Dressing: Frequency of Change and Evaluation of an Antiseptic-Impregnated Catheter Dressing in ICU Patients

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

1600 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2007-01-31

Study Completion Date

2008-06-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether a catheter dressing every 7th day is not inferior to a catheter dressing every 3 days and if Chlorhexidine impregnated sponges are effective in preventing catheter-related infections in ICUs.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Comparison of Chlorhexidine Impregnated Dressing and Standard Dressing

NCT04794231

Catheter-Related Infections

COMPLETED NA

Impact of Infusion Line Change Frequency on Infectious Complications Related to Central Venous Catheters in the ICU - A Randomized Controlled Trial

NCT07183592

Intensive Care (ICU) Central Venous Catheter Related Infections Critical Care Nursing +2 more

NOT_YET_RECRUITING NA

Impact of Daily Bathing With Chlorhexidine in the Critical Patient

NCT02870062

Healthcare Associated Infections

UNKNOWN PHASE1

Effectiveness of Chlorhexidine Wipe for Prevention of Multidrug-resistant Organisms in Intensive Care Unit Patients

NCT01989416

Antibiotic Resistant Infection

COMPLETED PHASE3

Frequence of Dressing Change and Bacterial Colonization in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

NCT04806776

Bacterial Infections

COMPLETED NA

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Central venous catheters (CVCs) are often required for the care of patient admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), and are now indispensable in modern-day medical practice. In the United States, it is estimated that 15 million CVC days occur each year in the ICU , and that approximately 80,000 CVC-associated bloodstream infection (BSIs) occur each year \[2\]. Data from the NNIS system indicate that approximately 40% of the BSIs are associated with a CVC in the ICU. This definition, however, include CVC-related BSIs (CRBSIs) and primary BSIs. In other multicenter surveys, primary BSIs are the leading cause of BSIs (30-35%), followed by CRBSIs (20-30%), and BSIs originating from pneumonia (20%) .

The attributable mortality of CRBSIs remains debated. It ranges from no increase in mortality in some studies, up to an attributable mortality of 35% in others. In studies adjusting for severity of illness, attributable mortality ranged between 0 and 11.5%. The excess ICU length of stay is estimated 9-12 days.

The cost of CRBSIs is therefore substantial, and efforts are required to reduce the incidence of theses infections. Several publications suggested that multiple strategies should be implemented concomitantly. Besides the critical importance of staff education, technology brings new materials that could decrease the risk for CRBSI. Several studies have demonstrated that antimicrobial- or antiseptic-impregnated CVCs can decrease CRBSIs in the ICU setting. Furthermore, cost-benefit analysis have suggested that the use of impregnated CVCs was beneficial

The recent CDC Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections recommend the use of antimicrobial- or antiseptic-impregnated CVCs in patients whose CVC is expected to remain in place for more than 5 days, and in ICUs where CRBSI rate remains above the benchmark rates, despite implementing a comprehensive strategy. This restricted recommended use is explained by the concern for emergence of resistance, the risk of adverse effects and the costs of these materials.

CRBSI rates in France could be lower than those observed in the United States. Data from two surveillance networks indicate that the rates of CRBSI range between 1 and 2 CRBSI per 1000 CVC days . Given these low rates, it is not clear that antimicrobial- or antiseptic-impregnated CVCs would be cost-effective.

Since most organisms responsible for CRBSI originate from insertion site in short-term CVC, there was a rationale to try to decrease bacterial colonization at cutaneous insertion site. Among the other new materials under development, a chlorhexidine-impregnated sponge (Biopatch TM), to be placed over the site of catheter insertion, has been proposed. In a prospective, controlled, bicenter, randomized, non blinded study, dressing changes every other day (control group) was compared to dressing changes every 7 days with Biopatch (Biopatch group) (Maki and al., ICAAC 2000). 1,401 lines (either CVCs, peripheral arterial catheters or pulmonary artery catheters) were included in 589 patients. Both groups of patients were comparable. Using proportional hazard models, both CVC colonization and CRBSI were significantly reduced in the Biopatch group, from 29% to 16% (HR, 0.62) for catheter colonization, and from 3.3% to 1.2% (HR, 0.38) for CRBSI.

This study demonstrated a significant reduction of CRBSI using Biopatch. Given the results presented at the ICAAC sessions, there is some concern, however, about the validity of the protective effect of the Biopatch.

Firstly, the intervention group associated Biopatch and the extension of the time between dressing changes, from 2 to 7 days. Preliminary data from cancer patients suggest that time between dressing changes could be extended. In a randomized study, Benhamou et al have recently compared a 4-day to a 15-day catheter-dressing change frequency in children undergoing chemotherapy. They have shown that skin cultures (27 vs 23%) and bloodstream infections (11 vs 13%) rates are not different between the 4-day and the 15-day groups. It is therefore unclear that the reduction of CRBSI observed in the Biopatch group was only due to the Biopatch.

Secondly, the control group in the Maki's study did not use a "placebo", i.e. a sponge not impregnated with chlorhexidine. The study was therefore not blinded for the ICU staff. It is strongly recommended to examine the catheter insertion site daily for local inflammatory signs. Biopatch impede to monitor the insertion site, with a potential for underestimation of local infections signs in these patients. It is possible that daily examination of the insertion site in the control group would conduct to remove the CVC more frequently in these patients, with a potential for higher rate of colonization. In addition, if a study is not blinded, it is useful for the validity of the results that a group of investigators, blinded to the randomized group, review the medical chart to classify catheter infection.

Thirdly, the rate if CRBSI was rather high in the control group (4.45 per 1000 line days). It is not certain that the benefit of Biopatch will be the same in ICUs with lower rates of CRBSI.

The aim of this study is therefore to evaluate the impact of Biopatch, and the impact of dressing changes (every 3 or 7 days) on the reduction of CVC infection

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Bacteremia

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

FACTORIAL

Primary Study Purpose

PREVENTION

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

3-days dressing frequency/CHX sponge

Interventions:

Device: 'Chlorhexidine Sponge (Biopatch TM)' on the insertion site

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Chlorhexidine Sponge (Biopatch TM)

Intervention Type DEVICE

dressing with chlorexidrine sponge versus dressing without chlorexidrine sponge

7-days dressing frequency/CHX sponge

Interventions:

Behavioural: 7-day catheter dressing frequency Device: 'Chlorhexidine Sponge (Biopatch TM)' on the insertion site

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Chlorhexidine Sponge (Biopatch TM)

Intervention Type DEVICE

dressing with chlorexidrine sponge versus dressing without chlorexidrine sponge

7-day catheter dressing frequency

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

dressing changes every 7 days versus every classical change every 3 days

3-days dressing frequency/No CHX sponge

No intervention, classical protocol of dressing frequency every 3-days and no other device

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

7-days dressing change/No CHX sponge

Interventions:Behavioural: 7-day catheter dressing frequency

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

7-day catheter dressing frequency

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

dressing changes every 7 days versus every classical change every 3 days

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Chlorhexidine Sponge (Biopatch TM)

dressing with chlorexidrine sponge versus dressing without chlorexidrine sponge

Intervention Type DEVICE

7-day catheter dressing frequency

dressing changes every 7 days versus every classical change every 3 days

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* patients older than 18 years
* with at least a central venous catheter or an arterial catheter
* whatever the first or subsequent CVC in a same patient
* in any site of insertion (sub-clavian, jugular or femoral)
* whatever le CVC is tunnelled or not
* CVC inserted in the study ICU or immediately before by the intensisvist in the emergency unit or in the operative room,
* CVC inserted under maximal barrier precautions

Exclusion Criteria

* pulmonary artery catheter, haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration CVCs
* known allergy to chlorhexidine
* CVC not inserted under maximal barrier precautions
* Expected duration of CVC for less than 48 hours
* CVC inserted under emergency conditions

Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No