MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012608141 · doi:10.1186/s40814-020-0564-9

Chlorhexidine locking device for central line infection prevention in ICU patients: protocol for an open-label pilot and feasibility randomized controlled trial

2020· article· en· W3012608141 on OpenAlexaff
Nasim Zamir, Makena Pook, Ellen McDonald, Alison Fox‐Robichaud

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsChlorhexidineMedicineRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)Open labelInfection controlAnesthesiaIntensive care medicineSurgeryDentistryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) are at risk for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) with an incidence up to 6.9 per 1000 catheter days. CLABSI has a significant attributable mortality and increases in-hospital length of stay, readmissions, and costs. Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG), a broad-spectrum biocide, has been shown to effectively reduce infections including CLABSI; however, few trials have utilized CHG for prevention of central line infections. Our preclinical work has demonstrated a device that diffuses CHG into the intravenous lock solution of central venous catheters and decreases bacterial growth on the catheter lumen. We designed a clinical trial to test the feasibility of using a CHG device in an ICU patient population. METHODS: The proposed pilot trial will be a single centre, open-label, two-arm, parallel group feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT). Participants will have a central line in situ and will be enrolled within 72 h of admittance to 3 ICUs at a single academic hospital. Exclusion criteria will include suspected infection, chronic indwelling catheters, and CHG allergy. Informed consent will be obtained from eligible participants or their substitute decision maker prior to randomization. Participants will be randomized to receive either usual care or the CHG locking device. Blood cultures will be drawn from all participants every 48 h. The primary objective of this study will be to determine the feasibility of using this protocol to conduct a larger trial. Feasibility will be assessed through the following outcomes: (1) consent rate, (2) recruitment rate, (3) protocol adherence, and (4) comfort level with the device. The secondary objective of this study will be to establish the preliminary efficacy of the device. DISCUSSION: This study will be the first human RCT to investigate a CHG locking device for the prevention of central line infections. Findings from this trial will inform the feasibility of conducting a large RCT and provide preliminary data on the efficacy of a CHG locking device. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03309137, registered on October 13, 2017.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.011

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.480
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.042 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePilot and Feasibility StudiesSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207