Background & Aim: Peripherally intravenous catheters (PIVs) are an important part of therapy for hospitalized children. Although such catheters provide necessary vascular access, their use puts patients at risk for local and systemic infectious complications with serious morbidity. Migration of skin organisms at the insertion site into the coetaneous catheter tract with colonization of the catheter tip is the most common rout of infection for peripherally inserted catheters in adults but in children this is controversial. The objective of this study is to find any relationship between colonization and catheter-related consequences.

Methods & Materials: In a descriptive cross-sectional study, 108 catheters of children and neonates hospitalized in NICU and infectious ward of Markaz Tebby Kodakan were cultured at a 2-month period. For all cases, a questionnaire of demographic characteristics and information about catheterization including location, dwell time, drugs and total parental nutrition was filled. The condition of catheterization for all cases was the same. Presence of only one colony was considered as positive colonization. Finally the data were analyzed by SPSS software.

Results: Excluding one case because of positive blood culture, from 107 catheters, 36 were colonized (33.6% of cases). Coagulate negative staphylococcus was the most common pathogen seen in 50% of total positive cases. Although there was a clinically significance between the dwell time of catheter and colonization but there was not any statistical significant association between colonization and any other variables including sex, age, hospitalization time, ward, location of catheter, dwell time, infusion of parental nutrition, and the administered drug.

Conclusion: This study is consistent with guidelines of CDC about avoiding unnecessarily routine replacement of catheters in neonates and children. As the risk of infection did not increase in association with dwell time of peripheral venous catheters, it seems it is better to leave catheters in place until there is a sign of local infection or infiltration.

Background & Aim: Pulse Oximeter monitoring technology has become so common in intensive health care settings over the last decade that blood oxygen level is now considered as the fifth vital sign. However, it seems that medical and nursing staffs are not specially educated to operate with the devices. The aim of the study was to investigate the knowledge of medical assistants (residents), nurses and anesthesia technicians of pediatric intensive care units regarding Pulse Oximetery.

Methods & Materials: This is a cross-sectional study. The study population consisted of all nurses, first year to third year medical assistants, and anesthesia technicians who working in intensive care units in Pediatric Center. A questionnaire was used for data gathering that had three sections: the first section as demographic data (occupational condition, record of service in pediatric unit, having the experience of using Pulse Oximetery, having enough knowledge about Pulse Oximetery, and its educational program type) the second section (eighteen short answer questions) in order to determine the participants knowledge about Pulse Oximetery and the third section (four imaginary clinical scenarios) evaluating the participants interpretation on Pulse Oximetery reports and its changes in patients. The collected data were analyzed through descriptive and inferential statistics (Fisher exact test) by SPSS v.15 and EPI6 computer softwares.

Results: The analyses showed that 77.4% of the participants did not pass any educational course regarding Pulse Oximetery, also 67.9% of them correctly identified what Pulse Oximeter measures, and 47.2% of the subjects correctly identified how a Pulse Oximeter works, and 13.2% identified its normal range, but only 26.4% had a correct understanding of the Oxhemoglobin dissociation curve and explained it completely true. It was found that the majority of the participants were wrong in their answers about Pulse Oximeter monitoring. They made mistakes in interpretation of the imaginary clinical scenarios.

Conclusion: The results of the study showed that the majority of pediatric intensive care unit staffs have little knowledge regarding Pulse Oximeter monitoring, then with attention to the vast usage of the technology the necessity of formal educational programs in colleges and retraining courses during employment about the device for health care providers is apparent.