Jump to content

CLABSI - Multiple lumens vs Y sites

Infusion   (809 Views | 4 Replies)
by CN21IVT CN21IVT (New) New Nurse

CN21IVT has 20 years experience and specializes in Vascular Access.

105 Profile Views; 2 Posts

I have a question about multiple lumen practices with regards to decreasing CLABSI risk.  In my practice, we try to get by with the least amount of lumens, especially central line lumens, but in general, my thought process is, the least amount of access points I can get by with, whether it be PIV or central lines, the better for CLABSIs/PLABSIs.  Recently I came across an ICU patient with a triple lumen IJ, with a triple lumen extension hooked to one of the lumens of the IJ for a total of basically 6 lumens.  I would typically recommend Y-siting compatible medications rather than using the triple lumen extension, but I don't ever recall seeing any literature as to which would be better as far as decreasing CLABSI risk.  I am aware that a triple lumen extension on one lumen can cause compatibility issues, but would like to know if anyone has any other thoughts regarding what would be better for decreasing CLABSI risk other than trying to get some of the meds d/c'd?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IVRUS has 32 years experience as a BSN, RN and specializes in Vascular Access.

1,030 Posts; 20,853 Profile Views

WOW!, 6 lumens.. Is the patient that much of a sick puppy??? First of all, like you, I know that the more lumens means more manipulation, and an increase in CRBSI's.  But, also remember that this is an ADD-ON device. According to INS, add on devices are a no-no, as this too causes an increase in infection.  Filters, manual flow control devices (Dial-a-flows)  or elongated tubing should be part of an integral set, and add on devices prohibited.  Secondly, I too would be worried about compatibility issues. AND, last, but not least, the catheter you said that this patient has is known to HAVE THE HIGHEST INFECTION RATES OF ALL C-LINES. All of these things bring me to the need to evaluate the situation more closely...I am so glad that you are there to advocate for this patient.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 Follower; 2,418 Posts; 49,209 Profile Views

3 hours ago, IVRUS said:

WOW!, 6 lumens.. Is the patient that much of a sick puppy??? First of all, like you, I know that the more lumens means more manipulation, and an increase in CRBSI's.  But, also remember that this is an ADD-ON device. According to INS, add on devices are a no-no, as this too causes an increase in infection. ...

Does the INS actually consider add-on devices a "no-no?"  Or do they recommend there use only when clinically indicated? 

ETA: Are the INS 2016 Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice the most current?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IVRUS has 32 years experience as a BSN, RN and specializes in Vascular Access.

1,030 Posts; 20,853 Profile Views

On 6/1/2020 at 10:04 AM, chare said:

Does the INS actually consider add-on devices a "no-no?"  Or do they recommend there use only when clinically indicated? 

ETA: Are the INS 2016 Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice the most current?  

Standard 36 specifically addresses add-ons and it states, " When indicated, preferentially use systems that minimize manipulation and reduce components, such as integrated extension sets" Therefore, it is saying, that if at all possible, don't use add-ons as they greatly contribute to bacterial introduction.  And, yes, 2016 is that last one. They update standards every 5 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

adventure_rn is a BSN and specializes in NICU, PICU.

3 Followers; 1 Article; 1,464 Posts; 20,182 Profile Views

This is fascinating, since the triple/quad extensions are standard practice in most NICUs and some peds/PICU settings. Pretty much every patient has at least one open lumen/extension port that you can hook into at any time (which is clamped when not in use). My NICUs have never y-d things in, and the PICU I worked in would rarely do it (occasionally people might y lipids into TPN, nurse preference). It wasn't uncommon to see multiple quad-ports stacked on top of each other (like a tree branching out). 

Part of the rhetoric was that if you needed to run extra things together at a later point (like drips or compatible meds), you could decease infection risk by steriley stringing the extra extension/ports into the line ahead of time, rather than breaking into the line once it's already attached to the patient (a huge infection risk no-no in NICU).

NICU/peds tubing also tends to be so tiny that it often doesn't even include a port on the line to y into; you have to use an extension bi/tri/quad-port if you want to run multiple things simultaneously through a line. NICU access is so challenging to establish/maintain that we also tend to run a lot more things together that adult nurses usually wouldn't (like bolus meds running in a lumen with sedation drips, or TPN being paused so an incompatible med can be given through the 'TPN lumen.' 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×

This site uses cookies. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Read our Privacy, Cookies, and Terms of Service Policies to learn more.