Tegaderm CHG securement dressing for vascular access sites in critically ill adults

The Committee concluded that the evidence showed that the 3M Tegaderm CHG IV securement dressing (Tegaderm CHG) offers better protection against catheter‑related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) than sterile semipermeable transparent dressings. Based on indirect evidence, the Committee considered that Tegaderm CHG also offers equivalent protection against CRBSI to chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)‑impregnated sponge dressings, but has other advantages, specifically being able to see the catheter insertion site.

The Committee accepted the External Assessment Centre's revised model and sensitivity analysis which estimated costs in relation to the baseline CRBSI rate. It concluded that Tegaderm CHG could generate cost savings of £73 per patient when the baseline CRBSI rate was 1.48 per 1,000 catheter days, as cited in the Matching Michigan study for intensive care units in England (based on April 2009 to April 2011 data). However, the Committee was aware of advice that baseline CRBSI rates have fallen in recent years and acknowledged the importance of the External Assessment Centre's estimate that Tegaderm CHG is likely to be cost neutral when the baseline CRBSI rate is 0.24 per 1,000 catheter days, and to incur costs when it falls below that level. It therefore concluded that hospitals should take their baseline CRBSI rate into account when making decisions about whether to adopt Tegaderm CHG.