Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Annie Topping (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: