All Entries Tagged With: "MRSA"
Can a video really help curb infections?
For quite some time now, hospitals have been creating and posting videos to create awareness about proper infection control protocol for patient caregivers (most focus on hand washing or vaccination).
The Association of Peri-operative Nurses (AORN) and 3M had a contest for nurses to submit videos on hand hygiene. The World Health Organization (WHO) posted a video on hand hygiene, and even the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had a contest for people to submit a public service announcement video for preventing flu. And of course, hospitals have created videos on their own to help raise awareness and educate.
Videos are fun—they have the power to get staff out of their daily routine, dancing in sterile hospital hallways and awkwardly singing their newly-crafted lyrics over popular hits (think “I’m Gonna Wash My Hands” or “Pump It”). I also assume that while the video is being made, hospital staff are more focused on proper patient safety protocol. But do videos actually make a lasting effect on ensuring staff wash their hands or get vaccinated?
After watching the APIC Infection Prevention Film Festival winner’s video, I think some might. About forty entries were submitted, but the winner takes a less gimmicky approach and “depicts the tragedy and irony of healthcare-associated infections, transforming the statistics into a story of a patient who gets an infection,” according to the APIC press release. In my opinion, the video directly connects the simple–and sometimes annoying–act of hand washing to the safety of the patient, leaving the responsibility square on the shoulders of healthcare professionals. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the fun, light-hearted videos may be downplaying the danger. But that’s just what I think; I’d love to hear what you think of the video posted below. Over dramatic? Right on target? Play movie critic and share your thoughts below.
Consumers’ safety affected by unproven product labels, the FDA reports
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is warning consumers not to believe the claims of hand sanitizer and antiseptic products that promote MRSA prevention, and has since sent warning letters to four distribution companies about their unproven claims.
Warning letters were sent April 20 to four companies that either distribute or make hand sanitizing products that can be bought without a prescription over-the-counter, according to an FDA report:
Deborah Autor is the compliance director at FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. She says in the FDA report that consumers are being misled if they buy these products in drug stores and think they will be protected from deadly infections such as MRSA.
Unproven product labels found by the FDA include:
- kills over 99.9% of MRSA
- helps prevent skin infections caused by MRSA and other germs
- is effective against a broad spectrum of pathogens, including MRSA
For more information and advice for consumers, check out the FDA report.
C. diff in children on the rise, guidelines for MRSA, and what’s up your nose
There’s been quite a bit of infection control news out there, so here’s a summary:
From 1997 to 2006, the number of children with Clostridium difficile (C. diff) rose about 15% each year, according to a new study published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. According to The Los Angeles Times, these pediatric patients had longer hospitalizations, higher death rates, and more surgeries to remove portions of colon compared to patients who did not contract the disease.
In other infection control news, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has published guidelines to treat methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). These are the first guidelines IDSA has issued for treating the multi-drug resistant organism. The guidelines include personal hygiene, wound care, and antibiotic therapy. They are published in the February 1 issue of Clinical Infections Diseases and have been endorsed by Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, the American College of Emergency Physicians, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
If you’re wondering how to find MRSA in patients, and to what severity they are infected, a new study at Rhode Island Hospital found that you might want to check your patient’s nose first. MRSA was more likely to be found in the nose than under the arms, the groin, or the perineum, reports HealthDay News. People with high levels of MRSA in the nose were also more likely to have MRSA in three other locations on the body.
Study finds staph infection rate after surgery varies by procedure
A study published in the July Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology finds that patients may be more likely to develop Staphylococcus aureus after specific procedures. Cardiothorasic procedures were found to create the highest risk for infection and the researchers suggested that these procedures should be targeted for preventive actions. However, the researchers concluded that there was a wide variation of S. aureus infection by procedure.
The study involved adult patients at 11 hospitals in North Carolina and Virginia undergoing orthopedic, neurosurgical, cardiothoracic, and plastic surgical procedures. The researchers divided up S. aureus infections into two categories: nonsuperficial incisional surgical site infections or bloodstream infections. After analyzing 81,267 patients who underwent 96,455 procedures, the researchers found that there were 0.47 infections per 100 patients. Additionally, slightly more than half of the infections were due to methicillin‐resistant S. aureus (MRSA).
Breakdown of MRSA infection by procedure was:
- 62% following cardiothorasic surgery
- 52% following orthopedic procedures
- 43% following neurosurgical procedures
- 35% following plastic surgery
Lead author of the study Deverick Anderson, MD, MPH, who works in the Division of Infectious Disease at Duke University Medical Center and is a member of Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America said “The data show us that when we’re looking at strategies for improving outcomes, it’s likely that one single approach isn’t going to work for every situation. Our study shows that prevention needs to be procedure specific.”
Study: Surgical site infections can add $60,000 to patient’s treatment
During a recent study, surgical patients who contracted a surgical site infection (SSI) because of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were at a greater risk for readmission, and death, and their elongated hospital stays cost $60,000 more than patients who did not develop a surgical site infection, reports HealthDay. The findings of the study were published in the December 15 PLoS One (journal). Researchers from Duke University Medical Center compared the 90-day outcomes of 659 patients with surgical site infections due to MRSA, patients whose surgical site infections were caused by MSSA (methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus), as well as patients without infection.
During the study, those patients who contracted a surgical site infection because of MRSA were 35 times as likely to be readmitted, and seven times as likely to die than patients without infection. Even compared with patients who had MSSA, MRSA patients were worse off, racking up six more hospital days and an extra $24,000 in hospital charges.
You can read more about the study by clicking here. When discussing SSIs at your facility, are the costs associated discussed with frontline caregivers? Do you think that those at the bedside should be made aware of the costs incurred by SSIs?
Penicillin and others in its family may be best for treating MRSA in children
A study published in the June Pediatrics has produced evidence that medications in the beta-lactum family, which includes Penicillin, are just as good at treating MRSA in children than other types of antibiotics that have been used, and may prevent further resistance to antibiotic treatment. The study, funded by the AHRQ, evaluated 2,096 children who had MRSA infections of the skin or soft tissue. Researchers tested the effectiveness of three types of antibiotic on treating the infection.
The researchers concluded that the beta-lactums were just as good as another type of antibiotic at treating the infection in children, and should be used as a first line of defense when treating in the future.
WA docs oppose MRSA bill
About a month ago, we wrote about a bill making its way through the Washington state legislature that would require physicians to screen vulnerable patients for the superbug methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The bill has run into some opposition from the Washington State Medical Association, which doesn’t like the idea of legislation dictating how they provide patient care.
Bill sponsor state Rep. Tom Campbell (R) told the Seattle Times that the healthcare system has failed to protect patients from MRSA. The legislation would require hospitals to screen surgical patients and those admitted to intensive care units (ICU). The bill was introduced after a Times report found that the annual number of hospitalized Washington patients with MRSA infections grew from 141 a decade ago to 4,723.
In the last two years, California, Illinois, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania have passed laws requiring similar patient screening for MRSA.
Many Washington doctors and some hospital administrators argue that there isn’t a consensus that widespread screening is the answer to the MRSA problem. The Washington State Hospital Association doesn’t oppose the bill, but it is concerned that the bill may require hospitals to isolate patients with MRSA infections. There aren’t enough private rooms to isolate every infected patient, a hospital association spokesperson said.
Meanwhile, a separate bill introduced by state Sen. Karen Keiser is approaching ratification. Keiser’s bill would require hospitals to conduct periodic and limited MRSA screening within ICUs to check for problems. The Times reports that the state medical association also opposes the second bill.
