Advertisement

Erratum

        In the article “Impact of needle-free connectors compared with 3-way stopcocks on catheter-related bloodstream infection rates: A meta-analysis.” by Victor D. Rosenthal. in the March issue of the American Journal of Infection Control (2020;48(3):281-84.
        The correct items are as follows:
        The title should have read: ”Impact of needle-free connectors compared with 3-way stopcocks on catheter-related bloodstream infection and colonization rates: A meta-analysis”.
        Reference 16 should have read: "Casey AL, Burnell S, Whinn H, Worthington T, Faroqui MH, Elliott TS. A prospective clinical trial to evaluate the microbial barrier of a needleless connector. J Hosp Infect. 2007;65(3):212-218. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2006.09.029”.
        3- In the abstract, the RR, 95% CI value must be corrected. The correct data is the one in table 2.  It should say: "Relative risk was 0.40 with a 95% CI of 0.20 to 0.80, and the relative difference was −0.025 with a 95% CI of −0.052 to 0.003”.

        Linked Article

        • Impact of needle-free connectors compared with 3-way stopcocks on catheter-related bloodstream infection rates: A meta-analysis
          American Journal of Infection ControlVol. 48Issue 3
          • Preview
            In addition to being among the most prevalent occupational accidents, needlestick injuries are also among the most preventable ones. Health care workers (HCWs), particularly nurses and physicians but also cleaning staff and others, are at high risk for sustaining a percutaneous injury. These injuries not only expose HCWs to more than 20 different bloodborne pathogens (BBPs) that can be acquired from a patient but also expose patients to the transmission of diseases from HCWs. It is estimated that 384,000 percutaneous injuries occur in US hospital settings per year, with 61% (236,000) of them being hollow-bore needlestick injuries and 23% of them occurring during surgical procedures.
          • Full-Text
          • PDF