Research Paper on:
Prevention of Central Venous Catheter-Related Infections

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
tunnel, port pocket and--most seriously--those in the bloodstream" (Hadaway, 2002, p. 46). Annually, roughly a quarter of a million cares of bloodstream infection are associated with vascular catheters and between  12 and 25 percent of these patients die (Hadaway, 2002). Despite the guidelines and recommendations formulated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Infusion Nurses Society and  the Oncology Nursing Society catheter-related bloodstream infections are increasing (Hadaway, 2002). Some factors that are contributing to this increase are beyond the control of healthcare practitioners. For instance, a contributing  element is when the patient has a compromised immune status. However, it is possible for nurses to minimize certain risks that are a routine part of care. Therefore, the purpose  of this literature review is to ascertain the latest data, protocols and methodologies for preventing central venous catheter-related infections, particularly focusing on how the dressing of the site can impact  the risk of infection. Criteria for inclusion and exclusion of sources While the criteria for this literature review is to examine prevention methods for central venous catheter-related infections, and  particularly, in regards to how dressings impact this risk, other literature offers implications that pertain to this topics. For example, a study or research article that discusses how to prevent  infection in other forms of catherization can offer useful information towards the investigation of this topic although it is not precisely on pertaining to this topic. Therefore, such studies/articles were  not excluded. For inclusion, articles/studies had to pertain to some aspect of the topic under consideration, such as helping to prevent infection through efficient skin cleaning and site preparation. Excluded  were all articles older than 5 years, because this suggests that their information may be out-of-date. Only scholarly, peer-reviewed professional journals were consulted for the review. Articles that specifically addressed