A Novel “Inocap” Method for Homogeneous Catheter Hubs Bacterial Inoculation Using a Combination of Male Luer Caps and O-rings.

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Sep 20, 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31524/10.31524/bkkmedj.2018.09.006
Keywords:
Bacteria inoculation model, disinfection, catheter related bloodstream infections, intraluminal infection, catheter hubs, contamination

Main Article Content

William W. Tang
Benyarat Wiriyanithinon
Nathan S. Kim
Chanond Sophonpanich
Tanant Waritanant

Abstract

Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) pose significant health risks and financial consequences for healthcare systems worldwide. In order to develop novel antiseptic technologies as alternative prophylactics for CRBSIs, a consistent and reproducible bacterial inoculation method is required for testing the technologies’ antiseptic effects. This study developed and investigated a new “Inocap” model for standardized bacteria inoculation on to surfaces of catheter hubs that is exposed and highly susceptible to contamination in healthcare settings. The results showed a significantly smaller variance in the number of bacteria inoculated onto the catheter hubs by the new Inocap method than the traditional dip method (p ≈ 0.02) while producing no significant difference in the mean value (p > 0.25), indicating that this new Inocap method could work as a more precise inoculation model for future disinfection studies.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Tang WW, Wiriyanithinon B, Kim NS, Sophonpanich C, Waritanant T. A Novel “Inocap” Method for Homogeneous Catheter Hubs Bacterial Inoculation Using a Combination of Male Luer Caps and O-rings. BKK Med J [Internet]. 2018 Sep. 20 [cited 2024 Nov. 22];14(2):28. Available from: https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/bkkmedj/article/view/222528
Issue
Vol. 14 No. 2 (2018): September
Section
Original Article

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

References

1. Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MA. CDC/NHSN surveillance definitions of health care-associated infections and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control 2008;36(5):309–32.
2. Shah H, Bosch W, Thompson KM, et al. Intravascular catheter-related bloodstream infection. Neurohospitalist 2013;3(3):144–51.
3. Beekmann SE, Henderson DK. Infections Caused by Percutaneous Intravascular Devices, Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett’s Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases, Elsevier, 2010; 3697-715.
4. Mermel LA. What is the evidence for intraluminal colonization of hemodialysis catheters? Kidney Int 2014; 86(1):28-33.
5. Safdar N, O’Horo JC, Maki DG. Arterial catheter-related bloodstream infection: incidence, pathogenesis, risk factors and prevention. J Hosp Infect 2013;85(3):189–95.
6. Han Z, Liang SY, Marschall J. Current strategies for the prevention and management of central line-associated bloodstream infections. Infect Drug Resist 2010;3:147–63.
7. Pronovost P, Needham D, Berenholtz S, et al. An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med 2006;355(26):2725–32.
8. Raad I, Hanna H, Maki D. Intravascular catheter-related infections: advances in diagnosis, prevention, and management. Lancet Infect Dis 2007;7(10):645–57.
9. Voor In ‘t Holt AF, Helder OK, Vos MC, et al. Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and metaanalysis. Int J Nurs Stud 2017;69:34–40.
10. Ista E, Van Der Hoven B, Kornelisse RF, et al. Effectiveness of insertion and maintenance bundles to prevent centralline- associated bloodstream infections in critically ill patients of all ages: a systematic review and meta-analysis, Lancet Infect Dis 2016; 16(6):724–34.
11. Helder OK, Kornelisse RF, Reiss IKM, et al. Disinfection practices in intravenous drug administration. Am J Infect Control 2016;44(6):721–3.
12. Casey AL, Karpanen TJ, Nightingale P, et al. An in vitro comparison of standard cleaning to a continuous passive disinfection cap for the decontamination of needle-free connectors. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2018;7(1):50.
13. Casey A, Karpanen T, Nightingale P, et al. An in vitro comparison of microbial ingress into 8 different needleless IV access devices. J Infuse Nurs 2015; 38(1):18–25.
14. Menyhay SZ, Maki DG. Preventing central venous catheterassociated bloodstream infections: Development of an antiseptic barrier cap for needleless connectors. Am J Infect Control 2008;36(10): S174.e1–S174.e5.
15. Hong H, Morrow DF, Sandora TJ, et al. Disinfection of needleless connectors with chlorhexidine-alcohol provides long-lasting residual disinfectant activity. Am J Infect Control 2013;41(8):e77–9.
16. Mazher MA, Kallen A, Edwards JR, et al. An in vitro evaluation of disinfection protocols used for needleless connectors of central venous catheters. Lett Appl Microbiol 2013;57(4):282–7.
17. Kragh KN, Alhede M, Rybtke M, et al. The inoculation method could impact the outcome of microbiological experiments. Appl Environ Microbiol 2017;84(5):e02264–17.
18.  Esposito S, Purrello SM, Bonnet E, et al. Central venous catheter-related biofilm infections: An up-to-date focus on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Glob Antimicrob Resist 2013;1(2):71–8.
19. Finnegan S, Percival SL. EDTA: An antimicrobial and antibiofilm agent for use in wound Care. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) 2015;4(7):415–21.
20. Boyce J, Pittet D. Guideline for hand hygiene in health-care settings: recommendations of the healthcare infection control practices advisory committee and the HICPAC/ SHEA/APIC/ IDSA hand hygiene Task Force. MMWR, 2002;51(16):14-7.