3.9 Article Proceedings Paper

Increased resource use associated with catheter-related bloodstream infection in the surgical intensive care unit

Journal

ARCHIVES OF SURGERY
Volume 136, Issue 2, Pages 229-234

Publisher

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.136.2.229

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hypothesis: Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) in critically ill surgical patients with prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stays is associated with a significant increase in health care resource use. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Surgical ICU at a large tertiary care center. Patients: Critically ill surgical patients (N=260) with projected surgical ICU length of stay greater than 3 days. Interventions: Central venous catheters were cultured for clinical suspicion of infection. Main Outcome Measures: Increases in total hospital cost, ICU cost, hospital days, and ICU days attributable to CRBSI were estimated using multiple linear regression after adjusting for demographic factors and severity of illness (APACHE III [Apache Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III] score). Results: The incidence of CRBSI per 1000 catheter-days was 3.6 episodes (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-5.8 episodes). Microbiologic isolates were Grampositive bacteria in 75%, Gram-negative bacteria in 20%, and yeast in 5%. After adjusting for demographic factors and severity of disease, CRBSI was associated with an increase of $56167 (95% CI, $11523-$165735; P=.001) (in 1998 dollars) in total hospital cost, an increase of $71443 (95% CI, $11960-$195628; P<.001) in ICU cost, a 22-day increase in hospital length of stay, and a 20-day increase in ICU length of stay. Conclusions: For critically ill surgical patients, CRBSI is associated with a profound increase in resource use. Prevention, early diagnosis, and intervention for CRBSI might result in cost savings in this high-risk population.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available