Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-wdhn8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-15T14:04:16.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Improving the Central Line—Associated Bloodstream Infection Surveillance Definition: A Work in Progress

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

James P. Steinberg*
Affiliation:
Emory University Hospital Midtown, Atlanta, Georgia
Susan E. Coffin
Affiliation:
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
*
Emory University Hospital Midtown, Medical Office Tower, 5th Floor, 550 Peachtree Street NE, Atlanta, GA 30308 (jstei02@emory.edu)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2013

References

1.Rhame, FS. Surveillance objectives: descriptive epidemiology. Infect Control 1987;8:454458.Google Scholar
2.Fraser, TG, Gordon, SM. CLABSI rates in immunocompromised patients: a valuable patient centered outcome? Clin Infect Dis 2011;52(12):14461450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Sexton, DJ, Chen, LF, Anderson, DJ. Current definitions of central line-associated bloodstream infection: is the emperor wearing clothes? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31(12):12861289.Google Scholar
4.See, I, Iwamoto, M, Allen-Bridson, K, Horan, T, Magill, SS, Thompson, ND. Mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection: results from a field test of a new National Healthcare Safety Network definition. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013;34(8):769776 (in this issue).Google Scholar
5.Steinberg, JP, Robichaux, C, Tejedor, SC, Reyes, MD, Jacob, JT. Distribution of pathogens in central line-associated bloodstream infections among patients with and without neutropenia following chemotherapy: evidence for a proposed modification to the current surveillance definition. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013;34(2):171175.Google Scholar
6.Srinivasan, A, Wise, M, Bell, M, et al.Vital signs: central line–associated blood stream infections—United States, 2001, 2008, and 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2011;60:243248.Google Scholar
7.Gaur, AH, Bundy, DG, Gao, C, et al.Surveillance of hospital-acquired central line-associated bloodstream infections in pediatric hematology-oncology patients: lessons learned, challenges ahead. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013;34(3):316320.Google Scholar
8.Rettig, SL, Gross, KA, Ditaranto, S, et al.Central line-associated bloodstream infections in oncology patients: the impact of mucositis on CLABSI rates. Presented at: 20th Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America; Dallas, TX; April 1-4, 2011.Google Scholar
9.Mayer, J, Greene, T, Howell, J, et al.Agreement in classifying bloodstream infections among multiple reviewers conducting surveillance. Clin Infect Dis 2012;55:364370.Google Scholar
10.Lin, MY, Hota, B, Khan, YM, et al.Quality of traditional surveillance for public reporting of nosocomial bloodstream infection rates. JAMA 2010;304:20352041.Google Scholar
11.Aslakson, RA, Romig, M, Galvagno, SM, et al.Effect of accounting for multiple concurrent catheters on central line-associated bloodstream infection rates: practical data supporting a theoretical concern. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011;32:121124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Sexton, DJ, Chen, LF, Moehring, R, Thacker, PA, Anderson, DJ. Casablanca redux: we are shocked that public reporting of rates of central line-associated bloodstream infections are inaccurate. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:932935.Google Scholar