Authors' recommendations: In the comparison between the mechanical valve devices (either NFD of PFD type) versus simple devices (NFD type), evidence from the RCTs showed no differences in terms of catheter-related infections, while evidence from the observational studies showed that the introduction of mechanical valve devices was associated with significant increase in CR-BSI rates. One observational study showed that a PFD mechanical valve device was associated with more CR-BSI than a NFD mechanical valve device used for central venous catheters. Taken together, the clinical effectiveness of PFD needleless connectors versus NFD needleless connectors for adult patients receiving central venous lines or peripheral venous lines is inconclusive based on the current evidence. There were no guidelines to indicate which type of mechanical devices (NFD or PFD) should be used for venous access devices (central or peripheral).

Project Status: Completed

URL for project: http://www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/l0172_positive_negative_needleless_connectors_htis-2.pdf

Year Published: 2010

English language abstract: An English language summary is available

Publication Type: Not Assigned

Country: Canada

Organisation Name: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health

Contact Address: 600-865 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON K1S 5S8 Canada. Tel: +1 613 226 2553; Fax: +1 613 226 5392;

Contact Name: requests@cadth.ca

Contact Email: requests@cadth.ca

Copyright: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH)