Dataset Information

Interventions to reduce colonisation and transmission of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria in intensive care units: an interrupted time series study and cluster randomised trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Intensive care units (ICUs) are high-risk areas for transmission of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, but no controlled study has tested the effect of rapid screening and isolation of carriers on transmission in settings with best-standard precautions. We assessed interventions to reduce colonisation and transmission of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria in European ICUs.

Methods

We did this study in three phases at 13 ICUs. After a 6 month baseline period (phase 1), we did an interrupted time series study of universal chlorhexidine body-washing combined with hand hygiene improvement for 6 months (phase 2), followed by a 12-15 month cluster randomised trial (phase 3). ICUs were randomly assigned by computer generated randomisation schedule to either conventional screening (chromogenic screening for meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus [MRSA] and vancomycin-resistant enterococci [VRE]) or rapid screening (PCR testing for MRSA and VRE and chromogenic screening for highly resistant Enterobacteriaceae [HRE]); with contact precautions for identified carriers. The primary outcome was acquisition of resistant bacteria per 100 patient-days at risk, for which we calculated step changes and changes in trends after the introduction of each intervention. We assessed acquisition by microbiological surveillance and analysed it with a multilevel Poisson segmented regression model. We compared screening groups with a likelihood ratio test that combined step changes and changes to trend. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00976638.

Findings

Seven ICUs were assigned to rapid screening and six to conventional screening. Mean hand hygiene compliance improved from 52% in phase 1 to 69% in phase 2, and 77% in phase 3. Median proportions of patients receiving chlorhexidine body-washing increased from 0% to 100% at the start of phase 2. For trends in acquisition of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, weekly incidence rate ratio (IRR) was 0·976 (0·954-0·999) for phase 2 and 1·015 (0·998-1·032) for phase 3. For step changes, weekly IRR was 0·955 (0·676-1·348) for phase 2 and 0·634 (0·349-1·153) for phase 3. The decrease in trend in phase 2 was largely caused by changes in acquisition of MRSA (weekly IRR 0·925, 95% CI 0·890-0·962). Acquisition was lower in the conventional screening group than in the rapid screening group, but did not differ significantly (p=0·06).

Interpretation

Improved hand hygiene plus unit-wide chlorhexidine body-washing reduced acquisition of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, particularly MRSA. In the context of a sustained high level of compliance to hand hygiene and chlorhexidine bathings, screening and isolation of carriers do not reduce acquisition rates of multidrug-resistant bacteria, whether or not screening is done with rapid testing or conventional testing.

Funding

European Commission.

SUBMITTER: Derde LPG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3895323 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRoad traffic injuries are among the top ten causes of death globally, with the highest burden in low and middle-income countries, where over a third of deaths occur among pedestrians and cyclists. Several interventions to mitigate the burden among pedestrians have been widely implemented, however, the effectiveness has not been systematically examined.ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of interventions to reduce road traffic crashes, injuries, hospitalizations and deaths among pedestrians.MethodsWe considered studies that evaluated interventions to reduce road traffic crashes, injuries, hospitalizations and/or deaths among pedestrians. We considered randomized controlled trials, interrupted time-series studies, and controlled before-after studies. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, WHO Global Health Index, Health Evidence, Transport Research International Documentation and ClinicalTrials.gov through 31 August 2020, and the reference lists of all included studies. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts and full texts, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We summarized findings narratively with text and tables.ResultsA total of 69123 unique records were identified through the searches, with 26 of these meeting our eligibility criteria. All except two of these were conducted in high-income countries and most were from urban settings. The majority of studies observed either a clear effect favoring the intervention or an unclear effect potentially favoring the intervention and these included: changes to the road environment (19/27); changes to legislation and enforcement (12/12); and road user behavior/education combined with either changes to the road environment (3/3) or with legislation and enforcement (1/1). A small number of studies observed either a null effect or an effect favoring the control.ConclusionsAlthough the highest burden of road traffic injuries exists in LMICs, very few studies have examined the effectiveness of available interventions in these settings. Studies indicate that road environment, legislation and enforcement interventions alone produce positive effects on pedestrian safety. In combination with or with road user behavior/education interventions they are particularly effective in improving pedestrian safety.

Project description:Intensive care units (ICU) are epicenters for the emergence of antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (ARGNB) because of high rates of antibiotic usage, rapid patient turnover, immunological susceptibility of acutely ill patients, and frequent contact between healthcare workers and patients, facilitating cross-transmission.Antibiotic stewardship programs are considered important to reduce antibiotic resistance, but the effectiveness of strategies such as, for instance, antibiotic rotation, have not been determined rigorously. Interpretation of available studies on antibiotic rotation is hampered by heterogeneity in implemented strategies and suboptimal study designs. In this cluster-randomized, crossover trial the effects of two antibiotic rotation strategies, antibiotic mixing and cycling, on the prevalence of ARGNB in ICUs are determined. Antibiotic mixing aims to create maximum antibiotic heterogeneity, and cycling aims to create maximum antibiotic homogeneity during consecutive periods.This is an open cluster-randomized crossover study of mixing and cycling of antibiotics in eight ICUs in five European countries. During cycling (9 months) third- or fourth-generation cephalosporins, piperacillin-tazobactam and carbapenems will be rotated during consecutive 6-week periods as the primary empiric treatment in patients suspected of infection caused by Gram-negative bacteria. During mixing (9 months), the same antibiotics will be rotated for each consecutive antibiotic course. Both intervention periods will be preceded by a baseline period of 4 months. ICUs will be randomized to consecutively implement either the mixing and then cycling strategy, or vice versa. The primary outcome is the ICU prevalence of ARGNB, determined through monthly point-prevalence screening of oropharynx and perineum. Secondary outcomes are rates of acquisition of ARGNB, bacteremia and appropriateness of therapy, length of stay in the ICU and ICU mortality. Results will be adjusted for intracluster correlation, and patient- and ICU-level variables of case-mix and infection-prevention measures using advanced regression modeling.This trial will determine the effects of antibiotic mixing and cycling on the unit-wide prevalence of ARGNB in ICUs.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01293071 December 2010.

Project description:BackgroundThird-generation cephalosporin-resistant Gram-negatives (3GCR-GN) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are common causes of multi-drug resistant healthcare-associated infections, for which gut colonisation is considered a prerequisite. However, there remains a key knowledge gap about colonisation and infection dynamics in high-risk settings such as the intensive care unit (ICU), thus hampering infection prevention efforts.MethodsWe performed a three-month prospective genomic survey of infecting and gut-colonising 3GCR-GN and VRE among patients admitted to an Australian ICU. Bacteria were isolated from rectal swabs (n = 287 and n = 103 patients ≤2 and > 2 days from admission, respectively) and diagnostic clinical specimens between Dec 2013 and March 2014. Isolates were subjected to Illumina whole-genome sequencing (n = 127 3GCR-GN, n = 41 VRE). Multi-locus sequence types (STs) and antimicrobial resistance determinants were identified from de novo assemblies. Twenty-three isolates were selected for sequencing on the Oxford Nanopore MinION device to generate completed reference genomes (one for each ST isolated from ≥2 patients). Single nucleotide variants (SNVs) were identified by read mapping and variant calling against these references.ResultsAmong 287 patients screened on admission, 17.4 and 8.4% were colonised by 3GCR-GN and VRE, respectively. Escherichia coli was the most common species (n = 36 episodes, 58.1%) and the most common cause of 3GCR-GN infection. Only two VRE infections were identified. The rate of infection among patients colonised with E. coli was low, but higher than those who were not colonised on admission (n = 2/33, 6% vs n = 4/254, 2%, respectively, p = 0.3). While few patients were colonised with 3GCR- Klebsiella pneumoniae or Pseudomonas aeruginosa on admission (n = 4), all such patients developed infections with the colonising strain. Genomic analyses revealed 10 putative nosocomial transmission clusters (≤20 SNVs for 3GCR-GN, ≤3 SNVs for VRE): four VRE, six 3GCR-GN, with epidemiologically linked clusters accounting for 21 and 6% of episodes, respectively (OR 4.3, p = 0.02).Conclusions3GCR-E. coli and VRE were the most common gut colonisers. E. coli was the most common cause of 3GCR-GN infection, but other 3GCR-GN species showed greater risk for infection in colonised patients. Larger studies are warranted to elucidate the relative risks of different colonisers and guide the use of screening in ICU infection control.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Intensive care units (ICUs) are high-risk settings for the transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE). METHODS:In a cluster-randomized trial, we evaluated the effect of surveillance for MRSA and VRE colonization and of the expanded use of barrier precautions (intervention) as compared with existing practice (control) on the incidence of MRSA or VRE colonization or infection in adult ICUs. Surveillance cultures were obtained from patients in all participating ICUs; the results were reported only to ICUs assigned to the intervention. In intervention ICUs, patients who were colonized or infected with MRSA or VRE were assigned to care with contact precautions; all the other patients were assigned to care with universal gloving until their discharge or until surveillance cultures obtained at admission were reported to be negative. RESULTS:During a 6-month intervention period, there were 5434 admissions to 10 intervention ICUs, and 3705 admissions to 8 control ICUs. Patients who were colonized or infected with MRSA or VRE were assigned to barrier precautions more frequently in intervention ICUs than in control ICUs (a median of 92% of ICU days with either contact precautions or universal gloving [51% with contact precautions and 43% with universal gloving] in intervention ICUs vs. a median of 38% of ICU days with contact precautions in control ICUs, P<0.001). In intervention ICUs, health care providers used clean gloves, gowns, and hand hygiene less frequently than required for contacts with patients assigned to barrier precautions; when contact precautions were specified, gloves were used for a median of 82% of contacts, gowns for 77% of contacts, and hand hygiene after 69% of contacts, and when universal gloving was specified, gloves were used for a median of 72% of contacts and hand hygiene after 62% of contacts. The mean (±SE) ICU-level incidence of events of colonization or infection with MRSA or VRE per 1000 patient-days at risk, adjusted for baseline incidence, did not differ significantly between the intervention and control ICUs (40.4±3.3 and 35.6±3.7 in the two groups, respectively; P=0.35). CONCLUSIONS:The intervention was not effective in reducing the transmission of MRSA or VRE, although the use of barrier precautions by providers was less than what was required. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; STAR*ICU ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00100386.).