Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2025
Association of catheter-related blood stream infections and aseptic technique(s) used in administration of parenteral nutrition: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fletcher Jane, Malhi Hardip, Topping Anne
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Patients receiving parenteral nutrition (PN) are often thought to be at higher risk of catheter-related blood stream infections (CRBSIs) than patients receiving other infusions. Nursing practice in the administration of PN has focused on traditional aseptic/sterile techniques using sterile gloves because of this perceived risk.
AIMS: To identify the evidence base for current aseptic practice in the administration of PN and association with incidence of CRBSI.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies reporting aseptic technique used/taught in administration of PN.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine papers were identified. After title, abstract, and full text screening six studies were included. All studies were low-quality evidence, observational or quasi-experimental designs; no relevant controlled trials were identified. Evidence did not support the use of any one aseptic technique when administering PN. A structured approach to education and standardisation appeared to improve technique and reduce CRBSI. Use of sterile gloves versus non-sterile gloves did not appear to impact on CRBSI.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to support the use of aseptic/sterile technique over other techniques in nurse administration of PN. However, there is a need for higher quality research in this area.
AIMS: To identify the evidence base for current aseptic practice in the administration of PN and association with incidence of CRBSI.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies reporting aseptic technique used/taught in administration of PN.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine papers were identified. After title, abstract, and full text screening six studies were included. All studies were low-quality evidence, observational or quasi-experimental designs; no relevant controlled trials were identified. Evidence did not support the use of any one aseptic technique when administering PN. A structured approach to education and standardisation appeared to improve technique and reduce CRBSI. Use of sterile gloves versus non-sterile gloves did not appear to impact on CRBSI.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to support the use of aseptic/sterile technique over other techniques in nurse administration of PN. However, there is a need for higher quality research in this area.