ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03270774Updated Sep 1, 2017

Central Venous Catheter Colonisation Among Critically Ill Patients in Intensive Care Units

An observational study in Sepsis, Septic Shock and Post-cardiac Surgery, sponsored by Makerere University. Completed. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-09-01.

Primary conditionShock, SepticRegistry: SepsisReclassifiedWhy we changed it
Registry
Sepsis — the first condition term the registry derived for this study.
ClinicalTrials.gg
Shock, Septic
Why
  1. The study's listed conditions name Shock, Septic, a narrower term within Sepsis.
Confidence
High: the new condition is named in the study's own listed conditions. Of 351 hand-checked studies reclassified this way, 68% were exactly right and 84% in the right disease family; the registry's first term was right for 5% (measured 2026-10-21). How we classify →
Wrong?
Tell us the study's main condition →

Sponsored by Makerere University · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
100
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Background: Central Venous catheter insertion technique and indwelling time are major risk factors for CVC colonisation. Colonisation occurs through microbial migration and biofilm formation along the catheter insertion tract. This study set out to determine the prevalence and associated factors for central venous catheter colonisation among critically ill patient. No data exists in this clinical setting addressing this topic.

Methods: The study population included 100 participants with central venous catheters in situ for at least 24 hours. Catheter tip (distal 5-cm segment) and blood cultures (10mls peripheral blood) were obtained at the time of catheter removal.

Read the detailed description

Introduction : Central venous catheter (CVC) insertion technique and time spent in situ (dwell period) are major risk factors for CVC colonisation among patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) worldwide. Normal skin flora colonizes CVCs early in their dwell period (\< 7-10 days) causing variable occurrence of infections in all categories of patients. Uganda has no data on CVC colonisation and with increasing use there is concern of CVC colonisation and its consequences. This study was done to determine the prevalence and associated factors of CVC colonization among patients in general ICUs.

Methodology: This was prospective cohort study. Critically ill patients with CVCs in situ from four general ICUs were consecutively enrolled into the study. Data on socio-demographic, clinical characteristics (diagnosis, comorbidities) and CVC insertion (site, technique, experience) was collected using a standardised questionnaire until a sample size of 100 was achieved. At the time of CVC removal, the CVC tip (distal 5cm segment) was aseptically obtained and cultured for microorganisms using the semi-quantitative method. A blood culture sample (10mls) was also collected from a peripheral site at the same time. Data was double entered into EPIDATA version 3.1.5 and exported to STATA version 12.0 for analysis.

02

Conditions studied

  • Sepsis
  • Septic Shock
  • Post-cardiac Surgery
  • Post-Cardiorespiratory Arrest Coma
  • Head Injury
  • Hypoxic Brain Damage
  • Acute Liver Failure
  • Diabetic Ketoacidotic Hyperglycaemic Coma
03

In context

Shock, Septic Reclassified

1,078 studies on the registry are indexed under Shock, Septic; 232 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 100 is close to the median of 108 across 406 observational studies indexed under Shock, Septic.

Browse Shock, Septic studies →

Lead sponsor

Makerere University is the lead sponsor of 144 studies on the registry; 16 are open to participants now.

Compared within Shock, Septic, this study's primary condition as ClinicalTrials.gg classifies it; the registry's first condition term is Sepsis. The counts are of registry records indexed under each term, refreshed daily. How we classify →

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Study population All the critically ill patients with CVCs admitted to the general ICUs in the 4 hospitals above during the study period and who met the inclusion criteria

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients of all age groups were included in this study
  • All critically ill patients admitted to the ICU with Central Venous Catheters in situ
  • Written /assent
  • Waiver of consent for unconscious patients with no attendant/valid surrogate respondent to provide the required information

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

•Patients who were already on treatment for CVC-related infectious complications.

Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
100 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Prevalence of central venous catheter colonisation

    Of the patients that had central venous catheter inserted, how many of them developed central venous catheter colonisation

    Time frame: up to 14 days

Secondary outcomes

  1. Prevalence of Central venous catheter associated bloodstream infections

    Of the patients that developed central venous catheter colonisation, how many of them developed associated bloodstream infection

    Time frame: Up to 48 hours after removal of central venous catheter

  2. Factors associated with central venous catheter colonisation

    Factors that have a significant p-value \< 0.5 of association with central venous catheter colonisation

    Time frame: up to 14 days

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Apr 2016 to primary completion in Apr 2017, 11 months.

Of 189 non-industry observational studies under Shock, Septic, half reached primary completion within 25 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 13 and three quarters within 47. This study's 11 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 202 studies reached it within 25 months; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 47.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Aug 30, 2017
First posted
Sep 1, 2017
StartActual
Apr 19, 2016
Primary completionActual
Apr 10, 2017
CompletionActual
Apr 19, 2017
Last update
Sep 1, 2017
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 1, 2017, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03270774
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Sep 1, 2017
Start date
Apr 19, 2016
Primary completion
Apr 10, 2017
Completion
Apr 19, 2017
Last update
Sep 1, 2017

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion