PURPOSE: To prevent cross-infections, we created a manual for the treatment of infectious wounds that clarifies when to wash one's hands and when to wear gloves. METHODS: Six patients with widespread infectious wounds caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were treated. The bacterial count on the hands of the staff was calculated. We then compared the number of patients with MRSA isolated, and typed the MRSA isolates using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). RESULTS: The pathogenic bacterial count among hospital staff before treatment/before hand hygiene was 8.2 x 10 colony-forming units (cfu)/hand, which were not detected before treatment/after hand hygiene. The pathogenic bacterial count on the hands before hand hygiene/after treatment climbed to 9.1 x 10(5) cfu/hand, and after treatment/after hand hygiene decreased to 0.38 cfu/hand. The number of patients with MRSA isolates before this protocol was 15/402 (3.7%), but that level significantly decreased to 5/411 (1.2%) after implementation of the manual. There were 13 strains of type F by PFGE before the manual was adopted, but five strains of MRSA isolated after the present manual was enforced were all observed to have different migration patterns. CONCLUSION: A hand hygiene manual is effective for decreasing the rate of cross-infection.
PURPOSE: To prevent cross-infections, we created a manual for the treatment of infectious wounds that clarifies when to wash one's hands and when to wear gloves. METHODS: Six patients with widespread infectious wounds caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were treated. The bacterial count on the hands of the staff was calculated. We then compared the number of patients with MRSA isolated, and typed the MRSA isolates using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). RESULTS: The pathogenic bacterial count among hospital staff before treatment/before hand hygiene was 8.2 x 10 colony-forming units (cfu)/hand, which were not detected before treatment/after hand hygiene. The pathogenic bacterial count on the hands before hand hygiene/after treatment climbed to 9.1 x 10(5) cfu/hand, and after treatment/after hand hygiene decreased to 0.38 cfu/hand. The number of patients with MRSA isolates before this protocol was 15/402 (3.7%), but that level significantly decreased to 5/411 (1.2%) after implementation of the manual. There were 13 strains of type F by PFGE before the manual was adopted, but five strains of MRSA isolated after the present manual was enforced were all observed to have different migration patterns. CONCLUSION: A hand hygiene manual is effective for decreasing the rate of cross-infection.
Authors: A R Tenorio; S M Badri; N B Sahgal; B Hota; M Matushek; M K Hayden; G M Trenholme; R A Weinstein Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2001-02-23 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: S Kusachi; Y Sumiyama; J Nagao; K Kawai; Y Arima; Y Yoshida; H Kajiwara; Y Saida; Y Nakamura Journal: Surg Today Date: 1999 Impact factor: 2.549