true
Products

BD MaxPlus™
Needle-free Connector

Choose the only needle-free connector with an FDA-cleared label statement demonstrating a reduction in CLABSI

Contact Us
Background Image
Loading
Overview

Hospitals using the MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector had lower unadjusted CLABSI rates, as well as lower standardized infection ratios, compared to hospitals not using the MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector.*

true

Others claim to reduce CLABSIs. We let the clinical evidence speak for us.

img
quote-icon
The BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector

The BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector is the only needle-free connector with an FDA-cleared label statement demonstrating a reduction in CLABSIs11

 

2013 CMS Hospital Compare data reported by 3,075 U.S. hospitals, accounting for nearly 11,000 CLABSIs associated with nearly 10 million catheter days, show that hospitals using the BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector had lower unadjusted CLABSI rates, as well as lower standardized infection ratios, compared to hospitals not using the BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector.1,3

Evidence-based guidelines recommending the use of needle-free connectors

quote-icon

Evaluate published outcomes of infection risks associated with each type of needleless connector

when making product purchase decisions, focusing on risks, benefits and educational requirements.

—

Infusion Nurses Society (INS) 2021 Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice12

quote-icon

Use needleless connectors (NC) as IV connection devices.

Use a luer-lock mechanism to ensure a secure junction when attaching NC to a VAD or access site. Avoid three way-stop cocks as IV connection devices.

—

International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) 2017 Care Bundles to Prevent Central and Peripheral Line-Related Bloodstream Infections13

Explore the results and clinical studies below to learn more about the evidence supporting BD Max™ Needle-free Connector technology

Meta-analysis
Meta-analysis

The BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector was shown to reduce the risk of CLABSI by 63%, compared to other needle-free connectors, in a 2014 peer-reviewed meta-analysis reporting on 7 studies, published in the American Journal of Infection Control,1 and is associated with lower CLABSI risk, independent of seasonality, case mix index, infusion care and cleaning practices.1

Systematic review
Systematic review

A systematic review of 2013 CMS Hospital Compare data from 3,074 hospitals, accounting for nearly 11,000 CLABSIs associated with nearly 10 million catheter days, shows that hospitals using the BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector had lower unadjusted CLABSI rates, as well as lower standardized infection ratios, compared to hospitals not using the BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector.3

 

Retrospective/Prospective Occlusion Study
Retrospective/Prospective Occlusion Study

In a retrospective observational study of 720 home infusion patients, the BD MaxZero™ Needle-free Connector reduced PICC occlusion rates by 55.1% (p=0.001), compared to a leading neutral displacement connector.2 There was a 55.1% reduction in the total number of nurse visits per 100 central line-days and a 56.4% reduction in the associated cost of Alteplase use, after patients were switched to the BD MaxZero™ Needle-free Connectors.2

Retrospective/Prospective CLABSI Studies
Retrospective/Prospective CLABSI Studies

A multidisciplinary evidence-based initiative consisting of a CVL insertion, access and maintenance bundle, including implementation of the MaxPlus needle-free connector, resulted in a reduction in CLABSIs from an estimated 7.8 CLABSIs per 1000 catheter days to 2.3 CLABSIs per 1000 catheter days.4

Retrospective/Prospective CLABSI Studies
Retrospective/Prospective CLABSI Studies

An ICU in a suburban Baltimore hospital reduced CLABSI rates to zero in 2012, by revising its CVAD policies and initiatives and implementing a bundled approach, including the use of BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connectors.5

r23r23r32r

32r23r23r23

rt42r

Upgrade to clinically proven needle-free connectors1–10 and catheters14,15

The needle-free connector you choose impacts the rate of catheter-related complications in your facility.16,17

Refer to our clinical evidence compendium for real-world evidence of helping facilities reduce catheter-related complications.1-10 Explore the design innovations that differentiate BD Max™ Needle-free Connector technology—and how they can help you reduce catheter-related complications, compared to other needle-free connector designs.

BD Vascular Access Management AllPoints™ Assessments

Our powerful evidence-based assessments, with analytics and benchmarks, are the first phase of BD Vascular Access Management—and the first step on the path to help you reduce complications and improve outcomes.

Related Solutions

BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System with the BD MaxZero™ Needle-free Connector

Use of innovative solutions, including closed integrated catheters (BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System) and positive displacement needle-free connectors (BD MaxZero™ Needle-free Connector) as part of a bundle, extended the catheters’ complication-free dwell time*.18

* Compared to the standard of care that included a standard peripheral catheter and three way stopcock among other elements.

Products & Accessories
EIFUs
false
Resources
Literature
BD's collection of literature on industry and on our offerings gives you information you can use to continue striving for excellence.
Learn more
Training

BD offers training resources to help improve your clinical practices as part of our goal of advancing the world of health.

Learn more
Events

BD supports the healthcare industry with market-leading products and services that aim to improve care while lowering costs. We host and take part in events that excel in advancing the world of health™.

Learn more
Case Studies
BD promotes clinical excellence by providing various resources on best practices, clinical innovations and industry trends in healthcare.
Learn more

Please let us know the areas that you are interested in:

BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector
Reference
  1. Tabak YP, Jarvis WR, Sun X, Crosby CT, Johannes RS. Meta-analysis on central line-associated bloodstream infections associated with a needleless intravenous connector with a new engineering design. Am J Infect Control. 2014;42(12):1278–1284. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2014.08.018.
  2. Williams A. Catheter occlusion in home infusion: the influence of needleless connector design on central catheter occlusion. J Infus Nurs. 2018;41(1):52–57. doi: 10.1097/NAN.0000000000000259.
  3. Tabak YP, Johannes RS, Sun X, Crosby CT, Jarvis WR. Innovative use of existing public and private data sources for postmarketing surveillance of central line-associated bloodstream infections associated with intravenous needleless connectors. J Infus Nurs. 2016;39(5):328–335. doi: 10.1097/NAN.0000000000000185.
  4. Costello JM, Morrow DF, Graham DA, Potter-Bynoe G, Sandora TJ, Laussen PC. Systematic intervention to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infection rates in a pediatric cardiac intensive care unit. Pediatrics. 2008;121(5):915–923. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-1577.
  5. Wallace MC, Macy DL. Reduction of central line-associated bloodstream infection rates in patients in the adult intensive care unit. J Infus Nurs. 2016;39(1):47–55. doi: 10.1097/NAN.0000000000000151.
  6. Sandora TJ, Graham DA, Conway M, Dodson B, Potter-Bynoe G, Margossian SP. Impact of needleless connector change frequency on central line-associated bloodstream infection rate. Am J Infect Control. 2014;42(5):485–489. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2014.01.022.
  7. Royer T. Implementing a better bundle to achieve and sustain a zero central line-associated bloodstream infection rate. J Infus Nurs. 2010;33(6):398–406. doi: 10.1097/NAN.0b013e3181f8586b.
  8. Casey AL, Karpanen TJ, Nightingale P, Chaganti S, Elliott TSJ. Microbiologic contamination of a positive- and a neutral-displacement needleless intravenous access device in clinical use. Am J Infect Control. 2016;44(12):1678–1680. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.206.06.027.
  9. Clavier T, Ferguen M, Gouin P, et al. Impact of MaxZero™ needle-free connector on the incidence of central venous catheter-related infections in surgical intensive care unit. Aust Crit Care. 2019;32(2):107–111. doi: 10.1016/j.aucc.2018.03.003.
  10. Hankins R, Majorant OD, Rupp ME, et al. Microbial colonization of intravascular catheter connectors in hospitalized patients. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47(12):1489–1492. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2019.05.024.
  11. BD MaxPlus™ Needle-free Connector Directions for Use. 630-00658; 2015.
  12. Gorski LA, Hadaway L, Hagle ME, et al. Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice, 8th Edition. J Infus Nurs. 2021;44(1S,1):S1–S224. doi: 10.1097/NAN.0000000000000396.
  13. International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) Care bundles to prevent central and peripheral line-related bloodstream infections. INICC website. http://www.inicc.org/media/docs/2017-INICCBSIPreventionGuidelines.pdf. Published January 1, 2017. Accessed June 2, 2021.
  14. González López J, Arribi Vilela A, Fernández Del Palacio E, et al. Indwell times, complications and costs of open vs closed safety peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomized study. J Hosp Infect. 2014;86(2):117–126. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2013.10.008.
  15. Bausone-Gazda D, Lefaiver CA, Walters SA. A randomized controlled trial to compare the complications of 2 peripheral intravenous catheter-stabilization systems. J Infus Nurs. 2010;33(6):371–384.doi: 10.1097/NAN.0b013e3181f85be2.
  16. Hadaway L. Needleless connectors for IV catheters. Am J Nurs. 2012;112(11):32–44. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000422253.72836.c1.
  17. Curran E. Needleless connectors: the vascular access catheter’s microbial gatekeeper. J Infect Prev. 2016;17(5):234–240. doi: 10.1177/1757177416657164.
  18. Guenezan J, Marjanovic N, Drugeon B, et al. Chlorhexidine plus alcohol versus povidone iodine plus alcohol, combined or not with innovative devices, for prevention of short-term peripheral venous catheter infection and failure (CLEAN 3 study): an investigator-initiated, open-label, single centre, randomised-controlled, two-by-two factorial trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2021. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30738-6.

 

BD-27572

true
true