Depression and anxiety are the leading contributors to the global burden of disease among young people, accounting for over a third (34.8%) of years lived with disability. Yet there is limited evidence for interventions that prevent adolescent depression and anxiety in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where 90% of adolescents live. This article introduces the ‘Improving Adolescent mentaL health by reducing the Impact of poVErty (ALIVE)’ study, its conceptual framework, objectives, methods and expected outcomes. The aim of the ALIVE study is to develop and pilot-test an intervention that combines poverty reduction with strengthening self-regulation to prevent depression and anxiety among adolescents living in urban poverty in Colombia, Nepal and South Africa.

This aim will be achieved by addressing four objectives: (1) develop a conceptual framework that identifies the causal mechanisms linking poverty, self-regulation and depression and anxiety; (2) develop a multi-component selective prevention intervention targeting self-regulation and poverty among adolescents at high risk of developing depression or anxiety; (3) adapt and validate instruments to measure incidence of depression and anxiety, mediators and implementation parameters of the prevention intervention; and (4) undertake a four-arm pilot cluster randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility, acceptability and cost of the selective prevention intervention in the three study sites.

The contributions of this study include the active engagement and participation of adolescents in the research process; a focus on the causal mechanisms of the intervention; building an evidence base for prevention interventions in LMICs; and the use of an interdisciplinary approach.

By developing and evaluating an intervention that addresses multidimensional poverty and self-regulation, ALIVE can make contributions to evidence on the integration of mental health into broader development policy and practice.

Data on short-term peripheral intravenous catheter–related bloodstream infections per 1,000 peripheral venous catheter days (PIVCR BSIs per 1,000 PVC days) rates from Latin America are not available, so they have not been thoroughly studied.

International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) members conducted a prospective, surveillance study on PIVCR BSIs from January 2010 to March 2018 in 100 intensive care units (ICUs) among 41 hospitals, in 26 cities of 9 countries in Latin America (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican-Republic, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, and Venezuela). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Health Safety Network (NHSN) definitions were applied, and INICC methodology and INICC Surveillance Online System software were used.

In total, 10,120 ICU patients were followed for 40,078 bed days and 38,262 PVC days. In addition, 79 PIVCR BSIs were identified, with a rate of 2.06 per 1,000 PVC days (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.635–2.257). The average length of stay (ALOS) of patients without a PIVCR BSI was 3.95 days, and the ALOS was 5.29 days for patients with a PIVCR BSI. The crude extra ALOS was 1.34 days (RR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.0975–1.6351; P = .040).

The mortality rate in patients without PIVCR BSI was 3.67%, and this rate was 6.33% in patients with a PIVCR BSI. The crude extra mortality was 1.70 times higher. The microorganism profile showed 48.5% gram-positive bacteria (coagulase-negative Staphylococci 25.7%) and 48.5% gram-negative bacteria: Acinetobacter spp, Escherichia coli, and Klebsiella spp (8.5% each one), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (5.7%), and Candida spp (2.8%). The resistances of Pseudomonas aeruginosa were 0% to amikacin and 50% to meropenem. The resistance of Acinetobacter baumanii to amikacin was 0%, and the resistance of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus to oxacillin was 75%.

Our PIVCR BSI rates were higher than rates from more economically developed countries and were similar to those of countries with limited resources.