Risk of Bias Assessments of Individual Studies
Appendix: 3.0 Risk of Bias Assessments of Individual Studies
Note: Overall risk of bias was calculated by dividing the total number of valuable trial characteristics by the total number of possible characteristics and applying these categories:
- ≤ 25% = high risk of bias;
- > 25% to ≤ 50% = moderate risk of bias;
- > 50% = low risk of bias.
Evaluation of Risk of Bias in Studies Using C-I Dressings among Patients Aged ≥ 18 Years with Short-term, Non-tunneled Central Venous Catheters
|Described as randomized||✓||✓||✓||✓||✓|
|Randomization appropriately performed||✓||n/a||✓||✓||✓|
|Described as double–blind||n/a||n/a||n/a||n/a|
|Outcome assessor blinded||✓||✓||n/a||✓||✓|
|Study participant blinded||n/a||n/a||n/a||n/a|
|Attrition smaller than 10–15% of assigned patients||✓||n/a||✓||✓||✓|
|Attrition appropriately analyzed||✓||n/a||✓||✓||✓|
|Funding source(s) disclosed and no obvious conflict of interest||n/a||n/a||n/a||n/a||n/a|
|Overall Risk of Bias||Low||Moderate||Low||Low||Low|
Evaluation of Risk of Bias in Studies Using C-I Dressings among Patients Aged < 18 Years with Short-term, Non-tunneled Central Venous Catheters
|Described as randomized||✓||✓||✓|
|Randomization appropriately performed||✓||✓||✓|
|Described as double–blind||n/a||n/a||n/a|
|Outcome assessor blinded||n/a||n/a||n/a|
|Study participant blinded||n/a||n/a||n/a|
|Attrition smaller than 10–15% of assigned patients||n/a||n/a||✓|
|Attrition appropriately analyzed||n/a||n/a||n/a|
|Funding source(s) disclosed and no obvious conflict of interest||n/a||n/a||n/a|
|Overall Risk of Bias||Moderate||Moderate||Moderate|
- Timsit JF, Mimoz O, Mourvillier B, et al. Randomized controlled trial of chlorhexidine dressing and highly adhesive dressing for preventing catheter-related infections in critically ill adults. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;186(12):1272-1278.
- Timsit JF, Schwebel C, Bouadma L, et al. Chlorhexidine-impregnated sponges and less frequent dressing changes for prevention of catheter-related infections in critically ill adults: a randomized controlled trial. 2009;301(12):1231-1241.
- Ruschulte H, Franke M, Gastmeier P, et al. Prevention of central venous catheter related infections with chlorhexidine gluconate impregnated wound dressings: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Hematol. 2009;88(3):267-272.
- Arvaniti K, Lathyris D, Clouva-Molyvdas P, et al. Comparison of Oligon catheters and chlorhexidine-impregnated sponges with standard multilumen central venous catheters for prevention of associated colonization and infections in intensive care unit patients: a multicenter, randomized, controlled study. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(2):420-429.
- Roberts B, Cheung D. Biopatch–a new concept in antimicrobial dressings for invasive devices. Aust Crit Care. 1998;11(1):16-19.
- Garland JS, Alex CP, Mueller CD, et al. A randomized trial comparing povidone-iodine to a chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressing for prevention of central venous catheter infections in neonates. 2001;107(6):1431-1436.
- Duzkaya DS, Sahiner NC, Uysal G, Yakut T, Citak A. Chlorhexidine-Impregnated Dressings and Prevention of Catheter-Associated Bloodstream Infections in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit. Crit Care Nurse. 2016;36(6):e1-e7.
- Levy I, Katz J, Solter E, et al. Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing for prevention of colonization of central venous catheters in infants and children: a randomized controlled study. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2005;24(8):676-679.