1 / 19

Introduction

What Impact Does a Nurse Training Program Designed to Decrease Urinary Catheter Use Have on Bacteruria Rates in the Community Hospital Setting?.

nasim-caldwell
Download Presentation

Introduction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What Impact Does a Nurse Training Program Designed to Decrease Urinary Catheter Use Have on Bacteruria Rates in the Community Hospital Setting? Jamie Bartley DO, Diane Lenk MSN, RN, Janet Moody BSN, RN, Amy Brode DO.From the Division of Urology, Wound Care Nursing, and The Infectious Disease Department. Botsford Hospital, Farmington Hills, MI

  2. Introduction • Urinary catheters are one of the most common causes of nosocomial infections in the hospitalized patient • Patients with an indwelling foley catheter have a risk of bacteruria at 5% per day • Symptomatic urinary tract infection has been shown to occur in 20% of patients with bacteruria • Urinary catheters are often placed without a clear indication for need

  3. Hypothesis • We believe that a nursing education program through the “Keystone Project” will decrease non-indicated catheter use in hospitalized patients • Secondary analysis: We suspect this will decrease the prevalence of positive urine cultures

  4. “Indicated vs. Non-Indicated Foley” Nursing Inservice • Beginning fall 2007, nurses were inserviced on indications and non-indications for foley catheters Urinary tract obstruction Neurogenic bladder Urologic study/urologic surgery Stage 3 or 4 pressure ulcer Hospice, comfort care or palliative care only Nephrology Transferred from ICU Patient requests Confused Incontinence Other • Figure 1: Indications for Urinary Catheter Use Figure 2: Non-Indications for urinary catheter use

  5. Collection of Catheter Data • Catheter use was documented for one week (Monday-Friday) and recorded on two units according to the dates below. 5 South Data Collection Dates Weeks 1-3 October 8-26, 2007  Pre-education data Week 8  November 26 - 30, 2007 1st Quarterly  March 3 - 7, 2008 2nd Quarterly  July 14 - 18, 2008 3rd Quarterly  October 27 -31, 2008 PCU Data Collection Dates Week 1-3  Feb 18 - March 7, 2008  Pre-education data Week 8  April 7 - 11, 2008 1st Quarterly  July 28 - August 1, 2008  2nd Quarterly  September 22 - 26, 2008 3rd  Quarterly  December 8 -12, 2008 Post-education data Post-education data

  6. Collection of Urine Culture Data • Information on patients with bacteruria was obtained from the Infectious Disease Department • Bacteruria= >10^2 CFUs • A retrospective chart review • Did patients with bacteruria had a foley catheter and if so, was it was indicated according to the above criteria?

  7. Study Population • Pre-intervention- n = 1223 (378 and 845) • Post Intervention- n = 1737 (608 and 879)

  8. RESULTS • Logistic regression analysis and Odds Ratios (95% confidence limits) were performed to determine if there was a statistically significant decrease (a=0.05) in non-indicated foley catheter use

  9. PCU Catheter Results * statistically significant for α=0.05

  10. 5S Catheter Results Table 3: Outcome – Non-indicated foley use * statistically significant for α=0.05

  11. Does the decrease in catheter use we see lead to a decrease in bacteruria? Our ultimate Goal Prevention of CAUTI

  12. % Pa T I En T s

  13. Can Decreasing Catheter Use Decrease Bacteruria? • Urine culture data was analyzed using Fisher’s exact test to determine if there was a decrease in the incidence of positive urine cultures after the foley education program was instituted • A decrease in percentage of positive urine cultures* was seen but it did not reach statistical significance (2.5%, 1.8%) *Note: This was determined by the number of positive urine cultures per total patient population, not total number of urine cultures. Since data was provided only on positive urine cultures, it is assumed that the other patients without cultures taken were either not indicated or were negative (this may represent a sample bias)

  14. Results • Of interest (though not significant) • Most of the positive urine cultures in our data were seen in patients with an indicated catheter in both the pre-education and post-education periods (90.32% and 77.42%)

  15. Discussion • Decreasing hospital acquired infections is necessary to decrease patient morbidity and mortality • Financial incentive to hospital due to no reimbursement for “reasonably preventable infections (including CAUTI) • Certain factors such as patient population will greatly influence the success of such a program • PCU, compared to 5S, was 4 times more likely to have a non-indicated foley (p<0.001).

  16. Conclusion • A nurse training program can be successful in decreasing foley catheter use when it may not be appropriate • The effect on decreasing bacteruria by decreasing catheter use was not proven in this study • The majority of positive urine cultures still occur in patients who have a medical reason to have a foley in place. Improved infection control techniques are needed for this high-risk population

  17. References 1.Cravens, DD., Zweig, S. Urinary catheter management. American Family Physician. 61 (2): 369-76, 2000 Jan 15 2. Hart, S. Urinary catheterization. Nursing Standard. 22(27): 44-8, 2008 Mar 12-18 3. Hashmi, S., Kelly, E. Rogers, SO. Urinary tract infection in surgical patients. American Journal of Surgery. 186(1) 53-6, 2003, Jul 4. Lo, E., Nicolle, L., et al. Strategies to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infections in acute care hospitals. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 29(1), 2008, Oct 5. Maki, DG., Tambyah, PA. Engineering out the risk for infection with urinary catheters. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 7(2), 2001 Mar-Apr 6. Saint, S., Chenoweth, CE. Biofilms and catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Infectious Disease Clinics of North America. 17(2): 411-31, 2003 Jun 7. Saint, S., Lipsky BA. Preventing catheter-related bacteriuria: should we? Can we? How? Archives of Internal Medicine. 159(8): 800-8, 1999 Apr 26 8. Sedor J., Mulholland, SG. Hospital Acquired urinary tract infections associated with the indwelling catheter. Urologic Clinics of North America. 26(4): 821-8, 1999 Nov 9. Trautner, B.W., Darouiche, R.O. Catheter-associated infections: pathogenesis affects prevention. Archives of Internal Medicine. 164(8): 842-50, 2004 Apr 26

More Related