Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-09T05:34:14.527Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Povidone-Iodine Ointment and Gauze Dressings Associated With Reduced Catheter-Related Infection in Seriously Ill Neurosurgical Patients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Atsushi Fukunaga ,
Heiji Naritaka ,
Raita Fukaya ,
Masanao Tabuse  and
Tsuneo Nakamura
Atsushi Fukunaga*
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, Saiseikai Kanagawaken Hospital, Yokohama City, Kanagawa, Japan
Heiji Naritaka
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, Saiseikai Kanagawaken Hospital, Yokohama City, Kanagawa, Japan
Raita Fukaya
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, Saiseikai Kanagawaken Hospital, Yokohama City, Kanagawa, Japan
Masanao Tabuse
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, Saiseikai Kanagawaken Hospital, Yokohama City, Kanagawa, Japan
Tsuneo Nakamura
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, Saiseikai Kanagawaken Hospital, Yokohama City, Kanagawa, Japan
*
Department of Neurosurgery, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 160-8582, Japan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstbact

Povidone-iodine ointment and gauze covered by transparent dressings were compared with transparent dressings alone in historical controls (both changed twice weekly) in neurosurgical patients needing catheter placement for prolonged periods. Colonization and bloodstream infection were both reduced with the new method (P<.01 and P= .062, respectively).

Type
Concise Communication
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 25 , Issue 8 , August 2004 , pp. 696 - 698
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Pearson, ML. Guideline for prevention of intravascular device-related infections: Part I. Intravascular device-related infections. An overview. Am J Infect Control 1996;24:262–277.Google Scholar
2.Brun-Buisson, C, Abrouk, F, Legran, P, Huet, Y, Larabi, S, Rapin, M. Diagnosis of central venous catheter-related sepsis: critical level of quantitative tip cultures. Arch Intern Med 1987;147:873–877.Google Scholar
3.Dettenkofer, M, Ebner, W, Hans, FJ, et al.Nosocomial infections in a neurosurgery intensive care unit. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1999;141:1303–1308.Google Scholar
4.Mizushima, Y, Daimon, Y, Oota, T, et al.An analysis of intravenous hyperalimentation (IVH) catheter-related infection in a university hospital in Japan over a ten year period (1982-1991). In Vivo 1993;7:441–446.Google Scholar
5.Maki, DG, Weise, CE, Sarafin, HW. A semiquantitative culture method for identifying intravenous catheter-related infection. N Engl J Med 1977;296:1305–1309.Google Scholar
6.Levin, A, Mason, AJ, Jindal, KK, Fong, IW, Goldstein, MB. Prevention of hemodialysis subclavian vein catheter infections by topical povidone-iodine. Kidney Int 1991;40:934–938.Google Scholar
7.Maki, DG, Ringer, M. Evaluation of dressing regimens for prevention of infection with peripheral intravenous catheters: gauze, a transparent polyurethane dressing, and an iodophor-transparent dressing. JAMA 1987;258:2396–2403.Google Scholar
8.Mermel, LA. Prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Ann Intern Med 2000;132:391–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Merrer, J, Jonghe, BD, Golliot, F, et al.Complications of femoral and subclavian venous catheterization in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2001;286:700–707.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed