Background Central line‐associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) are important hospital‐acquired infections. Chlorhexidine‐impregnated dressings (also known as chlorhexidine patches, CHG patches) are reported to decrease CLABSIs in adults. This study aims to determine the efficacy of CHG patches in reducing CLABSIs in children. Methods An open‐label randomized controlled trial was conducted in children aged 2 months to 18 years, requiring a short‐term catheter. Patients were randomized into two groups, allocated to receive CHG patches or standard transparent dressings. Care of the catheter was in accordance with Asia Pacific Society of Infection Control (APSIC) recommendations. Central‐line‐associated bloodstream infections were defined using National Healthcare Safety Network surveillance criteria. Results From April 2017 to April 2018, 192 children were enrolled. There were 108 CHG patch catheters and 101 standard dressing catheters, contributing to 3,113 catheter days. The median duration of catheter dwelling was 13 days, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 8–20 days. Half were placed at the jugular vein and 22% at the femoral vein. There were 23 CLABSI events. Incidence rates for CHG patches and standard dressings were 7.98 (95% confidence interval (CI), 4.25–13.65) and 6.74 (95% CI, 3.23–12.39) per 1,000 catheter days, respectively (incidence rate ratio 1.18; 95% CI, 0.52–2.70). The CLABSI pathogens were 15 Gram‐negative bacteria, six Gram‐positive bacteria, and two Candida organisms. Catheter colonization of CHG patches and standard dressings were 2.02 (95% CI, 0.42–5.91) and 3.07 (95% CI, 1.00–7.16) per 1,000 catheter days, respectively. Only local adverse effects occurred in 6.8% of the participants. Conclusions In our setting, there was no difference in CLABSI rates when the chlorhexidine patch dressings were compared with the standard transparent dressings. Strengthening of CLABSI prevention bundles is mandatory.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) recently recommended 2-dose primary rabies immunization instead of the 3-dose standard regimen. Given limited data of 2-dose regimens in pediatric population, this study was conducted. The objective was to compare the immunogenicity between 2-dose and 3-dose primary rabies immunization.MethodsThis study was an open-label clinical trial. Inclusion criteria were children aged 2–12 years with rabies virus neutralizing antibody (RVNA) titers < 0.5 IU/ml at baseline. The participants were divided into 2-dose vaccination (2D) on days 0 and 28 and 3-dose vaccination (3D) on days 0, 7, and 28 with a 2:1 ratio. A dose of 0.5 ml purified vero cell rabies vaccine (PVRV) was administered intramuscularly. RVNA titers were measured at 14-day post primary immunization. RVNA titers ≥ 0.5 IU/ml were considered seroprotective against rabies. Geometric mean titers (GMT) were calculated. T cell specific response to rabies vaccine antigen were measured from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) using the interferon-gamma enzyme-linked immunospot (IFN-gamma ELISpot) assay.ResultsFrom September to October 2017, 105 participants (52% male), 76 in 2D group and 29 in 3D group were enrolled. Median age and body weight was 70 months (IQR 53–88) and 19.2 kilograms (IQR 15.9–24.3), respectively. All participants had seroprotection at 14-day post primary immunization with GMT of 18.6 (95% CI 15.8-21.9) and 16.3 (95% CI 13.1–20.0) in 2D and 3D groups, respectively (P = 0.35). Median IFN-gamma level at 14-day post primary immunization was 60 spot forming cells (SFC) per 106PBMCs and 132 SFC per 106PBMCs in the 2D and 3D groups, respectively (P = 0.15).ConclusionThe immunogenicity of 2-dose primary rabies immunization at 14-day post primary vaccination is comparable to the 3-dose regimen. Participants are currently being followed for 1-year results.Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.