Literature DB >> 26486272

Routine Use of Contact Precautions for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus: Which Way Is the Pendulum Swinging?

Dana Russell1, Susan E Beekmann2, Philip M Polgreen2, Zachary Rubin3, Daniel Z Uslan3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND Studies have suggested that contact precautions (CP) for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococcus may have risks that outweigh the benefits. These risks, coupled with more widespread use of horizontal interventions such as daily bathing with chlorhexidine gluconate, have brought into question the value of routine CP for these organisms. OBJECTIVE To assess the state of utilization of CP as well as adjunctive measures to reduce the risk of transmission in US hospitals. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS Total of 751 physician members of the Emerging Infections Network. METHODS An 8-question electronic survey distributed by email. RESULTS A total of 426/751 (57%) responded to the survey; 337/364 (93%) of respondents use routine CP for methicillin-resistant S. aureus and 335/364 (92%) use routine CP for vancomycin-resistant enterococcus. The most widely used trigger for initiation of CP for both pathogens was positive clinical culture. Practices for discontinuation of isolation varied widely. We found that 325/354 (92%) perform routine chlorhexidine gluconate bathing and 236/353 (67%) perform S. aureus decolonization with mupirocin for 1 or more subsets of inpatients, and 82/356 (23%) reported using either hydrogen peroxide vapor or ultraviolet-C room disinfection at discharge. Free text responses noted frustration and variation in the application, practice, and process for initiation and discontinuation of CP. CONCLUSIONS Use of CP for methicillin-resistant S. aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococcus remains commonplace, although horizontal interventions such as chlorhexidine gluconate bathing are increasingly used. The heterogeneity of practices and policies was striking. Evidence-based guidelines regarding CP and horizontal interventions are needed. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2015;37(1):36-40.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26486272     DOI: 10.1017/ice.2015.246

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol        ISSN: 0899-823X            Impact factor:   3.254


  3 in total

1.  Policies for Controlling Multidrug-Resistant Organisms in US Healthcare Facilities Reporting to the National Healthcare Safety Network, 2014.

Authors:  Lindsey M Weiner; Amy K Webb; Maroya S Walters; Margaret A Dudeck; Alexander J Kallen
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 3.254

2.  Checking rounds for isolation precautions in the control of multidrug-resistant organisms: reduction achieved.

Authors:  P Barbadoro; E Martini; M G Gioia; R Stoico; S Savini; E Manso; G Serafini; E Prospero; M M D'Errico
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 3.267

3.  A Discrete Event Simulation Model of Patient Flow in a General Hospital Incorporating Infection Control Policy for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus (VRE).

Authors:  Erica S Shenoy; Hang Lee; Erin E Ryan; Taige Hou; Rochelle P Walensky; Winston Ware; David C Hooper
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2017-06-29       Impact factor: 2.583

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.