Objectives. To evaluate the evidence concerning the effectiveness of antiseptic barrier caps vs. manual disinfection in preventing central line-associated bloodstream infection (Clabsi). Methods. The protocol of this systematic review and meta-analysis was pre-registered in Prospero (CRD42021259582). PubMed, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched from 2011 to 2021. Randomized-controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies on hospitalized patients of any age were included. Results. Fourteen studies were included. Compared with manual disinfection, antiseptic barrier caps significantly reduced Clabsi rate per 1000 line-days (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.02; 95%CI: -0.03 to -0.01) and number of Clabsi per patient (RR: 0.60; 95%CI: 0.41-0.89). Subgroup analysis showed that antiseptic barrier caps were more effective in reducing Clabsi rate per 1000 line-days in ICU (SMD: -0.02; 95%CI: -0.03 to -0.01) and non-ICU patients (SMD: -0.03; 95%CI: -0.05 to -0.01), adults (SMD: -0.02; 95%CI: -0.04 to -0.01), as in observational studies (SMD: -0.02; 95%CI: -0.02 to -0.01). Antiseptic barrier caps also significantly reduce Clabsi risk in ICU patients (RR: 0.65, 95%CI: 0.42-1.00), adults (RR: 0.50, 95%CI: 0.29-0.86), and observational studies (RR: 0.54; 95%CI: 0.32-0.91). No differences were found when only children or RCTs were taken into account. Median cost savings amongst studies were $21,890 [IQR 16,350-45,000] per Clabsi. Conclusions. Antiseptic barrier caps appear to be effective in reducing Clabsi. The real-world impact needs to be confirmed by RCTs.
Tejada S, Leal-Dos-Santos M, Peña-López Y, et al. Eur J Intern Med. 2022 Feb 10:S0953-6205(22)00055-3. Doi : 10.1016/j.ejim.2022.01.040.