ライフサイエンスコーパス: catheter-related bloodstream infection

1 603 catheters met the inclusion criteria for catheter-related bloodstream infection.

2 imple, and rapid method for the diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection.

3 s indicated a substantial burden of arterial catheter-related bloodstream infection.

4 decreased ventilator-associated pneumonia or catheter-related bloodstream infection.

5 ought to evaluate the prevalence of arterial catheter-related bloodstream infection.

6 al catheters are an underrecognized cause of catheter-related bloodstream infection.

7 l site will help reduce the risk of arterial catheter-related bloodstream infection.

8 se of E. hermannii as the sole pathogen in a catheter-related bloodstream infection.

9 ng disruption on the risk for development of catheter-related bloodstream infection.

10 comparable for risk factors predisposing to catheter-related bloodstream infection.

11 l outcomes included local site infection and catheter-related bloodstream infection.

12 regnated and 160 tunneled) were analyzed for catheter-related bloodstream infection.

13 rs on the rates of catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection.

14 d in association with the catheters and with catheter-related bloodstream infections.

15 Ventilator-associated pneumonia and catheter-related bloodstream infections.

16 atheter-days, and studies providing data for catheter-related bloodstream infections.

17 nebacterium species are well-known causes of catheter-related bloodstream infections.

18 29 major catheter-related infections, and 23 catheter-related bloodstream infections.

19 ntensive care unit (ICU) patients may affect catheter-related bloodstream infections.

20 s are effective in decreasing central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections.

21 sociated with a decrease in the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections.

22 s well as team approaches that can eradicate catheter-related bloodstream infections.

23 rvention was used to reduce the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections.

24 MB-P were significantly less likely to cause catheter-related bloodstream infection (0.24 vs. 0.82 pe

25 catheter was suspected as the source for the catheter-related bloodstream infection (0.70/1,000 cathe

26 1 per 1,000 ventilator-days; p < 0.001), and catheter-related bloodstream infections (1.0 vs 3.5 per

27 enous catheters from patients with suspected catheter-related bloodstream infection (a raised periphe

28 that the intervention significantly reduced catheter-related bloodstream infection after large-scale

29 phylococcus spp, remain the leading cause of catheter-related bloodstream infection, although an incr

30 ants routine use in patients at high risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection and central venou

31 To compare catheter-related bloodstream infection and colonization

32 e primary outcome measure was a composite of catheter-related bloodstream infection and symptomatic d

33 catheter colonization and, more importantly, catheter-related bloodstream infection and warrants rout

34 Major catheter-related infection includes catheter-related bloodstream infections and clinical sep

35 animal pathogen, is commonly associated with catheter-related bloodstream infections and has evolved

36 lications of VADs but, with the exception of catheter-related bloodstream infections and thrombosis,

37 at occur in the intensive care unit, such as catheter-related bloodstream infections and ventilator-a

38 tolerated, significantly reduces the risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection, and provides pro

39 catheters at each insertion site, number of catheter-related bloodstream infections, and the prevale

40 umber of experimental catheters used without catheter-related bloodstream infections; and j) number o

41 Catheter-related bloodstream infections are an important

42 Catheter-related bloodstream infections are associated w

43 Catheter-related bloodstream infections are associated w

44 duces the rates of catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection as compared with

45 duces the rates of catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infections as compared with

46 In the 20 cases of catheter-related bloodstream infection associated with m

47 pared the rates of catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection associated with t

48 Catheters were studied for colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection at removal; local

49 was no significant difference in the risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection between the subcl

50 was no significant difference in the risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections between the femo

51 was no significant difference in the risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections between the femo

52 was no significant difference in the risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections between the femo

53 nt studies show no difference in the rate of catheter-related bloodstream infections between the thre

54 ral venous catheters significantly decreased catheter-related bloodstream infections by 2.32% (95% co

55 tensive care unit, several measures, such as catheter-related bloodstream infections, can be signific

56 ssociated with a significantly lower risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections compared to the

57 omes assessed were catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection confirmed by cath

58 ary endpoints were major CRI with or without catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI) with chl

59 are efficacious in reducing the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI); however

60 Multiple studies have demonstrated that catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBI) can be su

61 Our objective was to determine the risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) and cathe

62 A catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) was suspe

63 y outcomes were clinically diagnosed sepsis, catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI), and all-

64 The major complications of HPN were catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) (1.7/10

65 are receiving home parenteral support (HPS), catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) inflict

66 Catheter-related bloodstream infections decreased from 2

67 There were 36 episodes of catheter-related bloodstream infection, defined as a pos

68 The average catheter-related bloodstream infections density was 2.5

69 Catheter-related bloodstream infection developed in 7 pa

70 Documented catheter-related bloodstream infection did not occur (0%

71 Catheter-related bloodstream infections due to Staphyloc

72 ical sepsis without bloodstream infection or catheter-related bloodstream infection during the ICU st

73 Current evidence on catheter-related bloodstream infection femoral risk, com

74 However, the risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections from femoral as

75 perimental catheters used that resulted in a catheter-related bloodstream infection; h) number of con

76 s examining the outcome of primary interest, catheter-related bloodstream infection, had a summary od

77 of control catheters used that resulted in a catheter-related bloodstream infection; i) number of exp

78 incidence of both catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection in patients at hi

79 ple-lumen catheters may substantially reduce catheter-related bloodstream infections in an intensive

80 ifampin are efficacious and safe in reducing catheter-related bloodstream infections in cancer patien

81 r prevention and diagnosis of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections in the intensive

82 am stain and AOLC test in suspected cases of catheter-related bloodstream infection, in comparison wi

83 for prevention of catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection, including arteri

84 risk of major catheter-related infection and catheter-related bloodstream infection increased by more

85 ohort studies that reported the frequency of catheter-related bloodstream infections (infections per

86 We found no difference in catheter-related bloodstream infection (internal jugular

87 Prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infection is a basic object

88 Catheter-related bloodstream infection is the greatest t

89 emoral and internal jugular for the risks of catheter-related bloodstream infection, major catheter-r

90 No episode of catheter-related bloodstream infection occurred in the 5

91 A total of 17 catheter-related bloodstream infections occurred during

92 Catheter-related bloodstream infections occurring in the

93 the nonimpregnated catheters, with a rate of catheter-related bloodstream infection of 0.25 and 1.28/

94 09-0.23] and 0.6% vs 1.0%, respectively, for catheter-related bloodstream infection [OR, 0.50; 95% CI

95 e associated with a significant reduction in catheter-related bloodstream infection (p = .03).

96 rred for catheter colonization (P = 0.57) or catheter-related bloodstream infection (P = 0.99).

97 The median rate of catheter-related bloodstream infection per 1000 catheter

98 dressing resulted in a reduced prevalence of catheter-related bloodstream infection (random effects r

99 The overall catheter-related bloodstream infection rate was 0.2 per

100 The catheter-related bloodstream infection rate was 5.4 and

101 ms has been shown to decrease central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection rate.

102 w of the literature to determine the risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections related to nontu

103 us Diseases Society of America definition of catheter-related bloodstream infection remains the most

104 for baseline characteristics were excluded, catheter-related bloodstream infection risk was comparab

105 Catheter-related bloodstream infection risk was comparab

106 ular and subclavian may, similarly, decrease catheter-related bloodstream infection risk, when compar

107 sustained reduction (up to 66%) in rates of catheter-related bloodstream infection that was maintain

108 ent population is, however, at high risk for catheter-related bloodstream infections that can result

109 There are 80,000 catheter-related bloodstream infections that occur annua

110 ers has been demonstrated to protect against catheter-related bloodstream infection, the applicabilit

111 ologies applied to preventing central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection to arterial cathe

112 The rate of definitive catheter-related bloodstream infection was 1.24 per 1000

113 vs. 87 of 382 [22.8 percent], P<0.001), and catheter-related bloodstream infection was 1/12 as likel

114 ative methods; and, for prospective studies, catheter-related bloodstream infection was confirmed by

115 For the purposes of this study, catheter-related bloodstream infection was defined as po

116 The occurrence of catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection was determined.

117 Catheter-related bloodstream infection was diagnosed in

118 Catheter-related bloodstream infection was reduced after

119 The number of catheter-related bloodstream infections was expressed as

120 The rate of catheter-related bloodstream infections was higher in th

121 reparation, catheter days, and prevalence of catheter-related bloodstream infection were abstracted.

122 rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia and catheter-related bloodstream infection were analyzed by

123 128 cases of suspected catheter-related bloodstream infection were assessed in

124 In the control group, 8 catheter-related bloodstream infections were caused by S

125 reventive strategy, and outcome (measured as catheter-related bloodstream infections) were gathered.

126 contain original data relevant to lessening catheter-related bloodstream infections, were nonrandomi

127 hough earlier studies showed a lower risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections when the interna