Search

Purpose: The global rise of multidrug resistant organisms (MDROs) is of major concern since infections by these pathogens are difficult, and in some cases, even impossible to treat. This review will discuss the effectiveness of a pathogen-independent alternative approach consisting of the implementation of antibiotic stewardship (ABS) programs, improvement of hand hygiene compliance, and daily antiseptic body washings instead of "screening, isolation and eradication" as recommended by many infection control guidelines today., Methods: A review of the literature., Results: The classical approach composed of screening, isolation and eradication has many limitations, including lack of standardization of the screening methods, risk of medical errors for patients in isolation and failure to eradicate resistant bacteria. Notably, concrete evidence that this current infection control approach actually prevents transmission is still lacking. We found that a novel approach with the training of infectious diseases specialists can reduce the usage of antimicrobials, thereby significantly decreasing the emergence of new MDROs. Moreover, increased hand hygiene compliance not only reduces transmission of MDROs, but also that of sensitive organisms causing the majority of nosocomial infections. Further, instruments, such as continuing education, bed-side observation, and the use of new tools, e.g. electronic wearables and Wi-Fi-equipped dispensers, are all options that can also improve the current low hand hygiene compliance levels. In addition, daily antiseptic body washes were observed to reduce the transmission of MDROs, especially those deriving from the body surface-like MRSA and VRE in specific settings. Finally, antiseptic body washes were seen to have similar effects on reducing transmission rates as screening and isolation measures., Conclusions: In summary, this review describes a novel evidence-based approach to counteract the growing medical challenge of increasing numbers of MDROs.

Purpose: The reduction of central venous line (CVL)-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) is generally advocated. However, despite implementing infection prevention recommendations, CLABSI rates remain high at some institutions. Therefore, a chlorhexidine-containing dressing should be assessed for its potential for infection reduction, adverse events (AEs) and practicability., Methods: The number of CVLs, CVL days, CLABSIs and CLABSI rates with regard to the kind of dressing (standard vs. chlorhexidine-containing) were documented from November 2010 to may 2012 (1,298 patients with 12,220 CVL days) at two intensive care units (ICUs) and compared to historical controls. The practicability and safety of the chlorhexidine-containing dressing and reasons for not using this dressing were assessed., Results: Forty CLABSIs occurred in 34 patients, resulting in a significantly lower overall CLABSI rate in patients with the chlorhexidine-containing dressing [1.51/1,000 CVL days; confidence interval (CI): 0.75-2.70] compared to patients with the standard dressing (5.87/1,000 CVL days; CI: 3.93-8.43; p < 0.0001). The CLABSI rate in historical controls receiving the standard dressing was 6.2/1,000 CVL days. The main reason for not using chlorhexidine-containing dressing was bleeding at the insertion site. AEs occurred in five patients and represented self-healing skin macerations (3 cases) and superficial skin necrosis (2 cases)., Conclusions: In case of high CLABSI rates despite the implementation of standard recommendations, our findings suggest that a chlorhexidine-containing dressing safely decreases CLABSI rates.