Impact of pre-emptive contact precautions for outborn neonates on the incidence of healthcare-associated meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus transmission in a Japanese neonatal intensive care unit

Infant isolation and cohorting for preventing or reducing transmission of healthcare-associated infections in neonatal units

BACKGROUND

Neonatal healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) result in increased morbidity and mortality, as well as increased healthcare costs. Patient isolation measures, i.e. single-room isolation or the cohorting of patients with similar infections, remain a recommended and commonly used practice for preventing horizontal spread of infections in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).  OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to assess the effect of single-room isolation or cohorting, or both for preventing transmission of HAIs or colonization with HAI-causing pathogens in newborn infants less than six months of age admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Our secondary objective was to assess the effect of single-room isolation or cohorting, or both on neonatal mortality and perceived or documented adverse effects in newborn infants admitted to the NICU.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registries. There were no restrictions to date, language or publication type. We also checked the reference lists of studies identified for full-text review.  SELECTION CRITERIA: Types of studies: cluster-randomized or quasi-randomized trials at the level of the cluster (where clusters may be defined by NICU, hospital, ward, or other subunits of the hospital). We also included cross-over trials with a washout period of more than four months (arbitrarily defined).

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

newborn infants less than six months of age in neonatal units that implemented patient isolation or cohorting as infection control measures to prevent HAIs. Types of interventions: patient isolation measures (single-room isolation or cohorting, or both of infants with similar colonization or infections) compared to routine isolation measures.

TYPES OF OUTCOME MEASURES

the primary outcome was the rate of transmission of HAIs as estimated by the infection and colonization rates in the NICU. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality during hospital stay at 28 days of age, length of hospital stay, as well as potential adverse effects of isolation or cohorting measures, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The standard methods of Cochrane Neonatal were used to identify studies and assess the methodological quality of eligible cluster-randomized trials. The certainty of the evidence was to be assessed by the GRADE method as evidence of high, moderate, low, or very low certainty. Infection and colonization rates were to be expressed as rate ratios for each trial and if appropriate for meta-analysis, the generic inverse variance method in RevMan was to be used.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any published or ongoing trials to include in the review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The review found no evidence from randomized trials to either support or refute the use of patient isolation measures (single-room isolation or cohorting) in neonates with HAIs. Risks secondary to infection control measures need to be balanced against the benefits of decreasing horizontal transmission in the neonatal unit for optimal neonatal outcomes. There is an urgent need to research the effectiveness of patient isolation measures for preventing the transmission of HAIs in neonatal units. Well-designed trials randomizing clusters of units or hospitals to a type of patient isolation method intervention are warranted.

Impact of the "Zero Resistance" program on acquisition of multidrug-resistant bacteria in patients admitted to Intensive Care Units in Spain. A prospective, intervention, multimodal, multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of a multimodal interventional project ("Zero Resistance") on the acquisition of multidrug-resistant bacteria (MDR-B) during the patient's ICU stay.

DESIGN

Prospective, open-label, interventional, multicenter study.

SETTING

103 ICUs.

PATIENTS

Critically ill patients admitted to the ICUs over a 27-month period.

INTERVENTIONS

Implementation of a bundle of 10 recommendations to prevent emergence and spread of MDR-B in the ICU.

MAIN VARIABLE OF INTEREST

Rate of patients acquiring MDR-B during their ICU stay, with differentiation between colonization and infection.

RESULTS

A total of 139,505 patients were included. In 5409 (3.9%) patients, 6020 MDR-B on ICU admission were identified, and in 3648 (2.6%) patients, 4269 new MDR-B during ICU stay were isolated. The rate of patients with MDR-B detected on admission increased significantly (IRR 1.43, 95% CI 1.31-1.56) (p<0.001) during the study period, with an increase of 32.2% between the initial and final monthly rates. On the contrary, the rate of patients with MDR-B during ICU stay decreased non-significantly (IRR 0.93, 95% CI 0.83-1.03) (p=0.174), with a 24.9% decrease between initial and final monthly rates. According to the classification into colonization or infection, there was a highly significant increase of MDR-B colonizations detected on admission (IRR 1.69, 95% CI 1.52-1.83; p<0.0001) and a very significant decrease of MDR-B-infections during ICU stay (IRR 0.67, 95% CI 0.57-0.80, p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of ZR project-recommendations was associated with a significantly reduction an infection produced by MDR-B acquired during the patient's ICU stay.

Effectiveness of umbilical culture for surveillance of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among neonates admitted to neonatal intensive care units

To compare the culture sensitivities of MRSA detection, we collected 988 paired umbilical and nasal cultures from screened neonates. MRSA positivity rates were 79.1% from umbilicus and 41.9% from nares (P = .01). The umbilicus was a more useful culture site than the nares for surveillance of MRSA among neonates upon admission.

HAND HYGIENE COMPLIANCE IN THE PREVENTION OF HOSPITAL ACQUIRED INFECTIONS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

BACKGROUND

Healthcare worker's (HCW) hands are known to be a primary source of transmission of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs). Thus, practicing hand hygiene (HH) and adhering to HH guidelines are both expected to decrease the risk of transmission but there is no consensus on the optimal hand hygiene compliance (HHC) rate that HCWs should aim for.

AIM

The objective of this study was to systematically review the published literature to determine an optimal threshold of HCW HHC rate associated with the lowest incidence rate of HAIs.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched online databases using a comprehensive search criterion for randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled studies, investigating the impact of HCW's HHC rate on HAI rates in patients of all ages, within healthcare facilities in high income countries.

FINDINGS

Of the 8,093 articles citations and abstracts screened, 35 articles were included in the review. Most studies reported overall HAIs per 1000 patient-days and device-associated HAIs per 1000 device-days. Most studies reported HHC rates between 60%-70%. Lower incidence HAI rates seemed to be achieved with HHC rates of approximately 60%. Studies included were not originally designed to assess the impact of HHC on HAI rates but risk of bias was assessed as per our predetermined exposure and outcome criterion. 11 (31%) of studies were deemed at low risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Although HHC is part of HCW's code of conduct, very high HHC rates were difficult to reach. In observational studies, HHC and HAI followed a negative relationship up to about 60%. Due to flaws in study design, causality could not be inferred; only general trends could be discussed. Given the limitations, there is a need for high-quality evidence to support the implementation of specified targets of HHC rates.

Effect of Contact Precautions on Staphylococcus aureus and Clinical Outcomes of Colonized Patients in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Staphylococcus aureus is a common pathogen in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), yet little is known about the effect of contact precautions and clinical outcomes of colonized patients.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of all neonates from August 2014 to November 2018 colonized with either methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) or methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and select noncolonized patients at two neonatal intensive care units at the University of California, Los Angeles. Outcomes during two time periods (during and after the use of contact precautions) were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 234 patients were included in the study: 83 colonized and 151 noncolonized patients. There was a fourfold higher incidence of MSSA colonization versus MRSA (P < 0.001). There was a higher incidence of positive surveillance cultures after contact precautions were discontinued (P = 0.01), but this did not correlate with a higher incidence of invasive cultures (P = 0.475). There were twice as many MSSA invasive cultures than MRSA, but a higher rate of invasion with MRSA (P < 0.05). Colonized patients were more likely to develop an invasive infection than noncolonized (P = 0.003 MRSA; P = 0.004 MSSA). When controlling for gestational age and surgical interventions, colonization was more likely to be associated with skin and soft tissue infections (P < 0.001) and a longer length of stay by a mean of 27.8 days (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Contact precautions resulted in a lower incidence of colonization without a difference in invasive cultures in our NICUs. Those colonized with S. aureus had a higher incidence of skin and soft tissue infections and a longer NICU length of stay.

Compliance to empirical contact precautions for multidrug-resistant microorganisms

Health care-associated infections impact patient morbidity and mortality, and institutions adopt evidence-based measures to prevent and control such infections. In this study, professionals were observed during patient care under empirical contact precautions. A total of 243 observations were performed in which 39.5% complied with all measures. The positivity rate of surveillance cultures was 38.36%, and adherence to the measures in patients with colonization was 43.1%.

Gloves, gowns and masks for reducing the transmission of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in the hospital setting

BACKGROUND

Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA; also known as methicillin-resistant S aureus) is a common hospital-acquired pathogen that increases morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Its control continues to be an unresolved issue in many hospitals worldwide. The evidence base for the effects of the use of gloves, gowns or masks as control measures for MRSA is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of wearing gloves, a gown or a mask when contact is anticipated with a hospitalised patient colonised or infected with MRSA, or with the patient's immediate environment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Specialised Registers of three Cochrane Groups (Wounds Group on 5 June 2015; Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group on 9 July 2013; and Infectious Diseases Group on 5 January 2009); CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6); DARE, HTA, NHS EED, and the Methodology Register (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6); MEDLINE and MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (1946 to June week 1 2015); EMBASE (1974 to 4 June 2015); Web of Science (WOS) Core Collection (from inception to 7 June 2015); CINAHL (1982 to 5 June 2015); British Nursing Index (1985 to 6 July 2010); and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Database (1639 to 11 June 2015). We also searched three trials registers (on 6 June 2015), references list of articles, and conference proceedings. We finally contacted relevant individuals for additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies assessing the effects on MRSA transmission of the use of gloves, gowns or masks by any person in the hospital setting when contact is anticipated with a hospitalised patient colonised or infected with MRSA, or with the patient's immediate environment. We did not assess adverse effects or economic issues associated with these interventions.We considered any comparator to be eligible. With regard to study design, only randomised controlled trials (clustered or not) and the following non-randomised experimental studies were eligible: quasi-randomised controlled trials (clustered or not), non-randomised controlled trials (clustered or not), controlled before-and-after studies, controlled cohort before-after studies, interrupted time series studies (controlled or not), and repeated measures studies. We did not exclude any study on the basis of language or date of publication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently decided on eligibility of the studies. Had any study having been included, two review authors would have extracted data (at least for outcome data) and assessed the risk of bias independently. We would have followed the standard methodological procedures suggested by Cochrane and the Cochrane EPOC Group for assessing risk of bias and analysing the data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no eligible studies for this review, either completed or ongoing.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no studies assessing the effects of wearing gloves, gowns or masks for contact with MRSA hospitalised patients, or with their immediate environment, on the transmission of MRSA to patients, hospital staff, patients' caregivers or visitors. This absence of evidence should not be interpreted as evidence of no effect for these interventions. The effects of gloves, gowns and masks in these circumstances have yet to be determined by rigorous experimental studies, such as cluster-randomised trials involving multiple wards or hospitals, or interrupted time series studies.

Infection control measures to decrease the burden of antimicrobial resistance in the critical care setting

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The prevalence of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in ICUs is increasing worldwide. This review assesses the role of infection control measures, excluding antibiotic stewardship programs, in reducing the burden of resistance in ICUs.

RECENT FINDINGS

The knowledge base about the effect of increased hand hygiene compliance in reducing the burden of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in ICUs has been improved. Universal decolonization with chlorhexidine body washing was associated with significant reduction in MDRO prevalence, but vigilance for emerging chlorhexidine resistance is required. A significant reduction of resistance for Gram-negative bacilli has been demonstrated with the use of selective decontamination, but further clinical trials are necessary before definitive conclusions can be drawn regarding long-term risk/benefit ratios.

SUMMARY

In the recent years, several high-quality clinical studies have assessed the ability of various infection control measures in reducing the burden of antimicrobial resistance. Significant progress has been made in identifying interventions effective in preventing transmission of MDROs in ICUs, in particular, decolonization. However, it still remains impossible to determine the exact and relative importance of different infection control measures. Any approach must ultimately be tailored to the local epidemiology of the targeted ICU.

Optimization of pre-emptive isolations in a polyvalent ICU through implementation of an intervention strategy

BACKGROUND

Pre-emptive isolation refers to the application of contact precaution measures in patients with strongly suspected colonization by multiresistant bacteria.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of an intervention program involving the implementation of a consensus-based protocol of pre-emptive isolation (CPPI) on admission to a polyvalent ICU of a general hospital.

METHODS

A comparative analysis of 2 patient cohorts was made: a historical cohort including patients in which pre-emptive isolation was established according to physician criterion prior to starting CPPI (from January 2010 to February 2011), and a prospective cohort including patients in which CPPI was implemented (from March to November 2011). CPPI included the identification and diffusion of pre-emptive isolation criteria, the definition of sampling methodology, the evaluation of results, and the development of criteria for discontinuation of pre-emptive isolation. Pre-emptive isolation was indicated by the medical staff, and follow-up was conducted by the nursing staff. Pre-emptive isolation was defined as "adequate" when at least one multiresistant bacteria was identified in any of the samples. Comparison of data between the 2 periods was made with the chi-square test for categorical variables and the Student t-test for quantitative variables. Statistical significance was set at P<.05.

RESULTS

Among the 1,740 patients admitted to the ICU (1,055 during the first period and 685 during the second period), pre-emptive isolation was indicated in 199 (11.4%); 111 (10.5%) of these subjects corresponded to the historical cohort (control group) and 88 (12.8%) to the posterior phase after the implementation of CPPI (intervention group). No differences were found in age, APACHE II score or patient characteristics between the 2 periods. The implementation of CPPI was related to decreases in non-indicated pre-emptive isolations (29.7 vs. 6.8%, P<.001), time of requesting surveillance cultures (1.56 vs. 0.37 days, P<.001), and days of duration of treatment (4.77 vs. 3.58 days, P<.001). In 44 patients (22.1%) in which pre-emptive isolation was indicated, more than one multiresistant bacteria was identified, with an "adequate pre-emptive isolation rate" of 19.8% in the first period and 25.0% in the second period (P<.382).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of CPPI resulted in a significant decrease in pre-emptive isolations which were not indicated correctly, a decrease in the time elapsed between isolation and collection of samples, and a decrease in the duration of isolation measures in cases in which isolation was unnecessary, without increasing the rate of "adequate pre-emptive isolation".

[Update on outbreaks reported from neonatal intensive care units (2010-203): Staphylococcus aureus]

In terms of the unique risk profile of the patients and the morbidity associated with S. aureus infections in this vulnerable patient population, the literature on outbreaks of S. aureus (including MRSA) in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) needs to be analyzed separately from reports derived from other intensive care units. With the objective of updating important information for those involved in outbreak management and fostering preventive efforts, this article summarizes the results of a systematic literature analysis, referring to an earlier publication by Gastmeier et al. It focuses on NICU outbreaks caused by S. aureus (including MRSA) and on controlling them.

Prevalence of MRSA colonization in Japanese neonatal care unit patients in 2011

BACKGROUND

The neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) is a high-risk setting for transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The recent prevalence of colonization with MRSA in patients and its control measures are unknown in Japanese NICU. We investigated the prevalence of MRSA colonization in patients and measures to control and prevent health-care-associated transmission in Japanese NICU in 2011.

METHODS

A nationwide survey was performed in facilities certified as training hospitals for neonatologists. Data in NICU and growing care units (GCU) were collected and analyzed regarding surveillance cultures for MRSA and the proportion of MRSA-colonized patients in September 2011. Trends in the proportion of MRSA-colonized patients and the measures to control and prevent health-care-associated MRSA transmission were investigated in the surveyed NICU in 2000, 2003, and 2011.

RESULTS

A total of 168 NICU and 158 GCU were analyzed. The proportions of NICU and GCU that conducted regular surveillance cultures for MRSA were 81% and 66%, respectively. MRSA colonization was not found in 53% of NICU and in 45% of GCU. The percentage of NICU reported to be free of MRSA colonization increased over time. Use of alcohol-based hand rub and gloves by clinical staff and cohorting for identified MRSA-positive patients became more common in 2011 than in 2000 or 2003.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately half of Japanese NICU did not observe any patients with MRSA colonization in September 2011. Control and prevention measures have changed to use of alcohol-based hand rub and gloves in the last decade.

MRSA colonization and risk of infection in the neonatal and pediatric ICU: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in NICUs and PICUs. Our objective was to assess the burden of MRSA colonization on admission, study the time trends, and examine the significance of MRSA colonization in this population.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase databases were consulted. Studies that reported prevalence of MRSA colonization on ICU admission were selected. Two authors independently extracted data on MRSA colonization and infection.

RESULTS

We identified 18 suitable articles and found an overall prevalence of MRSA colonization of 1.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3%-2.6%) on admission to the NICU or PICU, with a stable trend over the past 12 years. Interestingly, 5.8% (95% CI 1.9%-11.4%) of outborn neonates were colonized with MRSA on admission to NICU, compared with just 0.2% (95% CI 0.0%-0.9%) of inborn neonates (P = .01). The pooled acquisition rate of MRSA colonization was 4.1% (95% CI 1.2%-8.6%) during the NICU and PICU stay and was as high as 6.1% (95% CI 2.8%-10.6%) when the NICU population was studied alone. There was a relative risk of 24.2 (95% CI 8.9-66.0) for colonized patients to develop a MRSA infection during hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

In the NICU and PICU, there are carriers of MRSA on admission, and MRSA colonization in the NICU is almost exclusively associated with outborn neonates. Importantly, despite infection control measures, the acquisition rate is high, and patients colonized with MRSA on admission are more likely to suffer a MRSA infection during hospitalization.