RESUMEN

Arterial catheter-related bloodstream infections have been identified as a significant healthcare burden. However, the incidence of arterial catheter-related infections is commonly underestimated in clinical practice, and adherence to CDC-recommended practices is inconsistent. Several categories of interventions have been studied to prevent arterial catheter-related bloodstream infections, which include barrier precautions, cutaneous antisepsis, insertion site selection, dressings, chlorhexidine-impregnated sponges, and the duration of catheter placement with or without catheter replacement. The majority of these studies are limited by small sample sizes and single-center designs, and further randomized trials are needed to update current clinical practice guidelines to reduce the risk of arterial catheter-related infections.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends implementing Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for all nursing home (NH) residents known to be colonized with targeted multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs), wounds, or medical devices. Differences in health care personnel (HCP) and resident interactions between units may affect risk of acquiring and transmitting MDROs, affecting EBP implementation. We studied HCP-resident interactions across a variety of NHs to characterize MDRO transmission opportunities. DESIGN: 2 cross-sectional visits. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Four CDC Epicenter sites and CDC Emerging Infection Program sites in 7 states recruited NHs with a mix of unit care types (≥30 beds or ≥2 units). HCP were observed providing resident care. METHODS: Room-based observations and HCP interviews assessed HCP-resident interactions, care type provided, and equipment use. Observations and interviews were conducted for 7-8 hours in 3-6-month intervals per unit. Chart reviews collected deidentified resident demographics and MDRO risk factors (eg, indwelling devices, pressure injuries, and antibiotic use). RESULTS: We recruited 25 NHs (49 units) with no loss to follow-up, conducted 2540 room-based observations (total duration: 405 hours), and 924 HCP interviews. HCP averaged 2.5 interactions per resident per hour (long-term care units) to 3.4 per resident per hour (ventilator care units). Nurses provided care to more residents (n = 12) than certified nursing assistants (CNAs) and respiratory therapists (RTs) (CNA: 9.8 and RT: 9) but nurses performed significantly fewer task types per interaction compared to CNAs (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.61, P < .05). Short-stay (IRR: 0.89) and ventilator-capable (IRR: 0.94) units had less varied care compared with long-term care units (P < .05), although HCP visited residents in these units at similar rates. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Resident-HCP interaction rates are similar across NH unit types, differing primarily in types of care provided. Current and future interventions such as EBP, care bundling, or targeted infection prevention education should consider unit-specific HCP-resident interaction patterns.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Clostridioides difficile is the most common cause of healthcare-associated infections in the United States. It is unknown whether universal gown and glove use in intensive care units (ICUs) decreases acquisition of C. difficile. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized trial in 20 medical and surgical ICUs in 20 US hospitals from 4 January 2012 to 4 October 2012. After a baseline period, ICUs were randomized to standard practice for glove and gown use versus the intervention of all healthcare workers being required to wear gloves and gowns for all patient contact and when entering any patient room (contact precautions). The primary outcome was acquisition of toxigenic C. difficile determined by surveillance cultures collected on admission and discharge from the ICU. RESULTS: A total of 21 845 patients had both admission and discharge perianal swabs cultured for toxigenic C. difficile. On admission, 9.43% (2060/21 845) of patients were colonized with toxigenic C. difficile. No significant difference was observed in the rate of toxigenic C. difficile acquisition with universal gown and glove use. Differences in acquisition rates in the study period compared with the baseline period in control ICUs were 1.49 per 100 patient-days versus 1.68 per 100 patient-days in universal gown and glove ICUs (rate difference, -0.28; generalized linear mixed model, P = .091). CONCLUSIONS: Glove and gown use for all patient contact in medical and surgical ICUs did not result in a reduction in the acquisition of C. difficile compared with usual care. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01318213.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

In this retrospective cohort of adult hematology-oncology and transplant patients, discontinuation of universal gloving did not result in significant changes in rates of central line-associated bloodstream infection, Clostridioides difficile infection, or vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus colonization. Active surveillance and subsequent isolation may be a viable alternative strategy to universal precautions.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Despite clear evidence of benefits in acute-care hospitals, controversy over the effectiveness of IPC measures for MDROs is perceptible and evidence-based practice has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of IPC interventions on MDRO colonization and infections in LTCFs. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL from inception to September 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Original and peer-reviewed articles examining the post-intervention effects on MDRO colonization and infections in LTCFs. INTERVENTIONS: (i) Horizontal interventions: administrative engagement, barrier precautions, education, environmental cleaning, hand hygiene, performance improvement, and source control; and (ii) vertical intervention: active surveillance plus decolonization. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS: We employed a random-effects meta-analysis to estimate the pooled risk ratios (pRRs) for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization by intervention duration; and conducted subgroup analyses on different intervention components. Study quality was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tools. RESULTS: Of 3877 studies identified, 19 were eligible for inclusion (eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs)). Studies reported outcomes associated with MRSA (15 studies), vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE) (four studies), Clostridium difficile (two studies), and Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) (two studies). Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pRRs were close to unity regardless of intervention duration (long: RR 0.81 [95% CI 0.60-1.10]; medium: RR 0.81 [95% CI 0.25-2.68]; short: RR 0.95 [95% CI 0.53-1.69]). Vertical interventions in studies with a small sample size showed significant reductions in MRSA colonization while horizontal interventions did not. All studies involving active administrative engagement reported reductions. The risk of bias was high in all but two studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis did not show any beneficial effects from IPC interventions on MRSA reductions in LTCFs. Our findings highlight that the effectiveness of interventions in these facilities is likely conditional on resource availability-particularly decolonization and barrier precautions, due to their potential adverse events and uncertain effectiveness. Hence, administrative engagement is crucial for all effective IPC programmes. LTCFs should consider a pragmatic approach to reinforce standard precautions as routine practice and implement barrier precautions and decolonization to outbreak responses only.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The Benefits of Universal Glove and Gown (BUGG) cluster randomized trial found varying effects on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus and no increase in adverse events. The aim of this study was to assess whether the intervention decreases the acquisition of antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a randomized trial in 20 hospital intensive care units. The intervention consisted of healthcare workers wearing gloves and gowns when entering any patient room compared to standard care. The primary composite outcome was acquisition of any antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria based on surveillance cultures. RESULTS: A total of 40 492 admission and discharge perianal swabs from 20 246 individual patient admissions were included in the primary outcome. For the primary outcome of acquisition of any antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria, the intervention had a rate ratio (RR) of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], .71-1.12; P = .34). Effects on the secondary outcomes of individual bacteria acquisition were as follows: carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (RR, 0.86 [95% CI, .60-1.24; P = .43), carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter (RR, 0.81 [95% CI, .52-1.27; P = .36), carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas (RR, 0.88 [95% CI, .55-1.42]; P = .62), and extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producing bacteria (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, .71-1.24]; P = .67). CONCLUSIONS: Universal glove and gown use in the intensive care unit was associated with a non-statistically significant decrease in acquisition of antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria. Individual hospitals should consider the intervention based on the importance of these organisms at their hospital, effect sizes, CIs, and cost of instituting the intervention. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01318213.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Surgeons are at an increased risk of contracting blood-borne pathogens. The aim of this study was to evaluate gender difference, surgical position, surgical experience, and subspecialty regarding surgeons' compliance to standard precautions. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was performed using a purposive sampling. A total of 241 surgeons were surveyed from June 2017 to January 2018. RESULTS: In total, 179 (74.3%) males and 62 (25.7%) females completed the questionnaire. The gender difference was evident when the type of surgery was extremely important in influencing the decision on wearing double gloves (DGs); 108 (60.3%) male surgeons versus 27 (43.5%) female surgeons (P = 0.022). Although a total of 17 (30.3%) surgeons reported being extremely and very concerned about contracting human immunodeficiency virus through their work, they had never tried DG (P = 0.027). CONCLUSION: This study revealed that the decision of wearing DG was affected by several factors. Surgeons' decision to wear DG was influenced by the type of surgery. This study showed that most surgeons reported lack of adherence to barrier precaution measures.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Central venous catheter (CVC) and chest tube (CT) insertions are common bedside procedures frequently performed by surgery residents. Despite published guidelines, variability in the practice exists. We sought to characterize the surgery residents' practice patterns surrounding these two bedside procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over the last 1½ months of the academic year in 2012 and 2013, surgery residents across the US were surveyed online. Participants reported levels of agreement for 15 questions in a 5-point Likert scale format. RESULTS: A total of 219 residents completed the survey. Majority of residents agreed that they received appropriate education and training. Over half of the respondents reported that they did not have attending staff physician's supervision during the procedures. Junior residents felt less confident in performing CVC or CT insertions. Those younger than 29 years old and of female sex were also less confident in performing CT insertion. Although almost all residents reported using maximal sterile barrier precautions, 7% reported not securing their gowns and another 7% reported inadequate draping of patients. About ⅓ reported no hand cleansing before the procedures. Those from community programs compared to university programs less frequently used antibiotics. Sixty-five percent of residents reported routine use of ultrasound for CVC insertion. CONCLUSION: Surgery residents do not strictly adhere to the guidelines for CVC and CT insertions, and there is substantial variation in the practice of the procedures, which may contribute to complications associated with these procedures. This survey opens new areas for in-service education, feedback, and practices for these procedures to reduce the risk of complications, especially the infectious one.

RESUMEN

Patients with Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) are placed in contact precautions. We surveyed 31 visitors of CDI patients to understand their compliance, knowledge, and perceptions of contact precautions. Although most visitors knew where to find the required personal protective equipment, only 42% were fully compliant with gown and gloves. Family members accounted for 90% of visitors, and roughly half of the reasons given for not gowning were related to a lack of perceived risk for family members. Nursing staff are fundamental sources of personal protective equipment (PPE) information for visitors; however, we found variation in staff communication regarding need for visitor PPE use.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Maximal sterile barrier precautions (MSBP) including head coverings and face masks are advocated for use in invasive procedures, including coronary interventions. The rationale for MSBP assumes it is an obligatory measure for infection prevention. However, in many coronary catheterization laboratories, head coverings/face masks are not used in daily practice. This study prospectively evaluated the potential hazards of not routinely using head coverings/face masks in routine coronary interventions. METHODS: This is a prospective study of ambulatory patients in hospital care. A total of 110 successive elective patients undergoing cardiac catheterizations were recruited. Patients were catheterized by several interventional cardiologists who employed only routine infection control precautions without head coverings or face masks. For each patient, we took blood cultures and cultures from the tips of the coronary catheters and from the sterile saline water flush bowl. Cultures were handled and analyzed at our certified hospital microbiology laboratory. RESULTS: In none of the cultures was a clinically significant bacterial growth isolated. No signs of infection were reported later by any of the study patients and there were no relevant subsequent admissions. CONCLUSION: Operating in the catheterization lab without head coverings/face masks was not associated with any bacterial infection in multiple blood and equipment cultures. Accordingly, we believe that the use of head coverings/face masks should not be an obligatory requirement and may be used at the interventional cardiologist's discretion.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Contact precautions (CPs) are recommended to prevent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) transmission in institutions. Rising doubts about CP effectiveness and recognition of unintended consequences for patients have raised questions about the benefit. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and adverse outcomes associated with CPs for prevention of MRSA transmission. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for articles related to effectiveness and adverse outcomes of CPs in patients with MRSA. Criteria for inclusion included the following: articles conducted in the United States, articles performed in an acute care setting, articles that were not a case series or review, and those with standardized collection of data or inclusion of case and control groups. Results were summarized and examined for potential limitations. Recommendations were based on our findings. RESULTS: CPs reduced MRSA transmission in epidemic settings and in instances with high compliance, but a decrease in infection rates was not shown. Unintended consequences of CPs include decreased health care provider (HCP) time spent with patients, low HCP compliance, decreased perceptions of comfort from patients, and greater likelihood of patient complaints and negative psychologic implications. CONCLUSION: In endemic settings, there are few data to support routine use of CPs to control the spread of MRSA. Education should be performed in hospitals to improve patients' perception of care and understanding of CPs when implemented and HCPs' adherence to good hand hygiene and standard precautions practices.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIMS: A discussion of conceptual frameworks applicable to the study of isolation precautions effectiveness according to Fawcett and DeSanto-Madeya's (2013) evaluation technique and their relative merits and drawbacks for this purpose. BACKGROUND: Isolation precautions are recommended to control infectious diseases with high morbidity and mortality, but effectiveness is not established due to numerous methodological challenges. These challenges, such as identifying empirical indicators and refining operational definitions, could be alleviated though use of an appropriate conceptual framework. DESIGN: Discussion paper. DATA SOURCES: In mid-April 2014, the primary author searched five electronic, scientific literature databases for conceptual frameworks applicable to study isolation precautions, without limiting searches by publication date. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: By reviewing promising conceptual frameworks to support isolation precautions effectiveness research, this article exemplifies the process to choose an appropriate conceptual framework for empirical research. Hence, researchers may build on these analyses to improve study design of empirical research in multiple disciplines, which may lead to improved research and practice. CONCLUSION: Three frameworks were reviewed: the epidemiologic triad of disease, Donabedian's healthcare quality framework and the Quality Health Outcomes model. Each has been used in nursing research to evaluate health outcomes and contains concepts relevant to nursing domains. Which framework can be most useful probably depends on whether the study question necessitates testing multiple interventions, concerns pathogen-specific characteristics and yields cross-sectional or longitudinal data. The Quality Health Outcomes model may be slightly preferred as it assumes reciprocal relationships, multi-level analysis and is sensitive to cultural inputs.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

We determined the prevalence and associated cost of isolation precautions. Current census and historic microbiology cultures were assessed for isolation appropriateness following national guidelines. Based on patient assessment and culture data, isolation was discontinued resulting in 4,087 days of isolation and over $141,000 dollars avoided from excess supplies and time.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: To prevent transmission, some pediatric units require clinicians to wear gloves for all patient contacts during RSV season. We sought to assess whether a mandatory gloving policy reduced the risk of other health care-acquired infections (HAIs). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all patients admitted to pediatric units of a tertiary care center between 2002 and 2010. Poisson regression models were used to measure the association between mandatory gloving and HAI incidence. Autoregressive models were used to adjust for time correlation. RESULTS: During the study period, 686 HAIs occurred during 363 782 patient-days. The risk of any HAI was 25% lower during mandatory gloving periods compared with during nongloving periods (relative risk [RR]: 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-0.93; P = .01), after adjusting for long-term trends and seasonal effect. Mandatory gloving was associated with lower risks of bloodstream infections (RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.49-0.81; P < .001), central line-associated bloodstream infections (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.44-0.84; P = 0.003), and hospital-acquired pneumonia (RR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.03-1.25; P= 0.09). The reduction was significant in the PICU (RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.42-0.93; P = .02), the NICU (RR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.39-0.98; P = .04), and the Pediatric Bone Marrow Transplant Unit (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.29-0.91, P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Universal gloving during RSV season was associated with significantly lower rates of bacteremia and central line-associated bloodstream infections, particularly in the ICUs and the Pediatric Bone Marrow Transplant Unit.

Asunto(s)