Prevention, Recognition, and Management of Vascular Access Device-Related Infections

Terminology and Diagnostic Criteria

2.1 Catheter-Associated Bloodstream Infection (CABSI)

Catheter-associated bloodstream infection serves as a comprehensive term encompassing bloodstream infections that originate from either peripheral or central vascular access devices. Recognition that both device types can cause equally serious infections has led to the adoption of this unified terminology. Bloodstream infections related to vascular catheters can develop through four distinct pathways: transfer of microorganisms along the catheter tract during insertion, contamination at the catheter hub or lumen during routine access and manipulation, seeding from endogenous microorganisms already present in the bloodstream, and infusion of contaminated solutions or medications.

2.2 Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection (CR-BSI)

This diagnostic criterion provides definitive confirmation that the catheter serves as the infection source. Diagnosis requires isolation of the identical organism from both a blood culture and the catheter tip culture, with quantitative tip culture yielding greater than 15 colony forming units (CFUs). An alternative diagnostic approach utilizes differential time to positivity (DTP), which requires the same organism isolated from both a peripheral venous blood culture and a catheter lumen blood culture, with the catheter sample demonstrating positive growth at least two hours before the peripheral sample.^[48,78]

2.3 Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection (CLABSI)

This surveillance definition identifies a primary bloodstream infection occurring in a patient with a central line in place on the day of infection onset or the preceding day, provided the patient had central access for more than two calendar days. Clinical teams should recognize that surveillance definitions may overestimate the true incidence of catheter-related infections and should not substitute for definitive diagnostic criteria when making treatment decisions.^[9]

Fundamental Prevention Principles

3.1 Care Bundle Implementation

Effective prevention of vascular access device infections requires implementation of comprehensive care bundles combined with an institutional culture that prioritizes safety and quality. These bundles address critical elements during both device insertion and ongoing maintenance phases. Essential components include verification that clinicians performing insertions possess documented competency through appropriate training and assessment programs. Institutions should consider consultation with vascular access specialty teams when basic prevention measures have failed to achieve acceptable infection rates, as these specialized services have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing catheter-associated infections.^{[47,46,9,44,54,60]}

Optimization of catheter lumen utilization helps minimize infection risk by reducing the number of access points requiring manipulation. Interdisciplinary coordination of medication scheduling can facilitate safe care delivery while using the minimum number of lumens necessary. Documentation systems should capture key aspects of insertion and post-insertion care in readily retrievable formats that support infection prevention surveillance and quality improvement efforts.

3.2 Collaborative Quality Improvement

Multidisciplinary rounds and systematic audits serve as effective strategies for enhancing compliance with infection prevention protocols. Regular assessment of adherence to established practices allows identification of gaps and opportunities for improvement. Quality improvement initiatives incorporating standardized audit tools and feedback mechanisms have demonstrated sustained reductions in infection rates across diverse healthcare settings.^{[53,77,31,33]} Establishing dedicated surveillance programs for catheter-related bloodstream infections provides the measurement infrastructure necessary to drive and sustain improvement.^[30] Professional adherence to infection prevention guidelines can be improved through systematic multicomponent interventions including audit, feedback, and multidisciplinary education.^[24,52]

3.3 Site Selection Considerations

Anatomical site selection for vascular access device placement significantly influences infection risk. Clinicians should evaluate patient-specific factors, anticipated duration of therapy, and intended uses when determining optimal insertion sites. Site selection decisions should balance infection risk against other considerations including thrombosis risk, patient comfort, and technical feasibility of device placement and maintenance.^[13]

Skin Antisepsis and Barrier Precautions

4.1 Pre-Insertion and Maintenance Antisepsis

Appropriate skin antisepsis at the vascular access site prior to insertion and during routine care represents a cornerstone of infection prevention. Standardized protocols should specify antiseptic agents, application technique, and required drying time before device insertion or dressing application.^[19]

4.2 Chlorhexidine-Containing Dressings

Evidence supports the use of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-containing dressings for prevention of central line-associated bloodstream infections in patients over two months of age with short-term central venous access devices. This recommendation extends to oncohematological patients unless specific contraindications exist, such as known sensitivity or allergy to chlorhexidine.^[65,81,57]

Clinical judgment should guide decisions regarding CHG-containing dressings in patients with complicated dermatologic conditions including Stevens-Johnson syndrome, graft-versus-host disease, burns, and anasarca. Sites with heavy exudate, immunocompromised patients, and infants or young children warrant careful consideration of risks and benefits. Manufacturers’ directions for use should inform application decisions in these populations.^[22,42]

For oncology patients receiving prolonged infusions exceeding four to six hours, chlorhexidine-containing dressings around needle insertion sites provide additional protection.^[72] Studies in both inpatient and outpatient hemodialysis populations have demonstrated reduced catheter-related infection rates with CHG-containing dressing use.^[1] Limited evidence suggests silver-plated dressings may reduce central line-associated infections in intensive care settings, though this requires further validation.^[36]

4.3 Chlorhexidine Bathing Protocols

Daily chlorhexidine bathing represents an effective strategy for reducing catheter-associated bloodstream infections in patients with central venous access devices in place, including infants. Multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses support this intervention across diverse patient populations and healthcare settings.^{[17,49,68,15,61,62]}

Implementation in neonatal populations, particularly low-birthweight and premature infants, requires careful attention to skin integrity and the potential for cutaneous injury. Manufacturer instructions regarding application of chlorhexidine-impregnated cloths over transparent semipermeable membrane dressings and along administration set tubing should guide practice. Combining chlorhexidine bathing with nasal decolonization protocols may provide additive benefit in reducing infections.^[66]

Device-Specific Prevention Strategies

5.1 Antimicrobial Catheters

Antimicrobial-impregnated or coated catheters offer an additional preventive strategy for reducing catheter-associated bloodstream infections. These devices incorporate antimicrobial agents into or onto the catheter material to inhibit microbial colonization. Consideration of antimicrobial catheters is appropriate when standard prevention measures have proven insufficient or in patient populations at elevated infection risk.^[40,26,35]

5.2 Needleless Connector Management

Proper disinfection of needleless connectors before each access represents an essential element of intraluminal contamination prevention. Standardized protocols should specify the antiseptic agent, technique, and duration of friction application required to achieve adequate disinfection prior to connector use.^[13,55] Quality improvement initiatives targeting consistent application of aseptic non-touch technique in IV line maintenance have demonstrated significant reductions in healthcare-associated infections.^[74] Implementation of passive disinfection caps (port protectors) has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing CLABSI rates when deployed as part of a structured improvement initiative.^[4]

5.3 Antimicrobial Barrier Caps for Hemodialysis

For patients receiving outpatient hemodialysis through central venous catheters, antimicrobial barrier caps provide a passive disinfection strategy that has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing bloodstream infection rates. Cluster-randomized trials support incorporation of these devices into standard care protocols for this population.^[34,7,82]

5.4 Prophylactic Antimicrobial Lock Solutions

Antimicrobial catheter lock solutions warrant consideration for high-risk patients and for individuals with long-term central venous access who have experienced multiple catheter-associated infections despite optimal adherence to aseptic technique.^[16] Selection of lock solution formulation should consider the target pathogens, catheter compatibility, and potential for promoting antimicrobial resistance.

Clinical Assessment and Monitoring

6.1 Signs and Symptoms of Infection

Systematic assessment of vascular access device insertion and exit sites for infection indicators forms an essential component of ongoing device surveillance. Clinical manifestations requiring evaluation include erythema, edema, pain, tenderness, purulent drainage, and induration at the exit site. For totally implanted devices and tunneled catheters, assessment extends to evaluation for fluid accumulation in the subcutaneous pocket, tunnel tenderness or induration, drainage, and skin breakdown overlying the device. Systemic manifestations including fever should prompt consideration of device-related infection.^[50,43,8,45]

Clinicians should recognize that not all microorganisms produce local site symptoms and that absence of exit site abnormalities does not exclude the possibility of catheter-related infection. When signs or symptoms suggestive of vascular access device-related infection are identified, immediate notification of the responsible provider and initiation of appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic interventions is warranted.

6.2 Patient Education

Patients with vascular access devices should receive education regarding infection risks, recognition of concerning signs and symptoms, and importance of promptly reporting changes to their healthcare team. Education should address any specific follow-up requirements related to their device type and clinical situation.

Device Removal Decisions

7.1 Peripheral Intravenous Catheters

Peripheral intravenous catheters should be removed when patients develop signs of complication or failure including infection-related findings such as erythema extending at least one centimeter from the insertion site, induration, purulent exudate, or fever without another identifiable source. Patient reports of pain or tenderness associated with the catheter warrant prompt removal and evaluation.^{[18,56,59,39,64]}

Catheters inserted under emergent conditions without full adherence to aseptic non-touch technique should be replaced at the earliest clinically appropriate opportunity to minimize infection risk.^[64,23]

7.2 Central Vascular Access Devices

Management decisions for central venous access devices suspected of infection require careful consideration of multiple factors. A functioning central device should not be removed solely on the basis of elevated body temperature without additional confirmatory evidence of catheter-related infection. Fever alone, in the absence of other findings, has low specificity for catheter infection and removal may unnecessarily deprive patients of essential vascular access.^[48,78]

When catheter-related infection is suspected, clinicians should assess the risks and benefits of device removal versus attempted catheter salvage. Relevant considerations include whether the device is a short-term or long-term catheter, the identity of the infecting organism, the severity of clinical illness, the availability of alternative vascular access sites, and the technical feasibility of inserting a replacement device. Infectious disease consultation can provide valuable guidance in complex cases.^{[21,58,73,14]}

Indications for prompt catheter removal include clinical deterioration, persistent bacteremia despite appropriate antimicrobial therapy, and relapsing bloodstream infection. When central access remains necessary, timing of new catheter insertion at an alternative site should reflect collaborative decision-making that weighs patient-specific risks, benefits, and ongoing vascular access requirements.^{[18,9,29,10,41,76,12,28]} Systematic efforts to reduce unnecessary central venous catheter use represent a high-leverage prevention strategy, as eliminating unneeded devices eliminates exposure risk.^[83]

7.3 Guidewire Exchange Considerations

Guidewire exchange should not be used to replace a non-tunneled central venous catheter suspected of infection. This approach risks introducing organisms along the new catheter tract and is not recommended in the setting of suspected catheter-related infection.^[51]

In situations where alternative vascular access sites are severely limited or when bleeding disorders make new site puncture hazardous, careful assessment of risks versus benefits may support consideration of catheter exchange procedures. If exchange is undertaken under these circumstances, use of an antimicrobial-impregnated replacement catheter may reduce subsequent infection risk.^[48,78]

Diagnostic Evaluation

8.1 Culture Collection Principles

When catheter-associated bloodstream infection is suspected, appropriate diagnostic evaluation enables accurate identification of the infection source and guides antimicrobial therapy selection. Blood cultures obtained before initiating empirical antimicrobial treatment provide optimal diagnostic yield.

Routine culture of vascular access device tips upon removal is not recommended in the absence of suspected infection. Catheter colonization detected through routine surveillance cultures may prompt inappropriate antimicrobial therapy and contribute to emergence of resistant organisms. Additionally, tip cultures primarily identify organisms on the extraluminal catheter surface and may not detect intraluminal contamination.^[9,48,78]

8.2 Culture Methods for Suspected Infection

When a short-term central venous catheter, peripheral intravenous catheter, or arterial catheter is suspected as the infection source, the catheter tip should be cultured upon removal using semiquantitative (roll-plate) or quantitative (sonication) methods. For pulmonary artery catheters, the introducer sheath tip should be submitted for culture. When an implanted vascular access port is removed for suspected infection, both the reservoir contents and catheter tip should be cultured.^[48,78]

Purulent exudate from peripheral or central device exit sites should be collected for culture to identify causative fungi or bacteria and guide empirical antimicrobial selection. Such cultures help determine whether gram-positive, gram-negative, or fungal pathogens are present.^[9,53]

8.3 Paired Blood Culture Technique

Definitive diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection requires paired blood samples collected from the catheter and a peripheral vein before antimicrobial therapy initiation. This approach enables application of diagnostic criteria that confirm the catheter as the infection source. Catheter-related bloodstream infection is the likely diagnosis when clinical signs of sepsis are present without an alternative obvious source and one of the following laboratory findings is demonstrated:

Positive semiquantitative culture (greater than 15 colony forming units) or quantitative culture (equal to or greater than 1,000 colony forming units) from a catheter segment, with the identical organism isolated from peripheral blood culture. Alternatively, simultaneous quantitative blood cultures demonstrating a ratio of at least 3:1 when comparing organism concentration in catheter-drawn versus peripherally-drawn samples supports the diagnosis. Differential time to positivity, with catheter cultures becoming positive more than two hours before peripheral cultures, provides additional diagnostic evidence.^[48,25,37]

8.4 Specimen Collection Quality

The accuracy of blood culture diagnostics depends critically on specimen collection technique. Contamination of blood cultures with skin flora can produce false-positive results that complicate clinical interpretation and may lead to unnecessary catheter removal or antimicrobial therapy. Institutions should monitor blood culture contamination rates as a quality indicator and implement targeted interventions when contamination exceeds acceptable thresholds.^[25,67]

8.5 Infusate Contamination

Though uncommon, contamination of infusate solutions should be considered as a potential infection source. Parenteral solutions, intravenous medications, and blood products can become contaminated either during manufacturing (intrinsic contamination) or during preparation and administration in the clinical setting (extrinsic contamination). Parenteral nutrition preparations require particular attention given their composition provides favorable conditions for microbial growth.^[51]

Special Population Considerations

9.1 Pediatric Patients

Prevention and management of vascular access device infections in pediatric populations requires attention to developmental considerations, differences in skin integrity, and age-appropriate care practices. Chlorhexidine-containing products should be used with appropriate caution in neonates and infants, particularly those who are premature or low birthweight, given increased risk of cutaneous toxicity. Quality improvement initiatives targeting pediatric populations have demonstrated that central line-associated bloodstream infection rates can be significantly reduced through standardized bundle implementation.^[5,38,2,11] Hospital-wide reviews of pediatric bloodstream infections identify modifiable system-level risk factors and provide actionable lessons for prevention program design.^[11,80,6] Registry-based approaches and standardized outcome datasets support benchmarking and continuous improvement in pediatric vascular access care.^[71] Understanding the temporal patterns of CLABSI onset in pediatric oncology populations—including periods of highest risk during catheter dwell time—can guide targeted prevention interventions.^[32]

9.2 Oncology and Immunocompromised Patients

Patients with hematologic malignancies, those receiving chemotherapy, and immunocompromised individuals face elevated risks for catheter-associated infections and may experience more severe consequences. Prevention bundle implementation adapted to ambulatory oncology settings has demonstrated effectiveness in these populations. Decisions regarding catheter salvage versus removal in the setting of infection require careful consideration of the patient’s underlying condition, treatment requirements, and vascular access limitations.^[2,69,3,79]

9.3 Hemodialysis Patients

Patients receiving hemodialysis through central venous catheters represent a population at particularly elevated risk for bloodstream infections, with documented health disparities in infection incidence across racial and socioeconomic groups.^[63] Dedicated quality improvement programs, antimicrobial barrier caps, and chlorhexidine-containing dressings have all demonstrated effectiveness in reducing infection rates in this population. Sustained surveillance and intervention programs can achieve and maintain significant infection reductions in dialysis settings.^[27,1,20]

9.4 Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

Management of vascular access in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia requires particular attention given the serious complications associated with this organism. Retrospective data suggest that early peripherally inserted central catheter placement may be safe in patients with S. aureus bloodstream infection, though prospective validation is needed. Establishing safe, reliable vascular access in these patients should be prioritized while maintaining appropriate infection control precautions.^[75]

Key Recommendations

Prevention of vascular access device-related infections requires a multifaceted approach combining evidence-based insertion and maintenance practices with systematic surveillance and quality improvement. Care bundles addressing hand hygiene, maximal barrier precautions, appropriate skin antisepsis, optimal site selection, and prompt removal of unnecessary devices form the foundation of prevention efforts.

Chlorhexidine-containing dressings provide additional protection against central line-associated infections for most patients with short-term central access. Daily chlorhexidine bathing offers a supplementary strategy for reducing catheter-associated infections across diverse patient populations. Specialized devices including antimicrobial-impregnated catheters and barrier caps may benefit specific populations or situations where standard measures have proven insufficient.

Clinical assessment should include systematic evaluation for infection signs and symptoms, with recognition that some infections may not produce local manifestations. Diagnostic evaluation of suspected catheter-related bloodstream infection should employ paired blood cultures to enable definitive diagnosis. Catheter removal decisions require individualized assessment weighing infection severity, pathogen identity, alternative access availability, and patient-specific factors.

Ongoing quality improvement efforts, including collaborative rounds, compliance audits, and outcome surveillance, support sustained achievement of infection prevention goals. Institutional cultures that prioritize safety, combined with clinician competency in vascular access practices, create the foundation for minimizing the burden of these preventable infections.

References

1. Apata IW, Hanfelt J, Bailey JL, Niyyar VD. Chlorhexidine-impregnated transparent dressings decrease catheter-related infections in hemodialysis patients: a quality improvement project. J Vasc Access. 2017;18(2):103-108. doi:10.5301/jva.5000615

2. Ardura MI, Bibart MJ, Mayer LC, et al. Impact of a best practice prevention bundle on central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates and outcomes in pediatric hematology, oncology, and hematopoietic cell transplantation patients in inpatient and ambulatory settings. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2021;43(1):e64-e72. doi:10.1097/MPH.0000000000001934

3. Awadh H, Chaftari AM, Khalil M, et al. Management of enterococcal central line-associated bloodstream infections in patients with cancer. BMC Infect Dis. 2021;21(1):1-7. doi:10.1186/s12879-021-06328-9

4. Beeler C, Kerley D, Davis C, et al. Strategies for the successful implementation of disinfecting port protectors to reduce CLABSI in a large tertiary care teaching hospital. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47(12):1505-1507. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2019.05.016

5. Bierlaire S, Danhaive O, Carkeek K, Piersigilli F. How to minimize central line-associated bloodstream infections in a neonatal intensive care unit: a quality improvement intervention based on a retrospective analysis and the adoption of an evidence-based bundle. Eur J Pediatr. 2021;180(2):449-460. doi:10.1007/s00431-020-03712-6

6. Boussamet L, Launay E, Thomas E, Leguen CG, Lepelletier D. Should central venous catheters be rapidly removed to treat Staphylococcus aureus related-catheter bloodstream infection (CR-BSI) in neonates and children? An 8-year period (2010-2017) retrospective analysis in a French university hospital. J Hosp Infect. 2019;103(1):97-100. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2019.03.015

7. Brunelli SM, Van Wyck DB, Njord L, Ziebol RJ, Lynch LE, Killion DP. Cluster-randomized trial of devices to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infection. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018;29(4):1336-1343. doi:10.1681/ASN.2017080901

8. Buetti N, Ruckly S, Lucet JC, et al. Local signs at insertion site and catheter-related bloodstream infections: an observational post hoc analysis using individual data of four RCTs. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):694. doi:10.1186/s13054-020-03425-0

9. Buetti N, Marschall J, Drees M, et al. Strategies to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections in acute-care hospitals: 2022 Update. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2022;43(5):553-569. doi:10.1017/ice.2022.87

10. Burnham JP, Rojek RP, Kollef MH. Catheter removal and outcomes of multidrug-resistant central-line-associated bloodstream infection. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97(42):e12782. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000012782

11. Campbell AJ, Chen YP, Gough L, et al. Lessons learned from a hospital-wide review of blood stream infections for paediatric central line-associated blood stream infection prevention. J Paediatr Child Health. 2019;55(6):690-694. doi:10.1111/jpc.14276

12. Campagna S, Gonella S, Berchialla P, et al. A retrospective study of the safety of over 100,000 peripherally-inserted central catheters days for parenteral supportive treatments. Res Nurs Health. 2019;42(3):198-204. doi:10.1002/nur.21939

13. Cawcutt KA, Hankins RJ, Micheels TA, Rupp ME. Optimizing vascular-access device decision-making in the era of midline catheters. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2019;40(6):674-680. doi:10.1017/ice.2019.49

14. Chaftari AM, Hachem R, Raad S, et al. Unnecessary removal of central venous catheters in cancer patients with bloodstream infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018;39(2):222-225. doi:10.1017/ice.2017.257

15. Chapman L, Hargett L, Anderson T, Galluzzo J, Zimand P. Chlorhexidine gluconate bathing program to reduce health care-associated infections in both critically ill and non-critically ill patients. Crit Care Nurs. 2021;41(5):e1-e8. doi:10.4037/ccn2021891

16. Chiba M, Yonekura T, Kaji T, et al. Ethanol lock therapy in pediatric patients: a multicenter prospective study. Pediatr Int. 2020;62(3):379-385. doi:10.1111/ped.14096

17. Choi EY, Park DA, Kim HJ, Park J. Efficacy of chlorhexidine bathing for reducing healthcare associated bloodstream infections: a meta-analysis. Ann Intensive Care. 2015;5(1):31. doi:10.1186/s13613-015-0074-0

18. Chopra V, Flanders SA, Saint S, et al. The Michigan appropriateness guide for intravenous catheters (MAGIC): results from a multispecialty panel using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(6):S1-S39. doi:10.7326/M15-0330

19. Choudhury MA, Sidjabat HE, Zowawi HM, et al. Skin colonization at peripheral intravenous catheter insertion sites increases the risk of catheter colonization and infection. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47(12):1484-1488. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2019.06.002

20. Conwell P, Aniskiewicz M, Ghidini J, DeVaux L, Perazella M, Giullian J. A hospital-based program to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infections among hospitalized patients receiving hemodialysis using a central venous catheter for vascular access. Nephrol Nurs J. 2019;46(6):587-590.

21. Corkum KS, Jones RE, Reuter CH, Kociolek LK, Morgan E, Lautz TB. Central venous catheter salvage in children with Staphylococcus aureus central line-associated bloodstream infection. Pediatr Surg Int. 2017;33(11):1201-1207. doi:10.1007/s00383-017-4095-0

22. Düzkaya DS, Sahiner NC, Uysal G, Yakut T, Çitak A. Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings and prevention of catheter-associated bloodstream infections in a pediatric intensive care unit. Crit Care Nurs. 2016;36(6):e1-e7. doi:10.4037/ccn2016620

23. Dulong C, Frey N. Peripherally inserted central catheter removal: Clinical effectiveness and guidelines. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH); 2019. Available at: https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/htis/2019/RA1016%20PICC%20Removal%20Final.pdf

24. Flodgren G, Conterno LO, Mayhew A, Omar O, Pereira CR, Shepperd S. Interventions to improve professional adherence to guidelines for prevention of device-related infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2013(3):CD006559. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006559.pub2

25. Garcia RA, Spitzer ED, Beaudry J, et al. Multidisciplinary team review of best practices for collection and handling of blood cultures to determine effective interventions for increasing the yield of true-positive bacteremias, reducing contamination, and eliminating false-positive central line-associated bloodstream infections. Am J Infect Control. 2015;43(11):1222-1237. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2015.06.030

26. Gilbert R, Brown M, Faria R, et al. Antimicrobial-impregnated central venous catheters for preventing neonatal bloodstream infection: the prevail RCT. Health Technol Assess. 2020;24(57):a-190. doi:10.3310/hta24570

27. Gork I, Gross I, Cohen MJ, et al. Access-related infections in two haemodialysis units: results of a nine-year intervention and surveillance program. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2019;8:105. doi:10.1186/s13756-019-0570-6

28. Govindan S, Snyder A, Flanders SA, Chopra V. Peripherally inserted central catheters in the ICU: a retrospective study of adult medical patients in 52 hospitals. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(12):e1136-e1144. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003423

29. Guenezan J, Drugeon B, Marjanovic N, Mimoz O. Treatment of central line-associated bloodstream infections. Crit Care. 2018;22(1):303. doi:10.1186/s13054-018-2249-9

30. Hallam C, Jackson T, Rajgopal A, Russell B. Establishing catheter-related bloodstream infection surveillance to drive improvement. J Infect Prevent. 2018;19(4):160-166. doi:10.1177/1757177418767759

31. Han J, Wan J, Cheng Y, et al. A hospital-wide reduction in central line-associated bloodstream infections through systematic quality improvement initiative and multidisciplinary teamwork. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47(11):1358-1364. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2019.05.008

32. Han JW, Cho E, Jang H. Factors affecting the timing of a central line associated bloodstream infection onset in children with cancer. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs. 2021;38(1):26-35. doi:10.1177/1043454220966831

33. Hugo MC, Rzucidlo RR, Weisert LM, Parakati I, Schroeder SK. A quality improvement initiative to increase central line maintenance bundle compliance through nursing-led rounds. Pediatr Qual Saf. 2022;7(1):e515. doi:10.1097/pq9.0000000000000515

34. Hymes JL, Mooney A, Van Zandt C, Lynch L, Ziebol R, Killion D. Dialysis catheter-related bloodstream infections: a cluster-randomized trial of the clearguard HD antimicrobial barrier cap. Am J Kidney Dis. 2017;69(2):220-227. doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2016.07.027

35. Kagan E, Salgado CD, Banks AL, Marculescu CE, Cantey JR. Peripherally inserted central catheter-associated bloodstream infection: risk factors and the role of antibiotic-impregnated catheters for prevention. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47(2):191-195. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2018.09.015

36. Karlnoski R, Abboud EC, Thompson P, Oxner AZ, Sinnott JT, Marcet JE. Reduction in central line-associated bloodstream infections correlated with the introduction of a novel silver-plated dressing for central venous catheters and maintained for 6 years. J Intensive Care Med. 2019;34(7):544-549. doi:10.1177/0885066617748513

37. Karnatak R, Rupp ME, Cawcutt K. Innovations in quality improvement of intravascular catheter-related bloodstream infections. Curr Treat Options Infect Dis. 2019;11(1):23-41. doi:10.1007/s40506-019-00187-4

38. Khieosanuk K, Fupinwong S, Tosilakul A, Sricharoen N, Sudjaritruk T. Incidence rate and risk factors of central line-associated bloodstream infections among neonates and children admitted to a tertiary care university hospital. Am J Infect Control. 2022;50(1):105-107. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2021.07.015

39. Kleidon TM, Cattanach P, Mihala G, Ullman AJ. Implementation of a paediatric peripheral intravenous catheter care bundle: a quality improvement initiative. J Pediatr Child Health. 2019;55(10):1214-1223. doi:10.1111/jpc.14384

40. Lai NM, Chaiyakunapruk N, Lai NA, O’Riordan E, Pau WS, Saint S. Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter-related infections in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;3(3):CD007878. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007878.pub3

41. Lee YM, Kim DY, Kim YJ, Park KH, Lee MS. Clinical impacts of delayed central venous catheter removal according to the severity of comorbidities in patients with candidaemia. J Hosp Infect. 2019;103(4):420-427. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2019.08.018

42. Levy I, Katz J, Solter E, et al. Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing for prevention of colonization of central venous catheters in infants and children: a randomized controlled study. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2005;24(8):676-679. doi:10.1097/01.inf.0000171998.05557.e8

43. Lladó Maura Y, Berga Figuerola ML, Rodriguez Moreno MJ, et al. Care bundle for the prevention of peripheral venous catheter blood stream infections at a secondary care university hospital: implementation and results. Infect Dis Health. 2023;28(3):159-167. doi:10.1016/j.idh.2022.11.004

44. Lutwick L, Al-Maani AS, Mehtar S, et al. Managing and preventing vascular catheter infections: a position paper of the International Society for Infectious Diseases. Int J Infect Dis. 2019;84:22-29. doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2019.04.014

45. Marsh N, Ray-Barruel G, Adzemovic T, et al. Awareness of peripheral intravenous catheters among nurses, physicians, and students. J Patient Saf. 2022;18(7):e1041-e1046. doi:10.1097/PTS.0000000000001020

46. Martillo M, Zarbiv S, Gupta R, et al. A comprehensive vascular access service can reduce catheter-associated bloodstream infections and promote the appropriate use of vascular access devices. Am J Infect Control. 2020;48(4):460-464. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2019.09.021

47. Rupp ME, Majorant D. Prevention of vascular catheter-related bloodstream infections. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2016;30(4):853-868. doi:10.1016/j.idc.2016.06.001

48. Mermel LA, Allon M, Bouza E, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of intravascular catheter-related infection: 2009 update by the infectious diseases society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49(1):1-45. doi:10.1086/590351

49. Musuuza JS, Guru PK, O’Horo JC, et al. The impact of chlorhexidine bathing on hospital-acquired bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):416. doi:10.1186/s12879-019-4013-5

50. Nickel B. Hiding in plain sight: peripheral intravenous catheter infections. Crit Care Nurs. 2020;40(5):57-66. doi:10.4037/ccn2020892

51. O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections, 2011. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated October 2017. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/infectioncontrol/guidelines/bsi/index.html

52. Owings A, Graves J, Johnson S, Gilliam C, Gipson M, Hakim H. Leadership line care rounds: application of the engage, educate, execute, and evaluate improvement model for the prevention of central line-associated bloodstream infections in children with cancer. Am J Infect Control. 2018;46(2):229-231. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2017.08.032

53. Pate K, Brelewski K, Rutledge SR, Rankin V, Layell J. CLABSI rounding team: a collaborative approach to prevention. J Nurs Care Qual. 2022;37(3):275-281. doi:10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000575

54. Patel PK, Gupta A, Vaughn VM, Mann JD, Ameling JM, Meddings J. Review of strategies to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) in adult ICUs. J Hosp Med. 2018;13(2):105-116. doi:10.12788/jhm.2856

55. Pathak R, Gangina S, Jairam F, Hinton K. A vascular access and midlines program can decrease hospital-acquired central line-associated bloodstream infections and cost to a community-based hospital. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2018;14:1453-1456. doi:10.2147/TCRM.S171748

56. Pearse I, Corley A, Rickard CM, Marsh N. Unnecessary removal of vascular access devices due to suspected infection in Australian intensive care units. Aust Crit Care. 2022;35(6):644-650. doi:10.1016/j.aucc.2021.09.004

57. Puig-Asensio M, Marra AR, Childs CA, Kukla ME, Perencevich EN, Schweizer ML. Effectiveness of chlorhexidine dressings to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infections. Does one size fit all? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2020;41(12):1388-1395. doi:10.1017/ice.2020.358

58. Raad I, Chaftari AM, Zakhour R, et al. Successful salvage of central venous catheters in patients with catheter-related or central line-associated bloodstream infections by using a catheter lock solution consisting of minocycline, EDTA, and 25% ethanol. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(6):3426-3432. doi:10.1128/AAC.00286-16

59. Ray-Barruel G, Cooke M, Mitchell M, Chopra V, Rickard CM. Implementing the I-DECIDED clinical decision-making tool for peripheral intravenous catheter assessment and safe removal: protocol for an interrupted time-series study. BMJ Open. 2018;8(6):e021290. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021290

60. Ray-Barruel G, Xu H, Marsh N, Cooke M, Rickard CM. Effectiveness of insertion and maintenance bundles in preventing peripheral intravenous catheter-related complications and bloodstream infection in hospital patients: a systematic review. Infect Dis Health. 2019;24(3):152-168. doi:10.1016/j.idh.2019.03.001

61. Reynolds SS, Sova C, McNalty B, Lambert S, Granger B. Implementation strategies to improve evidence-based bathing practices in a neuro ICU. J Nurs Care Qual. 2019;34(2):133-138. doi:10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000347

62. Reynolds SS, Woltz P, Keating E, et al. Results of the CHlorhexidine Gluconate Bathing implementation intervention to improve evidence-based nursing practices for prevention of central line associated bloodstream infections study (CHanGing BathS): a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial. Implement Sci. 2021;16(1):45. doi:10.1186/s13012-021-01112-4

63. Rha B, See I, Dunham L, et al. Vital signs: health disparities in hemodialysis-associated Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections—United States, 2017-2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2023;72(6):153-159. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm7206e1

64. Ruegg L, Faucett M, Choong K. Emergency inserted peripheral intravenous catheters: a quality improvement project. Br J Nurs. 2018;27(14):S28-S30. doi:10.12968/bjon.2018.27.14.S28

65. Safdar N, O’Horo JC, Ghufran A, et al. Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing for prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infection: a meta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2014;42(7):1703-1713. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e31829cbb4f

66. Samuelson C, Kaur H, Kritsotakis EI, Goode SD, Nield A, Partridge D. A daily topical decontamination regimen reduces catheter-related bloodstream infections in haematology patients. J Infect. 2018;76(2):132-139. doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2017.11.003

67. Santos KMB, Husain SS, Torres V, Huang C-C, Jacob E. Multi-level intervention program – a quality improvement initiative to decrease central line-associated bloodstream infections in the pediatric acute and hematology/oncology units. J Pediatr Nurs. 2019;48:106-113. doi:10.1016/j.pedn.2019.07.005

68. Scheier T, Saleschus D, Dunic M, et al. Implementation of daily chlorhexidine bathing in intensive care units for reduction of central line-associated bloodstream infections. J Hosp Infect. 2021;110:26-32. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2021.01.007

69. Schiffer CA, Mangu PB, Wade JC, et al. Central venous catheter care for the patient with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(10):1357-1370. doi:10.1200/JCO.2012.45.5733

70. Schults J, Kleidon T, Chopra V, et al. International recommendations for a vascular access minimum dataset: a Delphi consensus-building study. BMJ Qual Saf. 2021;30(9):722-730. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2020-011274

71. Schults JA, Rickard CM, Kleidon T, et al. Building a global, pediatric vascular access registry: a scoping review of trial outcomes and quality indicators to inform evidence-based practice. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2019;16(1):51-59. doi:10.1111/wvn.12339

72. Schulmeister L. Implanted venous ports. In: Camp-Sorrell D, Matey L, eds. Access Device Standards of Practice for Oncology Nursing. Oncology Nursing Society; 2017:65-73.

73. Secco IL, Reichembach MT, Pereira HP, Silva RPGVCD. Prevalence of central venous catheter salvage in newborn with staphylococcal bloodstream infection. Rev Bras Enferm. 2021;74(6):e20201073. doi:10.1590/0034-7167-2020-1073

74. Shettigar S, Somasekhara Aradhya A, Ramappa S, Reddy V, Venkatagiri P. Reducing healthcare-associated infections by improving compliance to aseptic non-touch technique in intravenous line maintenance: a quality improvement approach. BMJ Open Qual. 2021;10(Suppl 1):e001394. doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2021-001394

75. Stewart JD, Runnegar N. Early use of peripherally inserted central catheters is safe in Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. Intern Med J. 2018;48(1):44-49. doi:10.1111/imj.13636

76. Takashima M, Schults J, Mihala G, Corley A, Ullman A. Complication and failures of central vascular access device in adult critical care settings. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(12):1998-2009. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003370

77. Thate J, Rossetti SC, McDermott-Levy R, Moriarty H. Identifying best practices in electronic health record documentation to support interprofessional communication for the prevention of central line-associated bloodstream infections. Am J Infect Control. 2020;48(2):124-131. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2019.06.026

78. Timsit JF, Rupp M, Bouza E, et al. A state of the art review on optimal practices to prevent, recognize, and manage complications associated with intravascular devices in the critically ill. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(6):742-759. doi:10.1007/s00134-018-5120-7

79. Tribler S, Brandt CF, Fuglsang KA, et al. Catheter-related bloodstream infections in patients with intestinal failure receiving home parenteral support: risks related to a catheter-salvage strategy. Am J Clin Nutr. 2018;107(5):743-753. doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqy010

80. Walker LW, Nowalk AJ, Visweswaran S. Predicting outcomes in central venous catheter salvage in pediatric central line-associated bloodstream infection. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021;28(4):862-867. doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaa328

81. Wei L, Li Y, Li X, Bian L, Wen Z, Li M. Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing for the prophylaxis of central venous catheter-related complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):1-12. doi:10.1186/s12879-019-3840-8

82. Weiss S, Qureshi M. Evaluating a novel hemodialysis central venous catheter cap in reducing bloodstream infections: a quality improvement initiative. Int J Nephrol Renov Dis. 2021;14:125-131. doi:10.2147/IJNRD.S282702

83. Xiong Z, Chen H. Interventions to reduce unnecessary central venous catheter use to prevent central-line-associated bloodstream infections in adults: a systematic review. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018;39(12):1442-1448. doi:10.1017/ice.2018.250

This document represents a synthesis of current evidence-based recommendations and is intended for use by qualified clinical professionals. Local institutional policies, patient-specific factors, and evolving evidence should inform clinical decision-making.