Search

Background: Both targeted decolonization and universal decolonization of patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are candidate strategies to prevent health care-associated infections, particularly those caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)., Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial. Hospitals were randomly assigned to one of three strategies, with all adult ICUs in a given hospital assigned to the same strategy. Group 1 implemented MRSA screening and isolation; group 2, targeted decolonization (i.e., screening, isolation, and decolonization of MRSA carriers); and group 3, universal decolonization (i.e., no screening, and decolonization of all patients). Proportional-hazards models were used to assess differences in infection reductions across the study groups, with clustering according to hospital., Results: A total of 43 hospitals (including 74 ICUs and 74,256 patients during the intervention period) underwent randomization. In the intervention period versus the baseline period, modeled hazard ratios for MRSA clinical isolates were 0.92 for screening and isolation (crude rate, 3.2 vs. 3.4 isolates per 1000 days), 0.75 for targeted decolonization (3.2 vs. 4.3 isolates per 1000 days), and 0.63 for universal decolonization (2.1 vs. 3.4 isolates per 1000 days) (P=0.01 for test of all groups being equal). In the intervention versus baseline periods, hazard ratios for bloodstream infection with any pathogen in the three groups were 0.99 (crude rate, 4.1 vs. 4.2 infections per 1000 days), 0.78 (3.7 vs. 4.8 infections per 1000 days), and 0.56 (3.6 vs. 6.1 infections per 1000 days), respectively (P<0.001 for test of all groups being equal). Universal decolonization resulted in a significantly greater reduction in the rate of all bloodstream infections than either targeted decolonization or screening and isolation. One bloodstream infection was prevented per 54 patients who underwent decolonization. The reductions in rates of MRSA bloodstream infection were similar to those of all bloodstream infections, but the difference was not significant. Adverse events, which occurred in 7 patients, were mild and related to chlorhexidine., Conclusions: In routine ICU practice, universal decolonization was more effective than targeted decolonization or screening and isolation in reducing rates of MRSA clinical isolates and bloodstream infection from any pathogen. (Funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; REDUCE MRSA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00980980).

Background: A range of strategies and approaches have been developed for preventing health care-associated infections. Understanding the variation in practices among facilities is necessary to improve compliance with existing programs and aid the implementation of new interventions., Methods: In 2009, HCA Inc administered an electronic survey to measure compliance with evidence-based infection prevention practices as well as identify variation in products or methods, such as use of special approach technology for central vascular catheters and ventilator care. Responding adult intensive care units (ICUs) were those considering participation in a clinical trial to reduce health care-associated infections., Results: Responses from 99 ICUs in 55 hospitals indicated that many evidenced-based practices were used consistently, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) screening and use of contact precautions for MRSA-positive patients. Other practices exhibited wide variability including discontinuation of precautions and use of antimicrobial technology or chlorhexidine patches for central vascular catheters. MRSA decolonization was not a predominant practice in ICUs., Conclusion: In this large, community-based health care system, there was substantial variation in the products and methods to reduce health care-associated infections. Despite system-wide emphasis on basic practices as a precursor to adding special approach technologies, this survey showed that these technologies were commonplace, including in facilities where improvement in basic practices was needed., (Copyright © 2013 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The need for evidence about the effectiveness of therapeutics and other medical practices has triggered new interest in methods for comparative effectiveness research., Objective: Describe an approach to comparative effectiveness research involving cluster randomized trials in networks of hospitals, health plans, or medical practices with centralized administrative and informatics capabilities., Research Design: We discuss the example of an ongoing cluster randomized trial to prevent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection in intensive care units (ICUs). The trial randomizes 45 hospitals to: (a) screening cultures of ICU admissions, followed by Contact Precautions if MRSA-positive, (b) screening cultures of ICU admissions followed by decolonization if MRSA-positive, or (c) universal decolonization of ICU admissions without screening., Subjects: All admissions to adult ICUs., Measures: The primary outcome is MRSA-positive clinical cultures occurring >or=2 days following ICU admission. Secondary outcomes include blood and urine infection caused by MRSA (and, separately, all pathogens), as well as the development of resistance to decolonizing agents., Results: Recruitment of hospitals is complete. Data collection will end in Summer 2011., Conclusions: This trial takes advantage of existing personnel, procedures, infrastructure, and information systems in a large integrated hospital network to conduct a low-cost evaluation of prevention strategies under usual practice conditions. This approach is applicable to many comparative effectiveness topics in both inpatient and ambulatory settings.