Impact of needleless connectors in the bloodstream infection: a systematic review

Esta revisão sistemática buscou evidenciar o impacto do uso de conectores sem agulhas para sistema fechado de infusão na ocorrência de infecção da corrente sanguínea relacionada ao cateter venoso central. A amostra constitui-se de 14 estudos, os quais investigaram somente conectores sem agulhas. A infecção da corrente sanguínea relacionada ao cateter venoso central foi o desfecho de nove estudos. Seis apresentaram diferenças a favor do conector valvulado; quatro a favor do conector puncionável com cânula; um a favor do conector puncionável com agulha; um a favor do conector valvulado com pressão positiva e dois a favor do dispositivo usado antes da troca. A heterogeneidade dos estudos não permitiu a realização de metanálise.Esta revisión sistemática buscó evidenciar el impacto del uso de conectores sin agujas para sistemas cerrados de infusión en el caso de ocurrir una infección en la corriente sanguínea relacionada al catéter venoso central. La muestra fue constituida de 14 estudios, los cuales investigaron solamente conectores sin agujas. La infección de la corriente sanguínea relacionada al catéter venoso central fue el resultado de nueve estudios. Seis presentaron diferencias a favor del conector de válvula; cuatro a favor del conector para punción con cánula; uno a favor del conector para punción con aguja; uno a favor do conector de válvula con presión positiva y dos a favor del dispositivo usado antes del cambio. La heterogeneidad de los estudios no permitió la realización de una meta-análisis.This systematic review was intended to evaluate the impact of using needleless connectors in closed infusion systems in the event of a bloodstream infection related to central venous catheter. The sample consisted of 14 studies, which investigated only needleless connectors. The bloodstream infection related to central venous catheter was the result of nine studies. Six produced evidence in favor of the valve connector, four in favor of the cannula connector for puncturing, one in favor of needle connector, one in favor of positive pressure valve connector, and two in favor of the device used before the change. The heterogeneity of the studies did not allow the realization of a meta-analysis

PRINCIPAIS FATORES DE RISCO PARA INFECÇÃO DO TRATO URINÁRIO (ITU) EM PACIENTES HOSPITALIZADOS: PROPOSTA DE MELHORIAS

Cross-sectional, retrospective, exploratory study. The objective of this study is to identify the main risk factors for the presence of urinary tract infection (UTI) and to elaborate a proposal of improvements for its prevention. The patient mix consists of all the patients with nosocomial UTI notified between April 2003 and July 2005. A total of 114 of UTI cases were assessed in that period, related or not with long duration vesical catheterization. The main described risk factors were: A percentage of 60.5% of females, 78% with morbidity that presupposes UTI, 73% older than 61 years, 59% of both cases in intensive therapy, 83% used long duration vesical catheterization (33% using it for 16 to 30 days and 25% more than 31 days), 76% used swaddling, 68% had previously taken antibiotics. At the moment of the UTI, the average time of hospitalization had been 20 days. According to the initial sector of long duration vesical catheterization, 24% were registered in a Surgical Center (SC) and 66% in hospitalization and intensive therapy units. In this study the nosocomial UTI notified were found to be related to the main referred risk factors in the scientific literature, without unexpected factors appearing. It was possible to make an improvement proposal in relation to the discovered cases: Patient sensitization in order to assess the necessity of catheter use after the 7th day of its use to remove o change a silicone vesical catheter; protocol creation to use a silicone vesical catheter; institutional campaign to reduce the time of a long duration vesical catheterization by 10%; SC staff reorientation.Estudio transversal, retrospectivo y exploratorio, con el objetivo de identificar los principales factores de riesgo para la presencia de infección del tracto urinario (ITU) y elaborar propuesta de mejoras para la prevención de ésta. La población se constituye de todos los pacientes con ITU nosocomial, notificada en el período de abril de 2003 a julio de 2005. Fueron evaluados 114 casos de ITU en el período, relacionados o no con el sondaje vesical de larga duración (SVD). Los principales factores de riesgo descritos fueron: 60,5% del sexo femenino, 78 % con morbidad que presupone a ITU, 73 % > de 61 años, 59 % de los dos casos en la terapia intensiva, 83% usó SVD (33 % con uso de 16 a 30 días y 25 % > 31 días), 76 % usó pañales, 68 % usó antibiótico previamente. En el momento del suceso de ITU la media del tiempo de internación fue de 20 días. Según el sector inicial de pasaje de SVD, 24% se registró en el Centro Quirúrgico (CC) y 66% en las unidades de internación y de terapia intensiva. En este estudio se evidenció que las ITU nosocomiales notificadas estaban relacionadas con los principales factores de riesgo referidos en la literatura científica, sin la aparición de factores inesperados. Frente a los casos hallados fue posible establecer una propuesta de mejoras: sensibilización del enfermero para evaluar la necesidad del uso de la sonda a partir del 7º día de uso, para retirar o cambiar a una sonda vesical de silicona; creación de protocolo para el uso de sonda vesical de silicona; campaña institucional para la reducción del tiempo de permanencia de SVD en 10%; reorientación del ¨Staff¨ del CC.Estudo transversal, retrospectivo e exploratório, com seleção dos principais fatores de risco e distribuição percentual destes fatores na população estudada, constituída de todos os pacientes com infecção do trato urinário (ITU) hospitalar notificada no período de abril de 2003 a julho de 2005. Foram avaliados 114 casos de ITU no período, relacionados ou não a sondagem vesical: 60,5% feminino, 78 % com comorbidades que predispõem a ITU, 73 % > de 61 anos, 59 % dos casos na terapia intensiva, 83 % usaram Sonda Vesical de Demora (33 % com uso de 16 a 30 dias e 25 % > 31 dias), 76 % usou fraldas, 68 % com uso de antibiótico prévio. A mediana de 20 dias de internação, no momento da ITU. Segundo o setor de passagem da sonda vesical, 24% ocorreu no Centro Cirúrgico (CC) e 66% nas unidades de internação terapia intensiva. As ITU hospitalares na instituição estão ligadas aos principais fatores de risco referidos na literatura científica, sem o aparecimento de fatores inesperados. Frente aos achados, foi estabelecido um plano de melhoria: sensibilização do enfermeiro para avaliação do tipo de sonda a partir do 7º dia de uso, para retirada ou troca; criação de protocolo para uso de sonda vesical de silicone; campanha Institucional para redução do tempo de permanência da SVD em 10%; reorientação da equipe do CC

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear un derstanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5–7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8–11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world’s most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepre sented in biodiversity databases.13–15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may elim inate pieces of the Amazon’s biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological com munities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple or ganism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region’s vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most ne glected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lostinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5,6,7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8,9,10,11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases.13,14,15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5,6,7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8,9,10,11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases.13,14,15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Impact of needleless connectors in closed infusion systems on the occurrence of bloodstream infection related to the use of central venous catheters: evidence from a systematic review

Os conectores sem agulhas foram introduzidos para redução de incidência de acidentes pérfuro-cortantes nos profissionais da área da saúde e a literatura apresenta evidências irrefutáveis sobre este aspecto. No entanto, não há evidências conclusivas sobre as vantagens do conector sem agulha para o paciente, no que se referem aos índices de infecção de corrente sanguínea relacionada ao cateter venoso central. Este estudo tem como objetivo evidenciar o impacto do uso de conectores sem agulhas para sistema fechado de infusão na ocorrência de infecção de corrente sanguínea relacionada ao cateter venoso central por meio de revisão sistemática, desenvolvida conforme as recomendações propostas pela Colaboração Cochrane. A estratégia de busca nas bases de dados eletrônicas utilizou os componentes do PICO: População (estudos com pacientes em uso de cateter venoso central, independente de idade, sexo, etnia e serviço de saúde vinculado); Intervenção (uso de conectores de sistema fechado sem agulhas, não-valvulados, valvulados, com pressão positiva ou não); Comparação (uso de oclusores, conectores de sistema fechado com ou sem agulhas, não-valvulados, valvulados, com pressão positiva ou não); Outcome-desfecho (infecção de corrente sanguínea, contaminação do canhão, contaminação microbiana, infecção de corrente sanguínea relacionada ao cateter). As bases eletrônicas investigadas foram: PubMEDLINE, OVID, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL. Também foram avaliadas as referências bibliográficas dos estudos incluídos. Os resultados estão apresentados em três etapas: caracterização do processo de seleção dos estudos encontrados na busca; caracterização dos estudos incluídos para a revisão sistemática (RS); avaliação de qualidade e força da evidência dos estudos incluídos segundo a Escala de Jadad e a Escala de avaliação de qualidade dos estudos na área de Controle e Prevenção de Infecção de Corrente Sanguínea Relacionada ao cateter Venoso Central. A amostra desta revisão sistemática constitui-se de 14 estudos, e quatro investigaram somente conectores sem agulhas. Foram encontrados 6 ensaios clínicos controlados randomizados, 4 coortes, 3 caso-controle e 1 resultado terapêutico. A infecção de corrente sanguínea relacionada ao cateter venoso central foi o desfecho de 9 estudos. Seis apresentaram diferenças a favor do conector valvulado; 04 a favor do conector puncionável com cânula; 01 a favor do conector puncionável com agulha; 01 a favor do conector valvulado com pressão positiva e 02 a favor do dispositivo usado antes da troca. A heterogeneidade dos estudos quanto aos desenhos de pesquisa, as características das populações e os fatores de riscos controlados e os resultados, não permitem a realização de meta-análise, contudo, é possível afirmar, com base nos quatro melhores estudos encontrados, que a implantação de conectores sem agulhas, quer valvulados ou com injetor pré-furado, com manutenção de sistema fechado de infusão, apresentam impacto positivo relacionado à menor contaminação do canhão do cateter ou na ocorrência de infecção de corrente sanguínea relacionada ao cateter venoso centralNeedleless connectors were introduced to reduce the incidence of needlestick injuries in health professionals and according to the literature their effectiveness is irrefutable. However, there is no conclusive evidence on the advantages of needleless connectors for patients with regard to bloodstream infection rates from the use of central venous catheters. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of the use of needleless connectors in closed infusion systems on the occurrence of bloodstream infections related to the use of central venous catheters by conducting a Cochrane systematic review. The strategy for searching electronic databases employed the components of the PICO model: Population (studies of patients using central venous catheters, regardless of age, sex, race and associated health service); Intervention (use of closed needleless connector systems, with and without valves, with and without positive pressure); Comparison (use of plugs, closed system connectors with and without needles, with and without valves, with and without positive pressure); Outcome (bloodstream infection, cannula contamination, microbial contamination, bloodstream infection related to catheter). The electronic databases investigated were: PubMEDLINE, OVID, EMBASE, LILACS and CINAHL. Bibliographical references of the studies included were also evaluated. The results are presented in three stages: characterization of selection process for studies found in the search; characterization of studies included in the systematic revision; evaluation of quality and strength of evidence for studies included according to the Jadad Scale and the scale of quality of studies in the control and prevention of bloodstream infections related to central venous catheters. The sample of this systematic review was made up of 14 studies of which 4 investigated only needleless connectors. We found 6 randomized control clinical trials, 4 cohort, 3 case-control and 1 therapeutic result. Bloodstream infection related to central venous catheters was the outcome for 9 studies. Six presented differences regarding the valved connector; 04 in favor of the puncturable connector with cannula; 01 in favor of the puncturable connector with needle; 01 in favor of the valved connector with positive pressure and 02 in favor of the device used before the change. The heterogeneous nature of the studies with regard to design, population characteristics and controlled risk factors and results prevented a meta-analysis. However, it is possible to state, based on the four best studies found, that the introduction of needleless connectors, whether valved or puncturable with cannula, coupled with a closed infusion system, presented a positive impact on lowering contamination of catheter cannulae and on the occurrence of bloodstream infection related to central venous catheter

O perdão interpessoal e a qualidade de vida em idosos: scoping review

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio