Randomized Comparison of 2 Protocols to Prevent Acquisition of Methicillin-ResistantStaphylococcus aureus: Results of a 2-Center Study Involving 500 Patients

Author:

Camus Christophe,Bellissant Eric,Legras Annick,Renault Alain,Gacouin Arnaud,Lavoué Sylvain,Branger Bernard,Donnio Pierre-Yves,Corre Pascal le,Tulzo Yves Le,Perrotin Dominique,Thomas Rémi

Abstract

Objective.To compare an interventional protocol with a standard protocol for preventing the acquisition of methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus(MRSA) in the intensive care unit (ICU).Design.Prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel-group, nonblinded clinical trial.Setting.Medical ICUs of 2 French university hospitals.Participants.Five hundred adults with an expected length of stay in the ICU greater than 48 hours.Interventions.For the intervention group, the protocol required repeated MRSA screening, contact and droplet isolation precautions for patients at risk for MRSA at ICU admission and for MRSA-positive patients, and decontamination with nasal mupirocin and chlorhexidine body wash for MRSA-positive patients. For the standard group, the standard precautions protocol was used, and the results of repeated MRSA screening in the standard group were not communicated to investigators.Main Outcome Measure.MRSA acquisition rate in the ICU. An audit was conducted to assess compliance with hygiene and isolation precautions.Results.In the intent-to-treat analysis (n= 488), the MRSA acquisition rate in the ICU was similar in the standard (13 [5.3%] of 243) and intervention (16 [6.5%] of 245) groups (P=.58). The audit showed that the overall compliance rate was 85.5% in the standard group and 84.1% in the intervention group (P=.63), although compliance was higher when isolation precautions were absent than when they were in place (88.2% vs 79.1%;P<.001). MRSA incidence rates were higher without isolation precautions (7.57‰) than with isolation precautions (2.36‰;P=.01).Conclusions.Individual allocation to MRSA screening, isolation precautions, and decontamination do not provide individual benefit in reducing MRSA acquisition, compared with standard precautions, although the collective risk was lower during the periods of isolation.Trial Registration.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00151606.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Infectious Diseases,Microbiology (medical),Epidemiology

Cited by 20 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3