Tunnelling of thoracic epidural catheters is associated with fewer catheter-related infections: a retrospective registry analysis
British Journal of Anaesthesia, ISSN: 0007-0912, Vol: 116, Issue: 4, Page: 546-553
2016
- 38Citations
- 41Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations38
- Citation Indexes37
- 37
- CrossRef29
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Captures41
- Readers41
- 41
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- News1
Most Recent News
Registry for Acute Pain Treatment
STUDY INFORMATION OFFICIAL TITLE: Improvement of Acute Pain Treatment With Systemic and Regional Anesthesia CURRENT STATUS: Recruiting: 30 Days STUDY TYPE: Observational [Patient Registry] SPONSOR
Article Description
Catheter-related infections are a serious complication of continuous thoracic epidural analgesia. Tunnelling catheters subcutaneously may reduce infection risk. We thus tested the hypothesis that tunnelling of thoracic epidural catheters is associated with a lower risk of catheter-related infections. Twenty-two thousand, four hundred and eleven surgical patients with continuous thoracic epidural analgesia included in the German Network for Regional Anaesthesia registry between 2007 and 2014 were grouped by whether their catheters were tunnelled ( n +12 870) or not ( n +9541). Catheter-related infections in each group were compared with Student’s unpaired t and χ 2 tests. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with logistic regression, adjusting for potential confounding factors, including age, ASA physical status score, use of catheter for ≥4 days, multiple skin puncture, hospital, and surgical department. There were fewer catheter-related infections in patients with tunnelled catheters (4.5 vs 5.5%, P <0.001). Mild infections were also less common (4.0 vs 4.6%, P +0.009), as were moderate infections (0.4 vs 0.8%, P <0.001). After adjustment for potential confounding factors, tunnelling remained an independent prevention for any grade of infection (adjusted OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.42–0.61, P <0.001) and for mild infections (adjusted OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.43–0.66, P <0.001) and moderate and severe infections (adjusted OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.28–0.70, P +0.001). Tunnelling was associated with a lower risk of thoracic epidural catheter-related infections.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007091217304129; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bja/aew026; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84963930827&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26994232; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0007091217304129; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bja/aew026; http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/lookup/doi/10.1093/bja/aew026; https://academic.oup.com/bja/article-pdf/116/4/546/7863637/aew026.pdf; https://academic.oup.com/bja/article/116/4/546/2566119; http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/content/116/4/546; http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0007091217304129
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know