BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In August 2001, a cluster of MRSA skin infections was detected in a correctional facility. An investigation was conducted to determine its cause and to prevent further MRSA infections. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: A 200-bed detention center. PATIENTS: A case was defined as a detainee with a skin lesion from which MRSA was cultured from July 24 through December 31, 2001. Case-patients were identified by review of laboratory culture results and by skin lesion screening through point-prevalence survey and admission examination. Controls were randomly selected from an alphabetized list of detainees. INTERVENTION: Medical staff implemented measures to improve skin disease screening, personal hygiene, wound care, and antimicrobial therapy. RESULTS: Sixteen cases were identified: 11, 5, and 0 in the preintervention, peri-intervention, and postintervention periods, respectively. Seven case-patients and 19 controls were included in the case-control study. On multivariable analysis, working as a dormitory orderly (OR, 9.8; CI95, 0.74-638; P = .10) and a stay of longer than 36 days (OR, 6.9; CI95, 0.65-128.2; P = .14) were the strongest predictors for MRSA skin infection. The preintervention, peri-intervention, and postintervention MRSA infection rates were 11.6, 8.8, and 0 per 10,000 detainee-days, respectively. The rate of MRSA skin infections declined significantly between both the preintervention and peri-intervention periods and the postintervention period (P < .01 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: MRSA skin disease can become an emergent problem in a correctional facility. Interventions targeted at skin disease screening, appropriate antimicrobial treatment, and hygiene may decrease the risk of acquiring MRSA infection in correctional facilities.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In August 2001, a cluster of MRSAskin infections was detected in a correctional facility. An investigation was conducted to determine its cause and to prevent further MRSAinfections. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: A 200-bed detention center. PATIENTS: A case was defined as a detainee with a skin lesion from which MRSA was cultured from July 24 through December 31, 2001. Case-patients were identified by review of laboratory culture results and by skin lesion screening through point-prevalence survey and admission examination. Controls were randomly selected from an alphabetized list of detainees. INTERVENTION: Medical staff implemented measures to improve skin disease screening, personal hygiene, wound care, and antimicrobial therapy. RESULTS: Sixteen cases were identified: 11, 5, and 0 in the preintervention, peri-intervention, and postintervention periods, respectively. Seven case-patients and 19 controls were included in the case-control study. On multivariable analysis, working as a dormitory orderly (OR, 9.8; CI95, 0.74-638; P = .10) and a stay of longer than 36 days (OR, 6.9; CI95, 0.65-128.2; P = .14) were the strongest predictors for MRSAskin infection. The preintervention, peri-intervention, and postintervention MRSAinfection rates were 11.6, 8.8, and 0 per 10,000 detainee-days, respectively. The rate of MRSAskin infections declined significantly between both the preintervention and peri-intervention periods and the postintervention period (P < .01 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS:MRSAskin disease can become an emergent problem in a correctional facility. Interventions targeted at skin disease screening, appropriate antimicrobial treatment, and hygiene may decrease the risk of acquiring MRSAinfection in correctional facilities.
Authors: Michael Z David; Jane D Siegel; Janet Henderson; Greg Leos; Kaming Lo; Jerry Iwuora; Alexis R Taylor; Diana L Zychowski; Esmaeil Porsa; Susan Boyle-Vavra; Robert S Daum Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2014-06-23 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Benjamin A Miko; Montina Befus; Carolyn T A Herzig; Dhritiman V Mukherjee; Zoltan L Apa; Ruo Yu Bai; Joshua P Tanner; Dana Gage; Maryann Genovese; Carl J Koenigsmann; Elaine L Larson; Franklin D Lowy Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Michelle Barton; Michael Hawkes; Dorothy Moore; John Conly; Lindsay Nicolle; Upton Allen; Nora Boyd; Joanne Embree; Liz Van Horne; Nicole Le Saux; Susan Richardson; Aideen Moore; Dat Tran; Valerie Waters; Mary Vearncombe; Kevin Katz; J Scott Weese; John Embil; Marianna Ofner-Agostini; E Lee Ford-Jones Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 2.471
Authors: D V Mukherjee; C T A Herzig; C Y Jeon; C J Lee; Z L Apa; M Genovese; D Gage; C J Koenigsmann; F D Lowy; E L Larson Journal: Epidemiol Infect Date: 2013-06-28 Impact factor: 2.451
Authors: Michael W Ellis; Carey D Schlett; Eugene V Millar; Kenneth J Wilkins; Katrina B Crawford; Stephanie M Morrison-Rodriguez; Laura A Pacha; Rachel J Gorwitz; Jeffrey B Lanier; David R Tribble Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2014-03-14 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Carey D Schlett; Eugene V Millar; Katrina B Crawford; Tianyuan Cui; Jeffrey B Lanier; David R Tribble; Michael W Ellis Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2014-05-19 Impact factor: 5.191