The colonization rate of needleless connector and the impact of disinfection for 15 s on colonization: A prospective pre- and post-intervention study

Abstract

Purpose:

The optimal scrubbing time for the disinfection of the surface of needleless connectors has not been determined. The evidence for successful needleless connector decontamination with 70% isopropyl alcohol ranges from 5 to 60 s. The aim of this prospective study was to identify colonization on the external surface of needleless connectors on central venous catheters and measure the efficiency of 15 s of scrubbing with 70% alcohol.

Method:

A total of 31 patients were included. Samples were collected adhering to aseptic no-touch technique policies. Two samples were collected from the injectable surface of the needleless connector with sterile sodium chloride 0.9% moistened and a dry swab from the same site. Then the surface was scrubbed with alcohol 70% for 15 s for disinfection and second couples of samples for the cultures were taken after disinfection.

Findings:

A total of 420 swabs were obtained. The number of colonization (equal or higher than 15 CFU/plate) was present on 21 of the needleless connectors (20.0%). Coagulase-negative staphylococci was responsible for all the colonization. After disinfection for 15 s, no isolation exceeding 1 CFU/plate was present.

Conclusion:

Scrubbing for 15 s with 70% alcohol was found to be successful at elimination of colonization of the surface of needleless connector even in high microorganism counts.

Keywords

The colonization needleless connector disinfection pediatric intensive care unit

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Moureau

Flynn

Disinfection of needleless connector hubs: clinical evidence systematic review. Nurs Res Pract 2015; 2015: 796762.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Preventing needlestick injuries in health care settings, 2000, www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2000-108/pdfs/2000-108.pdf (accessed 17 June 2018).

Devrim

Oruç

Demirağ

, et al. Central line bundle for prevention of CLABSI for totally implantable venous access devices(ports) in pediatric cancer patients. J Vasc Access 2018; 19(4): 358–365.

Devrim

Yaşar

İşgüder

, et al. Clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of a central line bundle including split-septum and single-use prefilled flushing devices on central line-associated bloodstream infection rates in a pediatric intensive care unit. Am J Infect Control 2016; 44(8): e125–e128.

Blake

Catheter-related bloodstream infection rates in relation to clinical practice and needleless device type. Can J Infect Control 2008; 23(3): 156–162.

Slater

Cooke

Whitby

, et al. Microorganisms present on peripheral intravenous needleless connectors in the clinical environment. Am J Infect Control 2017; 45(8): 932–934.

Flynn

Slater

Cooke

, et al. Needleless connector decontamination: to use, or not to use, chlorhexidine? Am J Infect Control 2018; 46: 959–960.

CDC. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections, 2011, https://www.cdc.gov/hicpac/pdf/guidelines/bsi-guidelines-2011.pdf (accessed 27 February 2018).

Infusion Nurses Society. Infusion nursing standards of practice. J Infus Nurs 2016; 39(1, Suppl.): S1–S158.

10.

Loveday

Wilson

Pratt

, et al. Epic3: national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS hospitals in England. J Hosp Infect 2014; 86(Suppl.): S1–S70.

11.

Smith

Irwin

Viney

, et al. Optimal disinfection times for needleless intravenous connectors. J Assoc Vasc Access 2012; 17: 137–143.

12.

Kaler

Chinn

Successful disinfection of needleless access ports: a matter of time and friction. J Vasc Access 2007; 12: 140–147.

13.

Guembe

Pérez-Granda

Cruces

, et al. Cultures of needleless connectors are useful for ruling out central venous catheter colonization. J Clin Microbiol 2015; 53(7): 2068–2071.

14.

Moro

Vigano

Lepri

AC.

Risk factors for central venous catheter-related infections in surgical and intensive care units. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1994; 15(4 Pt 1): 253–264.

15.

Brismar

Jordahl

Nystrom

, et al. Bacterial contamination of intravenous line side ports of different designs. Clin Nutr 1987; 6(1): 31–33.

16.

Seymour

Dhallu

Moss

, et al. A prospective clinical study to investigate the microbial contamination of a needleless connector. J Hosp Infect 2000; 45(2): 165–168.

17.

Casey

Worthington

Lambert

, et al. A randomized, prospective clinical trial to assess the potential infection risk associated with the PosiFlow needleless connector. J Hosp Infect 2003; 54(4): 288–293.

18.

Sherertz

Karchmer

Palavecino

, et al. Blood drawn through valved catheter hub connectors carries a significant risk of contamination. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2011; 30(12): 1571–1577.

19.

Sitges-Serra

Puig

Linares

, et al. Hub colonization as the initial step in an outbreak of catheter-related sepsis due to Coagulase negative staphylococci during parenteral nutrition. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1984; 8(6): 668–672.

20.

Rupp

Huerta

, et al. Adequate disinfection of a split-septum needleless intravascular connector with a 5-second alcohol scrub. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012; 33(7): 661–665.

21.

Simmons

Bryson

Porter

“Scrub the hub”: cleaning duration and reduction in bacterial load on central venous catheters. Crit Care Nurs Quarter 2011; 34(1): 31–35.

22.

Karchmer

Cook

Palavecino

, et al. Needleless valve ports may be associated with a high rate of catheter-related bloodstream infection. In: Proceedings of the 15th annual scientific meeting of the society for healthcare epidemiology of America, Los Angeles, CA, 9–12 April 2005. Alexandria, VA: Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America.