Title |
Evaluation of contact precautions for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus
|
---|---|
Published in |
American Journal of Infection Control, August 2017
|
DOI | 10.1016/j.ajic.2017.06.017 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Ana Cecilia Bardossy, Muhammad Yasser Alsafadi, Patricia Starr, Eman Chami, Jennifer Pietsch, Daniela Moreno, Laura Johnson, George Alangaden, Marcus Zervos, Katherine Reyes |
Abstract |
There are limited controlled data demonstrating contact precautions (CPs) prevent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) infections in endemic settings. We evaluated changes in hospital-acquired MRSA and VRE infections after discontinuing CPs for these organisms. This is a retrospective study done at an 800-bed teaching hospital in urban Detroit. CPs for MRSA and VRE were discontinued hospital-wide in 2013. Data on MRSA and VRE catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs), surgical site infections (SSIs), and hospital-acquired MRSA bacteremia (HA-MRSAB) rates were compared before and after CPs discontinuation. There were 36,907 and 40,439 patients hospitalized during the two 12-month periods: CPs and no CPs. Infection rates in the CPs and no-CPs periods were as follows: (1) MRSA infections: VAP, 0.13 versus 0.11 (P = .84); CLABSI, 0.11 versus 0.19 (P = .45); SSI, 0 versus 0.14 (P = .50); and CAUTI, 0.025 versus 0.033 (P = .84); (2) VRE infections: CAUTI, 0.27 versus 0.13 (P = .19) and CLABSI, 0.29 versus 0.3 (P = .94); and (3) HA-MRSAB rates: 0.14 versus 0.11 (P = .55), respectively. Discontinuation of CPs did not adversely impact endemic MRSA and VRE infection rates. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 7 | 33% |
Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1 | 5% |
Canada | 1 | 5% |
Trinidad and Tobago | 1 | 5% |
Unknown | 11 | 52% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 15 | 71% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 24% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 14 | 25% |
Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
Other | 5 | 9% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
Other | 8 | 15% |
Unknown | 16 | 29% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 25% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 20% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 11% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 5% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
Other | 3 | 5% |
Unknown | 15 | 27% |