Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection

Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection

Details:

In collaboration with your approved course mentor, you will identify a specific evidence-based practice proposal topic for the capstone project. Consider the clinical environment in which you are currently working or have recently worked. The capstone project topic can be a clinical practice problem, an organizational issue, a quality improvement suggestion, a leadership initiative, or an educational need appropriate to your area of interest as well as your practice immersion (practicum) setting. Examples of the integration of community health, leadership, and an EBP can be found on the “Educational and Community-Based Programs” page of the Healthy People 2020 website Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection.

Write a 500–750-word description of your proposed capstone project topic. Make sure to include the following:

The problem, issue, suggestion, initiative, or educational need that will be the focus of the project

The setting or context in which the problem, issue, suggestion, initiative, or educational need can be observed.

A description providing a high level of detail regarding the problem, issue, suggestion, initiative, or educational need.

Impact of the problem, issue, suggestion, initiative, or educational need on the work environment, the quality of care provided by staff, and patient outcomes.

ORDER A FREE-PLAGIARISM PAPER NOW

Significance of the problem, issue, suggestion, initiative, or educational need and its implications to nursing.

A proposed solution to the identified project topic

You are required to retrieve and assess a minimum of 8 peer-reviewed articles. Plan your time accordingly to complete this assignment.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

There are occasions when patients are admitted into medical facilities, requiring central lines to facilitate drug administration. In fact, central lines can be identified as an important link for infusion treatment involving chronically and acutely ill persons. That is because their medical situation would require intravenous drug administration into the central circulation system as a portal for transporting medication, required to save lives, directly into the body (Majid et al., 2011). Although central lines are an important medical tool, they are also accompanied by some risks to include central line associated bloodstream infection that can increase the cost of medical care and morbidity or even increase mortality in some cases. Medical publications on the subject of central line infections shows that these risks can be minimized or even averted through particular nursing approaches (Rinke et al., 2012). The present analysis explores the problem of central line associated bloodstream infection by proposing strategies for addressing the issue.

Central line associated bloodstream infection can be considered as the result of contamination occurring around an intravenous line used to administer drugs and its dressing. This is a source of concern when the central line is used to administer drugs that would have been easily administered through other safer means (Guerin et al., 2010). For instance, using a nebulizer to administer albuterol presents an unnecessary risk for infect when the same drug could have easily been administered using a metered inhaler that is easily safer. In this case, the central line would require frequent changes that increase the risk of infection even as it disrupts the healing process when the patient has to be disturbed frequently instead of being left to rest. The most distressing aspect of this knowledge is that there is ample evidence to show that using central line increases the risk of infection, yet medical personnel (including nurses) continue to use central lines on a regular basis (McAlearney & Hefner, 2014; Wolf et al., 2013) Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection.

It is acknowledged that central lines present a high risk of infection, with medical facility programs presented to prevent the incidence of infection. In fact, the incidence of central line associated bloodstream infection vary between different facilities with Sons et al. (2012) coalescing information from National Healthcare Surveillance Network to show that some medical facilities reported infection rates as high as 4.2 patients for every 1,000 and as low as 0.2 patients for every 1,000. This marks a 38% difference in the way in infection rates. Although the figures may appear low, the differences noted between facilities is an indication that more can be done to arrest the situation (Guerin et al., 2010). This awareness has galvanized policy makers and health administrators to put regulatory measures in place to force medical facilities to apply corrective measures that engage multidisciplinary teams and guarantee favorable outcomes. Meyer, Balzer and Kopke (2013) made a similar observation by noting that it was possible to apply deliberate actions to reduce the incidence of central line associated bloodstream infections. As such, the premise is presented that increasing the awareness of practicing medical personnel, through evidence incorporation, can improve the safety of the patients, along with the practice effectiveness and efficiency (Oh et al., 2010).

ORDER A FREE-PLAGIARISM PAPER NOW

One must accept that there is a need to link medical practice with peer-reviewed evidence with the objective being to increase medical practice efficiency and effectiveness. This is principally true for central line associated bloodstream infection where evidence suggests that there are ways of reducing the risk and incidence of infection. Despite this evidence, medical personnel still continue to apply the same old practices as standard practice even when new practice would produce more favorable result. In essence, medical personnel need to be more cognizant of evidence that have an impact on their practice and apply the evidence.

References

Guerin, K., Wagner, J., Raines, K., & Bessesen M. (2010). Reduction in central line associated bloodstream infection by implementation of a post insertion care bundle. American Journal of Infection Control, 38(6), 430-433.

Majid, S., Foo, S., Luyt, B., Zhang, X., Theng, Y. & Chang, Y. (2011). Adopting evidence-based practice in clinical decision making: nurses’ perceptions, knowledge, and barriers. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 99(3), 229-236.

McAlearney, A. S. & Hefner, J. L. (2014).  Facilitating central line–associated bloodstream infection prevention: a qualitative study comparing perspectives of infection control professionals and frontline staff. American Journal of Infection Control, 42(10), S216-S222.

Meyer, G., Balzer, K. & Kopke, S. (2013). Evidence-based nursing practice–Opinions on the status quo. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes, 107(1), 30-35.

Oh, E. G., Kim Sunah., Kim Sun., Kim Sue., Cho, E. Y., Yoo, J., Kim, H. S., Lee, J., Yoo, M. A. & Lee, H. (2010). Integrating Evidence-Based Practice into RN-to-BSN Clinical Nursing Education. Journal of Nursing Education, 49(7), 387-392.

Rinke, M., Chen, A., Bundy, D., Colantuoni, E., Fratino, L., Drucis, K. & Miller, M. (2012). Implementation of a central line maintenance care bundle in hospitalized pediatric oncology patients. Pediatrics, 130(4), 996-1004.

Son, C., Daniels, T. & Sepkowitz, K. (2012). Central line associated bloodstream infection surveillance outside the intensive care unit: A multicenter survey. Infection Control Hospital Epidemiology, 33(9), 869-874 Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection.