Search

• Intranasal mupirocin is effective pre-operatively for orthopedic and cardiac procedures. • Mupirocin is effective for nasal decolonization in the intensive care unit setting. • Intranasal povidone-iodine is most effective for pre-operative nasal decolonization. • Other decolonization agents lack sufficient data for widespread use. • Additional research on decolonizing agents is still needed. Staphylococcus aureus colonization is a key risk factor for S. aureus infections in surgical patients and in hospitalized patients. Many studies have assessed various decolonization agents, protocols, and settings. This review summarizes key findings about nasal decolonization for 2 different patient populations: patients undergoing surgery and patients hospitalized in intensive care units. We reviewed major studies related to decolonization of patients colonized with S. aureus and who were either undergoing surgical procedures or were hospitalized in intensive care units. We focused on recent studies, particularly randomized controlled trials and robust quasi-experimental trials. We also reviewed select non-randomized trials when more rigorous trials were limited. Mupirocin is the best-studied agent for decolonization. Its use reduces the risk of surgical site infection following orthopedic surgery (strongest data) and cardiac surgery. Mupirocin decolonization also reduces the incidence of S. aureus clinical cultures in the intensive care unit. Povidone-iodine is less well-studied. Current data suggest that it decreases the risk of surgical site infections after orthopedic surgical procedures. In contrast, povidone-iodine is less effective than mupirocin for reducing the incidence of S aureus clinical cultures in the intensive care unit. Both mupirocin and povidone-iodine have important limitations, highlighting the need for future decolonization research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Reported adherence was highest at the hospital practicing universal decolonization. • Patients vary in their concern about surgical site infections. • Patients vary in the effort they will extend to prevent surgical site infections. • Few patients reported either barriers to adherence or side effects. To improve adherence with pre-surgical screening for Staphylococcus aureus nasal carriage and decolonization, we need more information about patients' experiences with these protocols. We surveyed patients undergoing orthopedic, neurosurgical, or cardiac operations at Johns Hopkins Hospitals (JHH), the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (UIHC) at MercyOne Northeast Iowa Neurosurgery (MONIN) to assess patients' experiences with decolonization protocols. Five hundred thirty-four patients responded. Respondents at JHH were significantly more likely than those at the UIHC to report using mupirocin and were significantly more likely than those at the UIHC and MONIN to feel they received adequate information about surgical site infection (SSI) prevention and decolonization. Respondents at JHH were the least likely to not worry about SSI and they were more willing to do anything they could to prevent SSI. Few patients reported barriers to adherence and side effects of mupirocin or chlorhexidine. Respondents did not report either major side effects or barriers to adherence. Patients varied in their level of concern about SSI, their willingness to invest effort in preventing SSI, and their assessments of preoperative information. To improve patients' adherence, clinicians and hospitals should assess their patients' needs and desires and tailor their preoperative processes, education, and prophylaxis accordingly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Understanding the perceptions and beliefs of health care workers (HCWs) regarding glove use and associated hand hygiene (HH) may be informative and ultimately improve practice. Research in this area is limited. This study examined the practices and beliefs of HCWs surrounding the use of nonsterile gloves and HH before gloving. Methods The study was conducted at 3 large academic US hospitals using a parallel convergent mixed-method design. To estimate compliance rates, the gloving and HH practices of HCWs were observed at entry to patient rooms for 6 months. Interviews were conducted with 25 providers, nurses, and nursing assistants to investigate their beliefs and perceptions of these practices. Results Observed HH compliance rates before gloving were 42%, yet in the interviews most HCWs reported 100% compliance. Observed compliance with gloving before entering contact precaution rooms was 78%, although all HCWs reported always gloving for standard and contact precautions. Most HCWs described using gloves more often than necessary. HCWs generally use gloves for their own safety and sanitize hands before gloving for patient safety. Numerous barriers to compliance with HH before gloving were discussed, including beliefs that gloves provide enough protection. Conclusions HH and glove use are highly intertwined in clinical practice and should be considered jointly in infection prevention improvement efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) frequently wear gloves when they care for patients in standard precautions. If CNAs use gloves inappropriately, they may spread pathogens to patients and the environment, potentially leading to health care–associated infections (HAIs). Methods Using a descriptive structured observational design, we examined the degree of inappropriate health care personnel glove use in a random sample of 74 CNAs performing toileting and perineal care at 1 long-term care facility. Results During the 74 patient care events, CNAs wore gloves for 80.2% (1,774/2,213) of the touch points, failing to change gloves at 66.4% (225/339) of glove change points. CNAs changed gloves a median of 2.0 times per patient care event. A median of 1.0 change occurred at a change point. CNAs failed to change their gloves at a glove change point a median of 2.5 times per patient care event. Most (61/74; 82.4%) patient care events had >1 contaminated touch point. Over 44% (782/1,774) of the gloved touch points were defined as contaminated for a median of 8.0 contaminated glove touch points per patient care event. All contaminated touches were with gloved hands ( P  <   .001). Conclusions Inappropriate glove use was frequently observed in this study. Contaminated gloves may be a significant cause of cross-contamination of pathogens in health care environments. Future research studies should evaluate strategies to improve glove use to reduce HAIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hand hygiene compliance is subject to the Hawthorne effect, which may be attenuated by covert observers and brief observation periods. This study demonstrated that hand hygiene compliance rates were between 8% and 29% greater when reported by infection prevention programs than when reported by covert observers over brief observation periods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) created an evidence-based bundle to help reduce methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) health care-associated infections. The study aim was to identify which components of the IHI's MRSA bundle that rural hospitals have implemented and to identify barriers that hindered implementation of bundle components. Methods Four surveys about the IHI's MRSA bundle were administered at the Iowa Statewide Infection Prevention Seminar between 2007 and 2011. Surveys were mailed to infection preventionists (IPs) who did not attend the meetings. Results The percentage of IPs reporting that their hospital implemented a hand hygiene program (range by year, 87%-94%) and used contact precautions for patients infected (range by year, 97%-100%) or colonized (range by year, 77%-92%) with MRSA did not change significantly. The number of hospitals that monitored the effectiveness of environmental cleaning significantly increased from 23%-71% (P < .01). Few hospitals assessed daily if central lines were necessary (range by year, 22%-26%). IPs perceived lack of support to be a major barrier to implementing bundle components. Conclusion Most IPs reported that their hospitals had implemented most components of the MRSA bundle. Support within the health care system is essential for implementing each component of an evidence-based bundle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background context: Some surgeons use systemic vancomycin to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs), but patients who do not carry methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus have an increased risk of SSIs when given vancomycin alone for intravenous prophylaxis. Applying vancomycin powder to the wound before closure could increase the local tissue vancomycin level without significant systemic levels. However, the effectiveness of local vancomycin powder application for preventing SSIs has not been established. Purpose: Our objective was to systematically review and evaluate studies on the effectiveness of local vancomycin powder for decreasing SSIs. Study design: Meta-analysis. Sample: We included observational studies, quasi-experimental studies, and randomized controlled trials of patients undergoing surgical procedures that involved vancomycin powder application to surgical wounds, reported SSI rates, and had a comparison group that did not use local vancomycin powder. Outcome measures: The primary outcome was postoperative SSIs. The secondary outcomes included deep incisional SSIs and S. aureus SSIs. Methods: We performed systematic literature searches in PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials via Wiley, Scopus (including EMBASE abstracts), Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, BMC Proceedings, ProQuest Dissertation, and Thesis in Health and Medicine, and conference abstracts from IDWeek, the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, and the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons annual meetings, and also the Scoliosis Research Society Annual Meeting and Course. We ran the searches from inception on May 9, 2013 with no limits on date or language. After reviewing 373 titles or abstracts and 22 articles in detail, we included 10 independent studies and used a random-effects model when pooling risk estimates to assess the effectiveness of local vancomycin powder application for preventing SSIs, the outcome of interest. We used the I2-index, Q-statistic, and corresponding p value to assess the heterogeneity of the risk estimates, and funnel plots to assess publication bias. Results: We included seven quasi-experimental studies, two cohort studies, and one randomized controlled trial, encompassing 5,888 surgical patients. The pooled effects showed that applying local vancomycin powder was significantly protective against SSIs (pooled odds ratio [pOR] 0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09–0.38), deep incisional SSIs (pOR 0.23; 95% CI 0.09–0.57), and SSIs caused by S. aureus (pOR 0.22; 95% CI 0.08–0.58). However, significant heterogeneity was present for studies evaluating all SSIs or deep incisional SSIs. When we pooled the risk estimates from the eight studies that assessed patients undergoing spinal operations, vancomycin powder remained significantly protective against SSIs (pOR 0.16; 95% CI 0.09–0.30), deep incisional SSIs (pOR 0.18; 95% CI 0.09–0.36), and SSIs caused by S. aureus (pOR 0.11; 95% CI 0.03–0.36). The pooled ORs from studies of spinal operations were lower than those for all studies and the estimates from spinal operation studies were homogeneous. However, there was evidence of publication bias. Conclusions: Local administration of vancomycin powder appears to protect against SSIs, deep incisional SSIs, and S. aureus SSIs after spinal operations. Large, high-quality studies should be performed to evaluate this intervention before it is used routinely. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Health care-associated infections (HAIs) are a leading cause of death in United States health care settings, with an overall estimated annual incidence of 1.7 million. As antimicrobial resistance has increased, so too have efforts to reduce HAI rates. The objective of this study was to identify commonly cited lessons learned across a wide variety of HAI projects and hospital settings. Methods: Thirty-three hospitals participated in 5 different regional collaboratives supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Data on hospitals’ successes, challenges, and lessons learned were collected via key informant interviews and structured, standardized case report forms. Results: Seven commonly cited themes were identified: foster change by first understanding resistance; commit to regular strategic communication and join a collaborative; start small and tailor implementation to local needs and cultures; engage frontline staff by involving them in the project and enlisting champions; educate and reeducate; convince administration to provide leadership, funds, and dedicated staff and assign accountability; and provide timely, relevant feedback and celebrate successes. Conclusion: Despite the diversity of hospital settings, cultures, personnel, and HAI reduction projects, we found that hospitals encounter similar challenges and facilitators across projects. We offer a model of 7 process elements shown to be important to successful implementation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The duties of infection control professionals (ICPs) have increased over time, but resources have not increased substantially. Numerous states have passed or have considered mandatory reporting laws for health care–associated infections. Such laws would increase ICPs'' work further. Methods: We conducted two surveys of ICPs in Iowa to determine their current responsibilities and resources and to estimate the resources they would need if they were required to report all nosocomial infections to the state. Results: Most hospitals had less than 1 full time equivalent performing infection control (mean = 0.64). Many respondents had several roles within the hospital. Surveillance methods and scope varied by hospital size. Most ICPs did not use catheter days as the denominator for rates of bloodstream infections. Over 50% of Iowa''s hospitals are critical access hospitals, most of which did not have intensive care units, and most had very few patients with central venous catheters. Conclusions: Hospitals in Iowa have limited resources for infection control. “One size fits all” public reporting systems are not appropriate for states like Iowa that have a few large hospitals and many small hospitals. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: To identify risk factors for and outcomes of surgical site infections and cellulitis after abdominal hysterectomies. Study Design: We used logistic regression analysis to analyze data from a case-control study of 1104 patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomies at a university hospital between Jan. 1, 2007 and Dec. 30, 2010. Results: Factors significantly associated with surgical site infections and with cellulitis were: pulmonary disease, operations done in Main Operating Room East, and seroma. Body mass index >35, no private insurance, and fluid and electrolyte disorders were risk factors for surgical site infections. The mean prophylactic dose of cefazolin was significantly higher for controls than for patients with surgical site infections. Preoperative showers with Hibiclens (Molnlycke Health Care US, LLC, Norcross, GA) and cefazolin prophylaxis were associated with a significantly decreased cellulitis risk. Surgical site infections and cellulitis were significantly associated with readmissions and return visits and surgical site infections were associated with reoperations. Conclusion: Preoperative showers, antimicrobial prophylaxis, surgical techniques preventing seromas, and the operating room environment may affect the risk of surgical site infections and cellulitis after abdominal hysterectomies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background Influenza acts synergistically with bacterial co-pathogens. Few studies have described co-infection in a large cohort with severe influenza infection. Objectives To describe the spectrum and clinical impact of co-infections. Study design Retrospective cohort study of patients with severe influenza infection from September 2013 through April 2014 in intensive care units at 33 U.S. hospitals comparing characteristics of cases with and without co-infection in bivariable and multivariable analysis. Results Of 507 adult and pediatric patients, 114 (22.5%) developed bacterial co-infection and 23 (4.5%) developed viral co-infection. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common cause of co-infection, isolated in 47 (9.3%) patients. Characteristics independently associated with the development of bacterial co-infection of adult patients in a logistic regression model included the absence of cardiovascular disease (OR 0.41 [0.23–0.73], p = 0.003), leukocytosis (>11 K/μl, OR 3.7 [2.2–6.2], p < 0.001; reference: normal WBC 3.5–11 K/μl) at ICU admission and a higher ICU admission SOFA score (for each increase by 1 in SOFA score, OR 1.1 [1.0–1.2], p = 0.001). Bacterial co-infections (OR 2.2 [1.4–3.6], p = 0.001) and viral co-infections (OR 3.1 [1.3–7.4], p = 0.010) were both associated with death in bivariable analysis. Patients with a bacterial co-infection had a longer hospital stay, a longer ICU stay and were likely to have had a greater delay in the initiation of antiviral administration than patients without co-infection (p < 0.05) in bivariable analysis. Conclusions Bacterial co-infections were common, resulted in delay of antiviral therapy and were associated with increased resource allocation and higher mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]