Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Oct;35 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):S17-22.
doi: 10.1086/677822.

Does chlorhexidine bathing in adult intensive care units reduce blood culture contamination? A pragmatic cluster-randomized trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Does chlorhexidine bathing in adult intensive care units reduce blood culture contamination? A pragmatic cluster-randomized trial

Edward J Septimus et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2014 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: To determine rates of blood culture contamination comparing 3 strategies to prevent intensive care unit (ICU) infections: screening and isolation, targeted decolonization, and universal decolonization.

Design: Pragmatic cluster-randomized trial.

Setting: Forty-three hospitals with 74 ICUs; 42 of 43 were community hospitals.

Patients: Patients admitted to adult ICUs from July 1, 2009, to September 30, 2011.

Methods: After a 6-month baseline period, hospitals were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 strategies, with all participating adult ICUs in a given hospital assigned to the same strategy. Arm 1 implemented methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nares screening and isolation, arm 2 targeted decolonization (screening, isolation, and decolonization of MRSA carriers), and arm 3 conducted no screening but universal decolonization of all patients with mupirocin and chlorhexidine (CHG) bathing. Blood culture contamination rates in the intervention period were compared to the baseline period across all 3 arms.

Results: During the 6-month baseline period, 7,926 blood cultures were collected from 3,399 unique patients: 1,099 sets in arm 1, 928 in arm 2, and 1,372 in arm 3. During the 18-month intervention period, 22,761 blood cultures were collected from 9,878 unique patients: 3,055 sets in arm 1, 3,213 in arm 2, and 3,610 in arm 3. Among all individual draws, for arms 1, 2, and 3, the contamination rates were 4.1%, 3.9%, and 3.8% for the baseline period and 3.3%, 3.2%, and 2.4% for the intervention period, respectively. When we evaluated sets of blood cultures rather than individual draws, the contamination rate in arm 1 (screening and isolation) was 9.8% (N = 108 sets) in the baseline period and 7.5% (N = 228) in the intervention period. For arm 2 (targeted decolonization), the baseline rate was 8.4% (N = 78) compared to 7.5% (N = 241) in the intervention period. Arm 3 (universal decolonization) had the greatest decrease in contamination rate, with a decrease from 8.7% (N = 119) contaminated blood cultures during the baseline period to 5.1% (N = 184) during the intervention period. Logistic regression models demonstrated a significant difference across the arms when comparing the reduction in contamination between baseline and intervention periods in both unadjusted (P = .02) and adjusted (P = .02) analyses. Arm 3 resulted in the greatest reduction in blood culture contamination rates, with an unadjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.044-0.71) and an adjusted OR of 0.55 (95% CI, 0.43-0.71).

Conclusion: In this large cluster-randomized trial, we demonstrated that universal decolonization with CHG bathing resulted in a significant reduction in blood culture contamination.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Potential conflicts of interest. E.J.S., M.K.H., K.K., T.R.A., J.M., R.A.W., J.H., J.L., A.G., K.H., R.E.K., J.A.J., J.B.P., and S.S.H. are conducting a trial of hospitals that are receiving product contribution from Sage Products and Molnlycke. This disclosure arose after the conduct and analysis of both the original REDUCE MRSA trial and this manuscript. EJ.S. reports receiving consulting fees from 3M and lecture fees from Sage Products. M.K.H. reports conducting other research involving contributed product from Sage Products. The authors of this article are responsible for its content. All authors submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest, and the conflicts that the editors consider relevant to this article are disclosed here.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Weinbaum FI, Lavie S, Danek M, Sixsmith D, Heinrich GF, Mill SS. Doing it right the first time: quality improvement and the contaminant blood culture. J Clin Microbiol 1997;35(3):563–565. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Weinstein MR Blood culture contamination: persisting problems and partial progress. J Clin Microbiol 2003;41:2275–2278. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Principles and Procedures for Blood Cultures: Approved Guideline. Wayne, PA: CLSI; 2007. CLSI document M47-A.
    1. Hall KK, Lyman IA. Updated review of blood culture contamination. Clin Microbiol Rev 2006; 19(4) :788–802. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bekeris LG, Tworek JA, Walsh MK, et al. Trends in blood culture contamination: a College of American Pathologists Q-Tracks study of 356 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2005;129:1222–1225. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms