INSIDE THE CURRENT ISSUE

May 2008

Infection Protection

 

VAP prevention:
Critical techniques and tools

by Suzanne M. Pear, RN, Ph.D, CIC

The statistics, regardless of how often they are read, are chilling. Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is responsible for more deaths than any other healthcare-associated infection (HAI) – approximately 36,000 people die in the United States each year from pneumonia acquired after being admitted to a hospital.1 Most patients who develop a hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) have been on a ventilator, resulting in longer Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stays as well as more time in the hospital overall, almost three weeks longer in some cases.2 The additional cost of healthcare and hospitalization attributed to an episode of VAP can be as high as $40,000,3 which is only partially recovered by healthcare institutions at present because of capitated fee schedules.4 VAP is also expected to be placed on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (CMS) growing list of healthcare-acquired, but preventable conditions which will not be reimbursed at all.5,6

The recent healthcare news is heart-
warming. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s (IHI) 100,000 Lives and 5 Million Lives Campaigns, Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP) and the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology’s (APIC) Zero Tolerance Campaign have galvanized healthcare administrators and clinicians around the country and the world into using "bundles" of evidenced-based practices to prevent HAIs and other iatrogenic events, saving many thousands of lives and hundreds of thousands of healthcare dollars in the bargain.7 Success stories abound about the phenomenal improvements seen when bundles of practices are used, but as Dr. Bonnie Zell of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and IHI notes, there is a lot of confusion about bundles and why they make a difference.8 The patient care practices found in bundles are not new; they have received considerable study and review in the recent as well as distant past. What is new is the universal agreement and emphasis that there are certain practices that must be used either sequentially or concomitantly, and most important, consistently, in order to improve outcomes and prevent healthcare-associated adverse events, especially HAIs, from occurring.

VAP prevention – bunches of bundles

Although the IHI VAP bundle, published in 2004 as part of the 100,000 Lives Campaign, has arguably received the most attention, it is by no means the only recognized or recommended group of evidence-based VAP prevention practices. The CDC’s 2003 Guidelines for preventing health-care-associated pneumonia3 is a compendium of HAP/VAP prevention strategies stratified by the quality and quantity of supporting clinical studies. The American Thoracic Society 2004 Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia9 has a succinct section on patient and treatment-related modifiable risk factors for HAP/VAP prevention which identifies both general and specific interventions which should be incorporated into the care of at-risk patient populations. APIC also published in 2004 a synopsis of VAP prevention strategies10 and the American Association of Critical Care Nurses 2005 - 5th edition of the AACN Procedure Manual for Critical Care11 delineated important patient monitoring and care practices for prevention of adverse events associated with endotracheal intubation, which reiterated those essential evidence-based strategies.

Not every healthcare facility’s VAP prevention bundle is exactly alike. For example, some institutions choose to follow only Category I recommendations from the CDC’s guidelines.3 Others only follow the IHI VAP prevention bundle12, while others may create their own unique practice and prevention bundles. The important point is that whichever bundle practices are adopted, that they be routinely monitored for consistent high level compliance and resultant VAP prevention improvement.

Critical techniques and tools for VAP prevention

The surest way to prevent VAP is to avoid intubating patients unless absolutely necessary or to remove patients from mechanical ventilator support as soon as possible.3,9 Non-invasive airway management options, such as bilevel non-invasive ventilation (Bi-PAP) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), are excellent alternatives to intubation in certain patient populations which may be underutilized in some facilities.13 Ways to ascertain this may be to benchmark the ICU ventilator utilization ratio with other similar units or to see whether all ventilator patients are given daily "sedation vacations"12 to assess for readiness to wean and extubate.

If a patient does require ventilatory support, careful endotracheal (ET) tube selection and placement are important, as the newer device variants offer important features which can help minimize the adverse consequences of intubation. ET tubes with high volume, low pressure cuffs may reduce the likelihood of tracheal ischemia, trauma and inadvertent extubation.14 Cuffed ET tubes that are anatomically correct and with proper depth markings are revolutionizing pediatric anesthesia practice.15 ET tubes with cuffs having specialized sealant properties to minimize subglottic fluid leakage or that continuously suction subglottic secretions have shown significant VAP reduction benefits.16,17 Making sure that ET tubes as well as gastric feeding tubes are placed orally rather nasally has been shown to reduce sinusitis, a common precursor and possible initiator of VAP.9

Patient positioning, specifically keeping the patient’s head elevated at least 30° unless medically contraindicated, is an essential strategy to minimize aspiration of oral and gastric secretions.18 All critically ill patients are at risk for aspiration, but intubated patients and/or patients receiving liquid tube feedings are at extremely high risk for gastric reflux and having contaminated secretions enter their lungs. The other essential technique to prevent aspiration is suctioning of the mouth and throat (oropharynx) around the ET tube and above the cuff, and suctioning of pulmonary secretions through the ET tube on an as-needed basis. ET tube suctioning can be performed using either an open suction, single-use sterile catheter or a closed-suction in-line catheter system which is exchanged every 24 or 72 hours. According to the American Association for Respiratory Care (AARC), the benefits of the closed system are that it allows ventilated patients to be suctioned without removal of ventilator support, decreasing the potential for complications associated with open suctioning such as "alveolar derecruitment" as well as environmental contamination and healthcare worker exposure from the patient’s microbially colonized secretions.19

Another strategy related to patient positioning is the use of kinetic, continuous oscillation or rotational beds to decrease lung atelectasis and improve mobilization and clearance of bronchopulmonary secretions.20 Five of six studies from a meta-analysis found VAP reduction benefit from the use of these beds, especially in surgical and/or neurological patients; however, concern has been voiced about the additional daily cost of approximately $100 for the specialized bed. Considering the much higher consequences of VAP in both dollars and lives may help put prevention costs in perspective.

Saline lavage, the instilling of saline into the ET tube prior to suctioning, is a practice that should be minimized. This used to be commonly performed with the rationale being that the fluid irrigation would help liquefy thick secretions and facilitate their removal. That practice has fallen into disrepute because it was found to cause oxygen desaturation as well as flush micro-organisms into the lungs from the biofilm-encrusted artificial airway, actually promoting the incidence of VAP.21,22

Back to basics has become a common rallying cry in our high tech healthcare world, and no where has it been shown to be more important than in VAP prevention with the renewed emphasis on consistent provision of comprehensive oral care.23 Here is a case where both technique and tools has been found to be critical and in some cases, wanting. In 2004, researchers from the University of Louisville Schools of Nursing and Dentistry surveyed more than 550 nurses working in more than 100 ICUs about their oral care knowledge and practices.24 Ninety-two percent of the nurses reported that they believed oral care to be important, but only 20 percent used toothbrushes and toothpaste when providing oral care. Almost half of those surveyed said they needed better oral care supplies and wanted more evidence-based education about oral care. What they were asking for were both the tools and the techniques for providing evidence-based care.

In the final analysis, the best medical products, devices or tools cannot make up for poor patient care practices and techniques. However, the best evidence-based patient care demands that the best tools available be provided to support and augment that care. Certainly there is a concern about the additional cost some of these tools and devices may add to the bottom line. But a truism of healthcare borrowed from education helps put these costs into perspective: "If you think prevention is expensive, take a look at the cost of disease."25

Dr. Suzanne Pear is a health care epidemiologist and associate director for infection control practices within the scientific affairs and clinical education department of Kimberly-Clark Health Care.

References

1. Klevens RM, Edwards JR, Richards CL, Jr., Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Pollock DA et al. Estimating health care-associated infections and deaths in U.S. hospitals, 2002. Public Health Rep 2007;122(2):160-166.

2. Rello J, Ollendorf D, Oster G, Vera-Llonch M, Bellm L, Redman R et al. Epidemiology and Outcomes of Ventilator-Associate Pneumonia in a Large US Database. Chest 2002;122(6):2115-2121.

3. Tablan OC, Anderson LJ, Besser R, Bridges C, Hajjeh R. Guidelines for preventing health-care—associated pneumonia, 2003: recommendations of CDC and the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. MMWR Recomm Rep 2004;53(RR-3):1-36.

4. Pennsylvania Healthcare Cost Containment Council. Hospital Infections in Pennsylvania - 2005. Pennsylvania Healthcare Cost Containment Council 2006;Issue No. 9

5. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Hospital-Acquired Conditions (HAC) in Acute Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) Hospitals. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 2008

6. Pear R. Medicare Says It Won’t Cover Hospital Errors. New York Times 2007; nytimes.com

7. Pyrek K.M. Zero Tolerance for Infections: A Winning Strategy. Infection Control Today 2008;12(2):

8. Schraag J. Bundling is Better, Experts Say. Infection Control Today 2008;12(2):

9. American Thoracic Society, Infectious Diseases Society of America. Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005;171(4):388-416.

10. APIC. Preventing Ventilator Associated Pneumonia. Infection Control Week 2004 Brochure 2007;

11. Scott J, Vollman K. Wiegand D and Carlson K. Procedure 4. Endotracheal Tube and Oral Care. AACN Procedure Manual for Critical Care. 2005;5th28-33.

12. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Protecting 5 Million Lives From Harm Campaign. Getting Started Kit: Preventing Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia How-to Guide. Online 2007;

13. Burns SM. Lynn-McHale Wiegand DJ and Carlson KK. Procedure 32: Ventilatory Management - Volume and Pressure Modes. AACN Procedure Manual for Critical Care. 2005; 5th(32):211-225.

14. Dullenkopf A, Gerber AC, Weiss M. Fit and seal characteristics of a new paediatric tracheal tube with high volume-low pressure polyurethane cuff. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2005;49(2):232-237.

15. Weiss M, Dullenkopf A. Cuffed tracheal tubes in children: past, present and future. Expert Rev Med Devices 2007;4(1):73-82.

16. Zanella A, Cressoni M, Epp M, Stylianou M, Kolobow T. A double-layer tracheal tube cuff designed to prevent leakage: a bench-top study. Intensive Care Med 2008;

17. Depew CL, McCarthy MS. Subglottic secretion drainage: a literature review. AACN Adv Crit Care 2007;18(4):366-379.

18. Dodek P, Keenan S, Cook D, Heyland D, Jacka M, Hand L et al. Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Ann Intern Med 2004;141(4):305-313.

19. Hess DR, Kallstrom TJ, Mottram CD, Myers TR, Sorenson HM, Vines DL. Care of the ventilator circuit and its relation to ventilator-associated pneumonia. Respir Care 2003;48(9):869-879.

20. Collard H, Saint S. Prevention of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia. Agency for Healthcare Research Quality Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No.43, Making Healthcare Safer: A Critical Analysis of Patient Safety Practices. AHRQ Publication No. 01-E058, full report, 01-E057, summary. 2001;(17):185-203.

21. Hagler DA, Traver GA. Endotracheal saline and suction catheters: sources of lower airway contamination. Am J Crit Care 1994;3(6):444-447.

22. Akgul S, Akyolcu N. Effects of normal saline on endotracheal suctioning. J Clin Nurs 2002;11(6):826-830.

23. O’keefe-McCarthy S. Evidence-based nursing strategies to prevent ventilator-acquired pneumonia. Dynamics 2006;17(1):8-11.

24. Binkley C, Furr LA, Carrico R, McCurren C. Survey of oral care practices in US intensive care units. Am J Infect Control 2004;32(3):161-169.

25. ThinkExist.com Quotations. "Derek Bok quotes". ThinkExist.com Quotations Online 2008; 4