Int J Pr Nursact: Glucorate chlorhepgenic transparent dressing does not reduce the rate of blood-line infectionassociat associated with the centerline

Centralline-related blood flow infections are accompanied by increased mortality and medical costsSo far, the application of different types of dressings in infection control has not been fully studiedTo assess the effects of two different types of dressings on central blood vessel-related blood flow infectionsA random, non-blind, controlled trial was conductedThe centerline was randomly assigned to the intervention group (glucorate chlorohexalic transparent dressing, n s 259) and the control group (standard dressing, n s 215)The rate of blood flow associated with the central line was assessedresults showed that the difference in blood line infection rate between the two groups was not statistically significantPatients who washed The Pythileta with glucose acid were significantly less frequent than those who used standard dressingsThe main type of infectious microorganism isolated from the outbreak of midline-related blood infection was Gram-negative bacteria (57.2%)The proportion of Gram-positive bacteria and fungi was low (28.5% and 14.3%, respectively)in general, the results show that the use of gluconate chlorohexaed transparent dressing does not reduce the rate of blood line infection associated with the centerline, although it reduces the frequency with which the dressing is replaced and therefore may save care time