MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400347373 · doi:10.1097/nan.0000000000000553

Implementing a 4% EDTA Central Catheter Locking Solution as a Quality Improvement Project in a Large Canadian Hospital

2024· article· en· W4400347373 on OpenAlexaffabout
Leanne Tremain, Ari Collerman, Prathiba Harsha, Kwadjo Ntow, Cheryl Main, Janell Wohlgemut, Mark Brown, Ted Scott, Tim Dietrich

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Infusion Nursing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCentral lineEmergency medicinePsychological interventionCatheterInfection controlEconomic shortagePandemicIntensive care medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SurgeryNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oncology and critical care patients often require central vascular access devices (CVADs), which can make them prone to central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and thrombotic occlusions. According to the literature, CLABSIs are rampant and increased by 63% during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the need for innovative interventions. Four percent ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (4% EDTA) is an antimicrobial locking solution that reduces CLABSIs, thrombotic occlusions, and biofilm. This retrospective pre-post quality improvement project determined if 4% EDTA could improve patient safety by decreasing CLABSIs and central catheter occlusions. This was implemented in all adult cancer and critical care units at a regional cancer hospital and center. Before implementing 4% EDTA, there were 36 CLABSI cases in 16 months (27 annualized). After implementation, there were 6 cases in 6 months (12 annualized), showing a statistically significant decrease of 59% in CLABSIs per 1000 catheter days. However, there was no significant difference in occlusions (alteplase use). Eighty-eight percent of patients had either a positive or neutral outlook, while most nurses reported needing 4% EDTA to be available in prefilled syringes. The pandemic and nursing shortages may have influenced the results; hence, randomized controlled trials are needed to establish a causal relationship between 4% EDTA and CLABSIs and occlusions.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.372 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Infusion NursingSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207