Catheter infection: A comparison of two catheter maintenance techniques

R. H. Snyder, F. J. Archer, T. Endy, Thomas Allen, B. Condon, J. Kaiser, D. Whatmore, G. Harrington, C. J. McDermott

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

52 Scopus citations

Abstract

Incidence of catheter-related infections was studied using two techniques: changing catheters over a guide-wire or placing a new catheter at a new site every 3 days. Patients were randomized into two groups: Group 1 (new site) and Group 2 (guide-wire). Of the 105 catheterization sites (20 arterial and 85 central lines) in patients of Group 1, none were considered infected (i.e., having 15 or more colonies at the time of semi-quantitative microbiology analysis and clinical signs of infection at the catheter site). Of the 274 catheterization sites (56 arterial and 218 central) of patients of Group 2, eight (2.9%) were infected (χ2 = 1.89, p > 0.05). Colonization (15 or more cultures without clinical signs of infection) occurred in three of 105 (2.9%) and in four of 274 (1.5%) of the catetherization sites of Groups 1 and 2, respectively (χ2 = 0.23, p > 0.05). Study results indicate no significant difference in infection or colonization rates between the two methods of catheter replacement.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)651-653
Number of pages3
JournalAnnals of surgery
Volume208
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1988

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Catheter infection: A comparison of two catheter maintenance techniques'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Snyder, R. H., Archer, F. J., Endy, T., Allen, T., Condon, B., Kaiser, J., Whatmore, D., Harrington, G., & McDermott, C. J. (1988). Catheter infection: A comparison of two catheter maintenance techniques. Annals of surgery, 208(5), 651-653. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-198811000-00018