23 research outputs found

    Measuring the effect of enhanced cleaning in a UK hospital : a prospective cross-over study

    Get PDF
    Increasing hospital-acquired infections have generated much attention over the last decade. There is evidence that hygienic cleaning has a role in the control of hospital-acquired infections. This study aimed to evaluate the potential impact of one additional cleaner by using microbiological standards based on aerobic colony counts and the presence of Staphylococcus aureus including meticillin-resistant S. aureus. We introduced an additional cleaner into two matched wards from Monday to Friday, with each ward receiving enhanced cleaning for six months in a cross-over design. Ten hand-touch sites on both wards were screened weekly using standardised methods and patients were monitored for meticillin-resistant S. aureus infection throughout the year-long study. Patient and environmental meticillin-resistant S. aureus isolates were characterised using molecular methods in order to investigate temporal and clonal relationships. Enhanced cleaning was associated with a 32.5% reduction in levels of microbial contamination at handtouch sites when wards received enhanced cleaning (P < 0.0001: 95% CI 20.2%, 42.9%). Near-patient sites (lockers, overbed tables and beds) were more frequently contaminated with meticillin-resistant S. aureus/S. aureus than sites further from the patient (P = 0.065). Genotyping identified indistinguishable strains from both handtouch sites and patients. There was a 26.6% reduction in new meticillin-resistant S. aureus infections on the wards receiving extra cleaning, despite higher meticillin-resistant S. aureus patient-days and bed occupancy rates during enhanced cleaning periods (P = 0.032: 95% CI 7.7%, 92.3%). Adjusting for meticillin-resistant S. aureus patient-days and based upon nine new meticillin-resistant S. aureus infections seen during routine cleaning, we expected 13 new infections during enhanced cleaning periods rather than the four that actually occurred. Clusters of new meticillin-resistant S. aureus infections were identified 2 to 4 weeks after the cleaner left both wards. Enhanced cleaning saved the hospital £30,000 to £70,000.Introducing one extra cleaner produced a measurable effect on the clinical environment, with apparent benefit to patients regarding meticillin-resistant S. aureus infection. Molecular epidemiological methods supported the possibility that patients acquired meticillin-resistant S. aureus from environmental sources. These findings suggest that additional research is warranted to further clarify the environmental, clinical and economic impact of enhanced hygienic cleaning as a component in the control of hospital-acquired infection

    Adherence to recommendations by infectious disease consultants and its influence on outcomes of intravenous antibiotic-treated hospitalized patients

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Consultation to infectious diseases specialists (ID), although not always performed by treating physicians, is part of hospital's daily practice. This study analyses adherence by treating physicians to written ID recommendations (inserted in clinical records) and its effect on outcome in hospitalized antibiotic-treated patients in a tertiary hospital in Spain. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, one-year study was performed. Patients receiving intravenous antimicrobial therapy prescribed by treating physicians for 3 days were identified and randomised to intervention (insertion of written ID recommendations in clinical records) or non-intervention. Appropriateness of empirical treatments (by treating physicians) was classified as adequate, inadequate or unnecessary. In the intervention group, adherence to recommendations was classified as complete, partial or non-adherence. RESULTS: A total of 1173 patients were included, 602 in the non-intervention and 571 in the intervention group [199 (34.9%) showing complete adherence, 141 (24.7%) partial adherence and 231 (40.5%) non-adherence to recommendations]. In the multivariate analysis for adherence (R2 Cox=0.065, p=0.009), non-adherence was associated with prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis (p=0.004; OR=0.37, 95%CI=0.19-0.72). In the multivariate analysis for clinical failure (R2 Cox=0.126, p<0.001), Charlson index (p<0.001; OR=1.19, 95%CI=1.10-1.28), malnutrition (p=0.006; OR=2.00, 95%CI=1.22-3.26), nosocomial infection (p<0.001; OR=4.12, 95%CI=2.27-7.48) and length of hospitalization (p<0.001; OR=1.01, 95%CI=1.01-1.02) were positively associated with failure, while complete adherence (p=0.001; OR=0.35, 95%CI=0.19-0.64) and adequate initial treatment (p=0.010; OR=0.39, 95%CI=0.19-0.80) were negatively associated. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to ID recommendations by treating physicians was associated with favorable outcome, in turn associated with shortened length of hospitalization. This may have important health-economic benefits and stimulates further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN83234896. http://www.controlled-trials.com/isrctn/sample_documentation.asp

    Screening for multi-drug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria: what is effective and justifiable?

    Get PDF
    Effectiveness is a key criterion in assessing the justification of antibiotic resistance interventions. Depending on an intervention's effectiveness, burdens and costs will be more or less justified, which is especially important for large scale population-level interventions with high running costs and pronounced risks to individuals in terms of wellbeing, integrity and autonomy. In this paper, we assess the case of routine hospital screening for multi-drug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDRGN) from this perspective. Utilizing a comparison to screening programs for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) we argue that current screening programmes for MDRGN in low endemic settings should be reconsidered, as its effectiveness is in doubt, while general downsides to screening programs remain. To accomplish justifiable antibiotic stewardship, MDRGN screening should not be viewed as a separate measure, but rather as part of a comprehensive approach. The program should be redesigned to focus on those at risk of developing symptomatic infections with MDRGN rather than merely detecting those colonised

    How long do nosocomial pathogens persist on inanimate surfaces? A systematic review

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Inanimate surfaces have often been described as the source for outbreaks of nosocomial infections. The aim of this review is to summarize data on the persistence of different nosocomial pathogens on inanimate surfaces. METHODS: The literature was systematically reviewed in MedLine without language restrictions. In addition, cited articles in a report were assessed and standard textbooks on the topic were reviewed. All reports with experimental evidence on the duration of persistence of a nosocomial pathogen on any type of surface were included. RESULTS: Most gram-positive bacteria, such as Enterococcus spp. (including VRE), Staphylococcus aureus (including MRSA), or Streptococcus pyogenes, survive for months on dry surfaces. Many gram-negative species, such as Acinetobacter spp., Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Serratia marcescens, or Shigella spp., can also survive for months. A few others, such as Bordetella pertussis, Haemophilus influenzae, Proteus vulgaris, or Vibrio cholerae, however, persist only for days. Mycobacteria, including Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and spore-forming bacteria, including Clostridium difficile, can also survive for months on surfaces. Candida albicans as the most important nosocomial fungal pathogen can survive up to 4 months on surfaces. Persistence of other yeasts, such as Torulopsis glabrata, was described to be similar (5 months) or shorter (Candida parapsilosis, 14 days). Most viruses from the respiratory tract, such as corona, coxsackie, influenza, SARS or rhino virus, can persist on surfaces for a few days. Viruses from the gastrointestinal tract, such as astrovirus, HAV, polio- or rota virus, persist for approximately 2 months. Blood-borne viruses, such as HBV or HIV, can persist for more than one week. Herpes viruses, such as CMV or HSV type 1 and 2, have been shown to persist from only a few hours up to 7 days. CONCLUSION: The most common nosocomial pathogens may well survive or persist on surfaces for months and can thereby be a continuous source of transmission if no regular preventive surface disinfection is performed

    In vitro-activity of Linezolid, Daptomycin, Tigecyclin and Vancomycin against 204 clinical isolates of MRSA

    No full text

    Optimierung der Antibiotikaverschreibungsgüte auf sieben Normalstationen: eine prospektive Clusterstudie

    No full text
    Aim: To evaluate general shortcomings and faculty-specific pitfalls as well as to improve antibiotic prescription quality (ABQ) in non-ICU wards, we performed a prospective cluster trial. Methods: An infectious-disease (ID) consulting service performed a prospective investigation consisting of three 12-week phases with point prevalence evaluation conducted once per week (=36 evaluations in total) at seven non-ICU wards, followed by assessment of sustainability (weeks 37-48). Baseline evaluation (phase 1) defined multifaceted interventions by identifying the main shortcomings. Then, to distinguish intervention from time effects, the interventions were performed in four wards, and the 3 remaining wards served as controls; after assessing effects (phase 2), the same interventions were performed in the remaining wards to test the generalizability of the interventions (phase 3). The prolonged responses after all interventions were then analyzed in phase 4. ABQ was evaluated by at least two ID specialists who assessed the indication for therapy, the adherence to the hospital guidelines for empirical therapy, and the overall antibiotic prescription quality. Results: In phase 1, 406 of 659 (62%) patients cases were adequately treated with antibiotics; the main reason for inappropriate prescription was the lack of an indication (107/253; 42%). The antibiotic prescription quality (ABQ) significantly increased, reaching 86% in all wards after the focused interventions (502/584; nDf=3, ddf=1,697, F=6.9, p=0.0001). In phase 2 the effect was only seen in wards that already participated in interventions (248/347; 71%). No improvement was seen in wards that received interventions only after phase 2 (189/295; 64%). A given indication significantly increased from about 80% to more than 90% (p90% (p<0.0001). Carryover Effekte wurden nicht gesehen. Diskussion: Die Antibiotikaverschreibungsgüte kann signifikant durch fokussierte Interventionen zumindest mittelfristig gesteigert werden
    corecore