|29.||Avoid administration set disconnections. If an administration set is disconnected it must be discarded and a new set used.||Consensus|
|Interventions: Maintenance of lumen integrity|
|30.||How frequently a CVAD lumen should be flushed to maintain lumen patency remains unclear. It is suggested that a CVAD lumen that is used intermittently should be flushed no more frequently than every eight hours.||Consensus|
|31.||The recommended solution for flushing a CVAD lumen is 0.9% saline (38-42).||Grade B|
|32.||To reduce the risk of thrombosis and intraluminal occlusion in large bore catheter lumens (e.g. dialysis catheters), an anticoagulant lock may be used when the lumen is not in use (39, 40, 43).||Consensus|
|33.||Unused lumens are to be managed to prevent air emboli and backflow of blood, protein or lipid solutions depending on the connector used. Refer to Table 4.||Consensus|
|34.||It is recommended that syringes with a capacity of ≥ 10mL be used to access a CVAD for flushing. Smaller syringes exert higher pressure and may cause possible catheter rupture or dislodged an occlusion if excessive force is used.||Consensus|
|35.||When flushing a CVAD lumen use a pulsatile positive pressure flushing technique to create turbulence within the device lumen.||Grade B|
|36.||If attempting to flush a CVAD lumen due to a blockage, force should never be used because of the risk of catheter rupture.||Consensus|
|37.||Use of a solution other than 0.9% saline to unblock a CVAD lumen has been shown to be effective in restoring lumen patency. Use of agents such as urokinase and alteplase require a medical prescription and must be discussed with the Medical Officer or a Vascular Access specialist/team before use (44, 45).||Grade B|
|38.||When removing a CVAD the patient MUST be placed in bed in a supine position (6). Prior to repositioning the patient following removal of a CVAD , ensure the dressing is airtight and occlusive.||Consensus|
|39.||Removal of a CVAD should be timed to occur at end inspiration or during expiration for patients who are not on a ventilator.||Consensus|
|40.||Following CVAD removal pressure must be applied with sterile gauze until haemostasis is achieved. The insertion site must be sealed immediately using an airtight occlusive dressing. This dressing is to remain intact and insitu for 48 hours to reduce the risk of late air embolism.||Consensus|
|41.||Routine collection of the CVAD tip is not required when removing the device. If a catheter-related bloodstream infection is suspected the medical team may request that the tip is sent for microbiological examination and a blood culture collected from a peripheral vein within 4 hours of CVAD removal (46).||Consensus|
Removal of the CVAD must be documented in the clinical record.
|43.||Following removal of a CVAD the condition of the site must be monitored at 24 and 48 hours at a minimum. This must be documented in the clinical record.||Consensus|
|44.||Clinicians must adhere to the Five Moments of Hand Hygiene.||Hand hygiene policy|
|45.||Clinicians are to evaluate the risk of body fluid exposure and cross contamination risk when caring for a patient with a CVAD . PPE , including goggles/face shield, gloves and gown/apron as per the NSW 2007 Infection prevention and control policy, should be worn accordingly.||National Guidelines and NSW Policy|
|46.||Aseptic non-touch technique must be used when attending to CVAD dressings, administration set changes and any intervention that involves accessing the CVAD (13, 47, 48).||Grade A|
|47.||CVAD management is provided by nursing staff that are proficient in this activity and/or by nursing staff under the direct supervision of nursing staff that are proficient as per institutional policy (13, 27, 49).||Consensus|
|48.||To prevent errors or breaches of asepsis, administration set and dressing changes should be performed when the clinician is unlikely to be interrupted.||Consensus|
|49.||Infusions on each lumen of the CVAD are to be labelled as per the National Standard for User-applied Labelling of Injectable Medicines, Fluids and Lines.||National Guidelines and NSW Policy|
Evaluation of patient outcomes in relation to device failure include:
|National Guidelines and NSW Policy|
Grades of recommendations
|Grade of recommendation||Description|
|A||Body of evidence can be trusted to guide evidence|
|B||Body of evidence can be trusted to guide practice in most situations|
|C||Body of evidence provides some support for recommendation/s but care should be taken in its application|
|D||Body of evidence is weak and recommendation must be applied with caution|
|Consensus||Consensus was set as a median of ≥ 7|
Grades A–D are based on NHMRC grades (50)
- Rolls KD, Elliott D. Using consensus methods to develop clinical practice guidelines for intensive care: The Intensive Care Collaborative project. Australian Critical Care. 2008;21(4):200-15.
- Graf JM, Newman CD, McPherson ML. Sutured securement of peripherally inserted central catheters yields fewer complications in pediatric patients. Jpen: Journal of Parenteral & Enteral Nutrition. 2006;30(6):532-5. PubMed PMID: 17047181.
- Teichgraber UK-M, de Bucourt M, Gebauer B, Streitparth F, Hamm B, Enzweiler C. Effectiveness of sutureless percutaneous placement of cuffed tunneled hemodialysis catheters applying StatLock attachment devices. Journal of Vascular Access. 2011;12(1):17-20. PubMed PMID: 21140360.
- Yamamoto AJ, Solomon JA, Soulen MC, Tang J, Parkinson K, Lin R, et al. Sutureless securement device reduces complications of peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Journal of Vascular & Interventional Radiology. 2002;13(1):77-81. PubMed PMID: 11788698.
- National Health and Medical Research Council. Australian Guidelines for the Prevention and Control of Infection in Healthcare 2010.
- Bishop L, Dougherty L, Bodenham A, Mansi J, Crowe P, Kibbler C, et al. Guidelines on the insertion and management of central venous access devices in adults. International Journal of Laboratory Hematology. 2007;29(4):261-78. PubMed PMID: 17617077.
- Infection Control Guidelines Steering Committee. Australian Guidelines for the Prevention and Control of Infection in Healthcare Executive Summary. In: Healthcare ACoSaQi, editor.: Australian Government; 2010.
- Chaiyakunapruk N, Veenstra DL, Lipsky BA, Saint S. Chlorhexidine compared with povidone-iodine solution for vascular catheter-site care: a meta-analysis.[Summary for patients in Ann Intern Med. 2002 Jun 4;136(11):I26; PMID: 12044142]. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2002;136(11):792-801. PubMed PMID: 12044127.
- Astle CM, Jensen L. A Trial of ExSept® for Hemodialysis Central Venous Catheters. Nephrology Nursing Journal. 2005;32(5):517-25. Epub Sep/Oct 2005.
- Mimoz O, Villeminey S, Ragot S, Dahyot-Fizelier C, Laksiri L, Petitpas F, et al. Chlorhexidine-based antiseptic solution vs alcohol-based povidone-iodine for central venous catheter care. Archives of Internal Medicine. 2007;167(19):2066-72. PubMed PMID: 17954800.
- Parienti J-J, du Cheyron D, Ramakers M, Malbruny B, Leclercq R, Le Coutour X, et al. Alcoholic povidone-iodine to prevent central venous catheter colonization: A randomized unit-crossover study. Critical Care Medicine. 2004;32(3):708-13. PubMed PMID: 15090951.
- Valles J, Fernandez I, Alcaraz D, Chacon E, Cazorla A, Canals M, et al. Prospective randomized trial of 3 antiseptic solutions for prevention of catheter colonization in an intensive care unit for adult patients. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. 2008;29(9):847-53. PubMed PMID: 18665819.
- Pratt RJ, Pellowe CM, Wilson JA, Loveday HP, Harper PJ, Jones SRLJ, et al. epic2: National evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS hospitals in England. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2007;65 Suppl 1:S1-64. PubMed PMID: 17307562.
- Simonova G, Rickard CM, Dunster KR, Smyth DJ, McMillan D, Fraser JF. Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesives - effective securement technique for intravascular catheters: in vitro testing of safety and feasibility. Anaesthesia & Intensive Care. 2012;40(3):460-6. PubMed PMID: 22577911.
- Olson K, Rennie RP, Hanson J, Ryan M, Gilpin J, Falsetti M, et al. Evaluation of a no-dressing intervention for tunneled central venous catheter exit sites. Journal of Infusion Nursing. 2004;27(1):37-44. PubMed PMID: 14734986.
- Ishizuka M, Nagata H, Takagi K, Kubota K. Dressing change reduces the central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection. Hepato-Gastroenterology. 2011;58(112):1882-6. PubMed PMID: 22234057.
- Le Corre I, Delorme M, Cournoyer S. A prospective, randomized trial comparing a transparent dressing and a dry gauze on the exit site of long term central venous catheters of hemodialysis patients. The journal of vascular access. 2003 Apr-Jun;4(2):56-61. PubMed PMID: 17642061. Epub 2007/07/21. eng.
- Laura R, Degl'Innocenti M, Mocali M, Alberani F, Boschi S, Giraudi A, et al. Comparison of two different time interval protocols for central venous catheter dressing in bone marrow transplant patients: results of a randomized, multicenter study. The Italian Nurse Bone Marrow Transplant Group (GITMO). Haematologica. 2000;85(3):275-9. PubMed PMID: 10702816.
- Benhamou E, Fessard E, Com-Nougue C, Beaussier PS, Nitenberg G, Tancrede C, et al. Less frequent catheter dressing changes decrease local cutaneous toxicity of high-dose chemotherapy in children, without increasing the rate of catheter-related infections: results of a randomised trial. Bone Marrow Transplantation. 2002;29(8):653-8. PubMed PMID: 12180109.
- Webster J, Gillies D, O'Riordan E, Sherriff KL, Rickard CM. Gauze and tape and transparent polyurethane dressings for central venous catheters. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2011 (11):CD003827. PubMed PMID: 22071809.
- Ho KM, Litton E. Use of chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing to prevent vascular and epidural catheter colonization and infection: a meta-analysis. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2006;58(2):281-7. PubMed PMID: 16757502.
- Chambers ST, Sanders J, Patton WN, Ganly P, Birch M, Crump JA, et al. Reduction of exit-site infections of tunnelled intravascular catheters among neutropenic patients by sustained-release chlorhexidine dressings: results from a prospective randomized controlled trial. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2005;61(1):53-61. PubMed PMID: 16002181.
- Levy I, Katz J, Solter E, Samra Z, Vidne B, Birk E, et al. Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing for prevention of colonization of central venous catheters in infants and children: a randomized controlled study. Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal. 2005;24(8):676-9. PubMed PMID: 16094219.
- Ruschulte H, Franke M, Gastmeier P, Zenz S, Mahr KH, Buchholz S, et al. Prevention of central venous catheter related infections with chlorhexidine gluconate impregnated wound dressings: a randomized controlled trial. Annals of Hematology. 2009;88(3):267-72. PubMed PMID: 18679683.
- Schwebel C, Lucet J-C, Vesin A, Arrault X, Calvino-Gunther S, Bouadma L, et al. Economic evaluation of chlorhexidine-impregnated sponges for preventing catheter-related infections in critically ill adults in the Dressing Study. Critical Care Medicine. 2012;40(1):11-7. PubMed PMID: 21926570.
- Timsit J-F, Schwebel C, Bouadma L, Geffroy A, Garrouste-Orgeas M, Pease S, et al. Chlorhexidine-impregnated sponges and less frequent dressing changes for prevention of catheter-related infections in critically ill adults: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2009;301(12):1231-41. PubMed PMID: 19318651.
- Society IN. Infusion Nursing standards of Practice. Journal of Infusion Nursing. 2011;34(1S):S1-S109.
- O'Grady N, Alexander M, Burns LA, Dellinger P, Garland J, Heard SO, et al. Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter Related Blodd Stream Infections. In: Control CfD, editor. 2011.
- Gillies D, O'Riordan L, Wallen M, Morrison A, Rankin K, Nagy S. Optimal timing for intravenous administration set replacement. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2007 (4):CD003588. PubMed PMID: 16235329.
- Raad I, Hanna HA, Awad A, Alrahwan A, Bivins C, Khan A, et al. Optimal frequency of changing intravenous administration sets: is it safe to prolong use beyond 72 hours? Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. 2001;22(3):136-9. PubMed PMID: 11310690.
- Rickard CM, Lipman J, Courtney M, Siversen R, Daley P. Routine changing of intravenous administration sets does not reduce colonization or infection in central venous catheters. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. 2004;25(8):650-5. PubMed PMID: 15357156.
- Bouza E, Munoz P, Lopez-Rodriguez J, Jesus Perez M, Rincon C, Martin Rabadan P, et al. A needleless closed system device (CLAVE) protects from intravascular catheter tip and hub colonization: a prospective randomized study. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2003;54(4):279-87. PubMed PMID: 12919758.
- Casey AL, Burnell S, Whinn H, Worthington T, Faroqui MH, Elliott TSJ. A prospective clinical trial to evaluate the microbial barrier of a needleless connector. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2007;65(3):212-8. PubMed PMID: 17241691.
- Leon C, Alvarez-Lerma F, Ruiz-Santana S, Gonzalez V, de la Torre M-V, Sierra R, et al. Antiseptic chamber-containing hub reduces central venous catheter-related infection: a prospective, randomized study. Critical Care Medicine. 2003;31(5):1318-24. PubMed PMID: 12771597.
- Esteve F, Pujol M, Limon E, Saballs M, Argerich MJ, Verdaguer R, et al. Bloodstream infection related to catheter connections: a prospective trial of two connection systems. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2007;67(1):30-4. PubMed PMID: 17719682.
- Niel-Weise BS, Daha TJ, van den Broek PJ. Is there evidence for recommending needleless closed catheter access systems in guidelines? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2006;62(4):406-13. PubMed PMID: 16448719.
- Yebenes JC, Vidaur L, Serra-Prat M, Sirvent JM, Batlle J, Motje M, et al. Prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infection in critically ill patients using a disinfectable, needle-free connector: a randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Infection Control. 2004;32(5):291-5. PubMed PMID: 15292895.
- Schallom ME, Prentice D, Sona C, Micek ST, Skrupky LP. Heparin or 0.9% sodium chloride to maintain central venous catheter patency: a randomized trial. Critical Care Medicine. 2012;40(6):1820-6. PubMed PMID: 22488006.
- Bowers L, Speroni KG, Jones L, Atherton M. Comparison of occlusion rates by flushing solutions for peripherally inserted central catheters with positive pressure Luer-activated devices. Journal of Infusion Nursing. 2008;31(1):22-7. PubMed PMID: 18202556.
- de Neef M, Heijboer H, van Woensel JBM, de Haan RJ. The efficacy of heparinization in prolonging patency of arterial and central venous catheters in children: a randomized double-blind trial. Pediatric Hematology & Oncology. 2002;19(8):553-60. PubMed PMID: 12487830.
- Hermite L, Quenot J-P, Nadji A, Barbar SD, Charles P-E, Hamet M, et al. Sodium citrate versus saline catheter locks for non-tunneled hemodialysis central venous catheters in critically ill adults: a randomized controlled trial. Intensive Care Medicine. 2012;38(2):279-85. PubMed PMID: 22124771.
- Rabe C, Gramann T, Sons X, Berna M, Gonzalez-Carmona MA, Klehr H-U, et al. Keeping central venous lines open: a prospective comparison of heparin, vitamin C and sodium chloride sealing solutions in medical patients. Intensive Care Medicine. 2002;28(8):1172-6. PubMed PMID: 12185445.
- Hall KFM, Bennetts TM, Whitta RKS, Welman L, Rawlins P. Effect of heparin in arterial line flushing solutions on platelet count: a randomised double-blind study. Critical Care & Resuscitation. 2006;8(4):294-6. PubMed PMID: 17227264.
- Gabrail N, Sandler E, Charu V, Anas N, Lim E, Blaney M, et al. TROPICS 1: a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of tenecteplase for restoration of function in dysfunctional central venous catheters. Journal of Vascular & Interventional Radiology. 2010;21(12):1852-8. PubMed PMID: 21111365.
- Haire WD, Deitcher SR, Mullane KM, Jaff MR, Firszt CM, Schulz GA, et al. Recombinant urokinase for restoration of patency in occluded central venous access devices. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Thrombosis & Haemostasis. 2004;92(3):575-82. PubMed PMID: 15351854.
- Safdar N, Fine JP, Maki DG. Meta-analysis: methods for diagnosing intravascular device-related bloodstream infection. Ann Intern Med. 2005 Mar 15;142(6):451-66. PubMed PMID: 15767623. Epub 2005/03/16. eng.
- Care ACoSaQiH. Australian Guidelines for the Prevention and Control of Infection in Healthcare. In: Government A, editor. 2010.
- Larwood KA, Anstey CM, Dunn SV. Managing central venous catheters: a prospective randomised trial of two methods. Australian Critical Care. 2000;13(2):44-50. PubMed PMID: 11235451.
- Adams S, Barrett L, Brooks S, Dahler A, Jansens W, Shaw H. Central venous Access Devices: Principles for Nursing Practice and Education. Cancer Nurses Society of Australia. 2007.
- Hillier S, Grimmer-Somers K, Merlin T, Middleton P, Salisbury J, Tooher R, et al. FORM: an Australian method for formulating and grading recommendations in evidence-based clinical guidelines. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2011;11:23. PubMed PMID: 21356039.
- Marschall J, Mermel LA, Fakih M, Hadaway L, Kallen A, O’Grady NP, et al. Strategies to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections in acute care hospitals: 2014 update. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. 2014;35(S2):S89-S107.
The information on this page is general in nature and cannot reflect individual patient variation. It reflects Australian intensive care practice, which may differ from that in other countries. It is intended as a supplement to the more specific information provided by the doctors and nurses caring for your loved one. ICCMU attests to the accuracy of the information contained here but takes no responsibility for how it may apply to an individual patient. Please refer to the full disclaimer.