Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
2. Bennett DS, Walsh KA, Gould H. Foodborne disease outbreaks caused by Bacillus cereus, Clostridium perfringens, and Staphylococcus aureus— United States, 1998–2008. Clinical Infect Dis 2013;57:425.
3. Watkins RR. Gastrointestinal infections in the setting of natural disasters. Curr Infect Dis Rep 2012;14:47–52.
4. Yee EL, Palacio H, Atmar RL, et al. Widespread outbreak of norovirus gastroenteritis among evacuees of Hurricane Katrina residing in a large “megashelter” in Houston, Texas: lessons learned for prevention. Clin Infect Dis 2007;44:1032–1039.
5. Kadariya J, Smith TC, Thapaliya D. Staphylococcus aureus and staphylococcal food-borne disease: an ongoing challenge in public health. BioMed Res Int 2014;article ID 827965:1–9.
6. Pillsbury A, Chiew M, Bates J, Sheppeard V. An outbreak of staphylococcal food poisoning in a commercially catered buffet. Commun Dis Intel Q Rep 2013;37:E144–E148.
Laterality of a short-term peripheral intravenous catheter does not affect complications or patient satisfaction: a subanalysis of the One Million Global Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Study
Rami Sommerstein MD, Lisa Kottanattu MD and Jonas Marschall MD, MSc Department of Infectious Diseases, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
To the Editor—The One Million Global Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Study (OMGPIVC) was the largest prevalence study to date on the use and management of short-term peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC) in adult and pediatric inpatients from 49 countries.1 The authors found that many PIVCs were placed in areas of flexion, were symptomatic or idle, had suboptimal dressings, or lacked ade- quate documentation, which suggested an inconsistency between recommendations in PIVC management and current practice.1 Although few data are available on the effect of laterality on (peripherally inserted) central venous catheters,2–4 information is completely lacking for PIVCs. Thus, we supplemented the data from the 302 PIVCs our center contributed to the OMG PIVC study with additional variables on PIVC laterality and patient handedness. All other variables were collected as described in detail in the OMG PIVC study.1 Our aim was to correlate the laterality of PIVCs placed in the
upper extremity with the outcome rates of complications and patient satisfaction. We included 291 of 302 PIVCs (96.4%) that were inserted at the upper extremity and where information on laterality was available. Characteristics such as handedness, bed days at the time of data collection (April 15, 2015) and PIVC insertion position at the upper extremity (wrist and/or hand versus forearm and/or elbow) did not differ significantly depending on the laterality of the PIVC (Table 1). Also, PIVC outcomes and patient satisfaction did not depend on PIVC laterality (Table 1). Based on this, we conclude that laterality
Author for correspondence: Rami Sommerstein, Infectious Diseases/Hospital Epi-
demiology, Freiburgstrasse, 3010 Bern, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland. E-mail:
rami.sommerstein@
insel.ch
Cite this article: Sommerstein R, et al. (2019). Laterality of a short-term peripheral
intravenous catheter does not affect complications or patient satisfaction: a subanalysis of the One Million Global Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Study. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology 2019, 40, 117–118. doi: 10.1017/ice.2018.291
© 2018 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved.
should not influence the decision regarding where to insert a PIVC at the upper extremity.
Acknowledgments. We acknowledge the One Million Global Peripheral Intravenous Catheter (OMG PIVC) study team for the original concept and study design (Evan Alexandrou, Gillian Ray-Barruel, Niall Higgins, Steven Frost, Peter Carr, Sheila Inwood, Frances Lin, Leonard Mermel and Claire Rickard). Also, we thank the infection prevention team at BernUniversity Hospital for data collection.
Financial support. No financial support was provided relevant to this article.
Conflicts of interest. All authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.
References 1. Alexandrou E, Ray-Barruel G, Carr PJ, Frost SA, et al. Use of short peripheral intravenous catheters: characteristics, management, and out- comes worldwide. J Hosp Med 2018. doi: 10.12788/jhm.3039.
2. Engstrom BI, Horvath JJ, Stewart JK, et al.Tunneled internal jugular
hemodialysis catheters: impact of laterality and tip position on catheter dysfunction and infection rates. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013;24:1295–1302.
3. Sperry BW, Roskos M, Oskoui R. The effect of laterality on venous thromboembolism formation after peripherally inserted central catheter placement. J Vasc Access 2012;13:91–95.
4. Paquet F, Boucher LM, Valenti D, Lindsay R. Impact of arm selection on the incidence of PICC complications: results of a randomized controlled trial. J Vasc Access 2017;18:408–414.
117
7. Hennekinne JA, De Buyser M-L, Dragacci S. Staphylococcus aureus and its food poisoning toxins: characterization and outbreak investigation. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2012;36:815–836.
8. Ercoli L, Gallina S, Nia Y, et al. Investigation of a staphylococcal food poisoning outbreak from a chantilly cream dessert, in Umbria (Italy). Foodborne Path Dis 2017;14:407–413.
9. Elward A, Grim A, Schroeder P, et al. Outbreak of Salmonella javiana infection at a children’s hospital. Infect Contol Hosp Epidemiol 2006;27:586–592.
10. Bloom MS, Palumbo J, Saiyed N, Lauper U, Lin S. Food and waterborne disease in the greater New York City area following Hurricane Sandy in 2012. Disaster Med Public Health Prepare 2016;10:503–511.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136
