Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007))

Anne F. Voor in ’t holt; Onno K. Helder; Margreet C. Vos; Laura Schafthuizen; Sandra Sülz; Agnes van den Hoogen; Erwin Ista

doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.001

Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007))

Anne F. Voor in ’t holt
, Onno K. Helder
, Margreet C. Vos
, Laura Schafthuizen
, Sandra Sülz
, Agnes van den Hoogen
, Erwin Ista^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/Letter to the editor › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

In the meta-analysis we compared two types of ‘barrier caps’ respectively the Curos and the SwabCap. We described that the study of Cameron-Watson (2016) used the Curos barrier cap, however, this is incorrect. Cameron-Watson studied the effectiveness of the Curos barrier cap. This incorrect description has consequences for the subgroup analysis (of the meta-analysis) we have performed. Subgroup analysis showed that the Curos (IRR= 0.47, 95% CI= 0.31 to 0.72) and SwabCap (IRR= 0.72, 95% CI = 0.60 to 0.86) were equally effective. See corrected Tables 1 and 2, and Fig. 2 for further details (Supplementary data S3). The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	79-80
Number of pages	2
Journal	International Journal of Nursing Studies
Volume	84
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.001
Publication status	Published - 1 Aug 2018

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.001

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007))'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

Voor in ’t holt, A. F., Helder, O. K., Vos, M. C., Schafthuizen, L., Sülz, S., Hoogen, A. V. D., & Ista, E. (2018). Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007)). International Journal of Nursing Studies, 84, 79-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.001

Voor in ’t holt, Anne F. ; Helder, Onno K. ; Vos, Margreet C. et al. / Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections : A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007)). In: International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2018 ; Vol. 84. pp. 79-80.

@article{4808966ae5634e26a229697a193777f1,

title = "Corrigendum to {\textquoteleft}Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis{\textquoteright} [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007))",

abstract = "In the meta-analysis we compared two types of {\textquoteleft}barrier caps{\textquoteright} respectively the Curos and the SwabCap. We described that the study of Cameron-Watson (2016) used the Curos barrier cap, however, this is incorrect. Cameron-Watson studied the effectiveness of the Curos barrier cap. This incorrect description has consequences for the subgroup analysis (of the meta-analysis) we have performed. Subgroup analysis showed that the Curos (IRR= 0.47, 95\% CI= 0.31 to 0.72) and SwabCap (IRR= 0.72, 95\% CI = 0.60 to 0.86) were equally effective. See corrected Tables 1 and 2, and Fig. 2 for further details (Supplementary data S3). The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007",

author = "\{Voor in {\textquoteright}t holt\}, \{Anne F.\} and Helder, \{Onno K.\} and Vos, \{Margreet C.\} and Laura Schafthuizen and Sandra S{\"u}lz and Hoogen, \{Agnes van den\} and Erwin Ista",

year = "2018",

month = aug,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.001",

language = "English",

volume = "84",

pages = "79--80",

journal = "International Journal of Nursing Studies",

issn = "0020-7489",

publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

Voor in ’t holt, AF, Helder, OK, Vos, MC, Schafthuizen, L, Sülz, S, Hoogen, AVD & Ista, E 2018, 'Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007))', International Journal of Nursing Studies, vol. 84, pp. 79-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.001

Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007)). / Voor in ’t holt, Anne F.; Helder, Onno K.; Vos, Margreet C. et al.
In: International Journal of Nursing Studies, Vol. 84, 01.08.2018, p. 79-80.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/Letter to the editor › Academic › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007))

AU - Voor in ’t holt, Anne F.

AU - Helder, Onno K.

AU - Vos, Margreet C.

AU - Schafthuizen, Laura

AU - Sülz, Sandra

AU - Hoogen, Agnes van den

AU - Ista, Erwin

PY - 2018/8/1

Y1 - 2018/8/1

N2 - In the meta-analysis we compared two types of ‘barrier caps’ respectively the Curos and the SwabCap. We described that the study of Cameron-Watson (2016) used the Curos barrier cap, however, this is incorrect. Cameron-Watson studied the effectiveness of the Curos barrier cap. This incorrect description has consequences for the subgroup analysis (of the meta-analysis) we have performed. Subgroup analysis showed that the Curos (IRR= 0.47, 95% CI= 0.31 to 0.72) and SwabCap (IRR= 0.72, 95% CI = 0.60 to 0.86) were equally effective. See corrected Tables 1 and 2, and Fig. 2 for further details (Supplementary data S3). The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007

AB - In the meta-analysis we compared two types of ‘barrier caps’ respectively the Curos and the SwabCap. We described that the study of Cameron-Watson (2016) used the Curos barrier cap, however, this is incorrect. Cameron-Watson studied the effectiveness of the Curos barrier cap. This incorrect description has consequences for the subgroup analysis (of the meta-analysis) we have performed. Subgroup analysis showed that the Curos (IRR= 0.47, 95% CI= 0.31 to 0.72) and SwabCap (IRR= 0.72, 95% CI = 0.60 to 0.86) were equally effective. See corrected Tables 1 and 2, and Fig. 2 for further details (Supplementary data S3). The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85048175620

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.001

DO - 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.001

M3 - Comment/Letter to the editor

C2 - 29887034

AN - SCOPUS:85048175620

SN - 0020-7489

VL - 84

SP - 79

EP - 80

JO - International Journal of Nursing Studies

JF - International Journal of Nursing Studies

ER -

Voor in ’t holt AF, Helder OK, Vos MC, Schafthuizen L, Sülz S, Hoogen AVD et al. Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007)). International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2018 Aug 1;84:79-80. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.001

Corrigendum to ‘Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis’ [Int J Nurs Stud. 69. (2017) 34-40] (S0020748917300202) (10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.007))

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this