The Association of Central-Line–Associated Bloodstream Infections With Central-Line Utilization Rate and Maintenance Bundle Compliance Among Types of PICUs*

Objective: Central-line–associated bloodstream infections comprise 25% of device-associated infections. Compared with other units, PICUs demonstrate a higher central-line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence. Prior studies have not investigated the association of central-line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence, central-line utilization, or maintenance bundle compliance between specific types of PICUs. Design: This study analyzed monthly aggregate data regarding central-line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence, central-line utilization, and maintenance bundle compliance between three types of PICUs: 1) PICUs that do not care for cardiac patients (PICU); 2) PICUs that provide care for cardiac and noncardiac patients (C/PICU); or 3) designated cardiac ICUs (CICU). Setting: The included units submitted data as part of The Children’s Hospital Association PICU central-line–associated bloodstream infections collaborative from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2013. Patients: Patients admitted to PICUs in collaborative institutions. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The overall central-line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence was low (1.37 central-line–associated bloodstream infections events/1,000 central-line days) and decreased over the time of the study. Central-line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence was not related to the type of PICU although C/PICU tended to have a higher central-line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence (p = 0.055). CICU demonstrated a significantly higher central-line utilization ratio (p < 0.001). However, when examined on a unit level, central-line utilization was not related to the central-line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence. The central-line maintenance bundle compliance rate was not associated with central line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence in this unit-level investigation. Neither utilization rate nor compliance rate changed significantly over time in any of the types of units. Conclusions: Although this unit-level analysis did not demonstrate an association between central-line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence and central-line utilization and maintenance bundle compliance, optimization of both should continue, further decreasing central-line–associated bloodstream infections prevalence. In addition, investigation of patient-specific factors may aid in further central-line–associated bloodstream infections eradication.