Clinical Impacts and Risk Factors for Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection: A Systematic Review
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background A central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) is defined as a primary bloodstream infection (BSI) in a patient that had a central line within the 48-hour period before the development of the BSI and is not bloodstream-related to an infection at another site. CLABSI is a common healthcare-associated infection and a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Methods This systematic review included studies published within the past 13 years that examined risk factors and clinical impact variables associated with CLABSI, using the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)/National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) criteria for defining catheter-associated infection, and included participants of all ages. The terms "CLABSI," "central line-associated bloodstream infection," "risk factors," "predictors," "morbidity," "mortality," "healthcare costs," and "length of hospital stay" were used to find relevant publications on PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, and Science Direct. The quality assessment of the included publications utilized the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for observational studies. Results After the full-text screening, we identified 15 articles that met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. The majority of these studies were of good quality and had a low risk of bias based on our bias assessment. The studies included a total of 32,198 participants and covered a time period from 2010 to 2023. The mean age of the male patients included in the studies ranged from 0.1 months to 69.1 years. All of the included studies were either observational cohort studies, cross sectional studies, case-control studies, or case reports. The major study parameters/outcomes extracted were risk factors, CLABSI-associated mortality, hospital cost, length of hospital stay, and catheter days. With respect to predisposing factors, multilumen access catheters were identified as risk factors in three studies, use of more than one central venous catheter per case in four studies, hematologic malignancy in three studies, catheterization duration in four studies, surgical complexity in four studies, length of ICU stays in three studies, and parenteral nutrition in two studies. Conclusion The decision to place a venous device should be carefully considered by evaluating individual risk factors for the development of CLABSI. This is important due to the potential for severe clinical consequences and significant healthcare expenses associated with this complication.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle