Little adherence to standardization found in ED infection prevention practices
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
According to data recently published in the American Journal of Infection Control, inconsistent adherence to standardization made it difficult for some published studies on ED infection prevention practices to be compared.
Eileen J. Carter, RN, BSN, of the Columbia University School of Nursing in New York, and colleagues performed a literature review to determine adherence rates in the ED for hand hygiene during routine patient care, aseptic technique during the placement of central venous catheters and urinary catheters, urinary catheter insertion guidelines and rates of equipment contamination. Twenty-three papers were included in the study.
“To our knowledge, this is one of the first literature reviews detailing adherence rates with common infection prevention practices in the ED setting,” Carter said in a press release. “While this review adds new information about infection prevention practices in the ED, there is clearly more to be learned, since EDs are a vital and important component of our health care system.”
Examined studies reporting hand hygiene rates recorded compliance ranging from 7.7% to 89.7%, but the use of multiple guidelines prevented meaningful comparisons between the studies. Seven studies examining central venous catheter insertions determined that video-based online training led to increased hygiene compliance.
Adherence to aseptic technique during catheter insertion ranged from 27% to 58%, but the wide variety of catheter insertion procedures included in these statistics made it difficult to compare results. Only one study of four examining urinary catheter insertions observed aseptic technique, whereas another reported that more than 30% of urinary catheters in the ED were unwarranted.
The researchers also discussed the low number of academic studies reporting ED practices and advocated for more standardized work to be done regarding ED infection prevention.
Disclosure: The researchers report no relevant financial disclosures.