OBJECTIVE: To assess the experience of Minnesota nursing homes with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and the policies and procedures used for its control. DESIGN: A 12-question survey, with primarily categorical responses, was mailed to the Directors of Nursing of all Minnesota long-term-care facilities. A follow-up mailing was sent to non-responders 5 weeks later. The mailing included a cover letter, a description of the study and its purposes, and a stamped return envelope. Four weeks after the second mailing, all non-responding institutions were contacted by telephone and invited to participated by mail or by completing the survey by telephone. SETTING: All long-term-care facilities in Minnesota licensed for skilled and intermediate care. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was directed to the Directors of Nursing of the long-term-care facilities with the request that, if another individual was better able to complete it, the survey be forwarded to them. RESULTS: Completed responses were obtained from 88% (395/445) of all long-term-care facilities in Minnesota. Forty-eight institutions (12%) had residents colonized or infected with MRSA. Only four (8%) of these facilities stated that MRSA was a problem; however, 33 (69%) of facilities with MRSA had sought outside help or consultation from a variety of sources for its control. Few facilities (7%) had cultured residents specifically for MRSA. Policies regarding the admission of colonized or infected persons were reported by 14% and 21% of facilities, respectively, and over 40% of these policies stated that persons with MRSA would not be accepted. Policies regarding the care of MRSA-colonized or -infected persons were not uniform. Both metropolitan and non-metropolitan facilities had residents with MRSA. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that MRSA in long-term-care facilities may be a widespread and underrecognized problem. There is a need to develop uniform policies for the control of MRSA in nursing homes. These policies should consider the sources and objectives of long-term-care facilities.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the experience of Minnesota nursing homes with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and the policies and procedures used for its control. DESIGN: A 12-question survey, with primarily categorical responses, was mailed to the Directors of Nursing of all Minnesota long-term-care facilities. A follow-up mailing was sent to non-responders 5 weeks later. The mailing included a cover letter, a description of the study and its purposes, and a stamped return envelope. Four weeks after the second mailing, all non-responding institutions were contacted by telephone and invited to participated by mail or by completing the survey by telephone. SETTING: All long-term-care facilities in Minnesota licensed for skilled and intermediate care. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was directed to the Directors of Nursing of the long-term-care facilities with the request that, if another individual was better able to complete it, the survey be forwarded to them. RESULTS: Completed responses were obtained from 88% (395/445) of all long-term-care facilities in Minnesota. Forty-eight institutions (12%) had residents colonized or infected with MRSA. Only four (8%) of these facilities stated that MRSA was a problem; however, 33 (69%) of facilities with MRSA had sought outside help or consultation from a variety of sources for its control. Few facilities (7%) had cultured residents specifically for MRSA. Policies regarding the admission of colonized or infected persons were reported by 14% and 21% of facilities, respectively, and over 40% of these policies stated that persons with MRSA would not be accepted. Policies regarding the care of MRSA-colonized or -infected persons were not uniform. Both metropolitan and non-metropolitan facilities had residents with MRSA. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that MRSA in long-term-care facilities may be a widespread and underrecognized problem. There is a need to develop uniform policies for the control of MRSA in nursing homes. These policies should consider the sources and objectives of long-term-care facilities.
Authors: Khaled El Emam; Luk Arbuckle; Aleksander Essex; Saeed Samet; Benjamin Eze; Grant Middleton; David Buckeridge; Elizabeth Jonker; Ester Moher; Craig Earle Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-04-08 Impact factor: 3.240