Dataset Information

Effectiveness of Contact Precautions to Prevent Transmission of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci in Intensive Care Units.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Contact precautions for endemic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are under increasing scrutiny, in part due to limited clinical trial evidence.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed data from the Strategies to Reduce Transmission of Antimicrobial Resistant Bacteria in Intensive Care Units (STAR*ICU) trial to model the use of contact precautions in individual intensive care units (ICUs). Data included admission and discharge times and surveillance test results. We used a transmission model to estimate key epidemiological parameters, including the effect of contact precautions on transmission. Finally, we performed multivariate meta-regression to identify ICU-level factors associated with contact precaution effects.

Results

We found that 21% of admissions (n = 2194) were placed on contact precautions, with most for MRSA and VRE. We found little evidence that contact precautions reduced MRSA transmission. The estimated change in transmission attributed to contact precautions was -16% (95% credible interval, -38% to 15%). VRE transmission was higher than MRSA transmission due to contact precautions, but not significantly. In our meta-regression, we did not identify associations between ICU-level factors and estimated contact precaution effects. Importation and transmission were higher for VRE than for MRSA, but clearance rates were lower for VRE than for MRSA.

Conclusions

We found little evidence that contact precautions implemented during the STAR*ICU trial reduced transmission of MRSA or VRE. We did find important differences in the transmission dynamics between MRSA and VRE. Differences in organism and healthcare setting may impact the efficacy of contact precautions.

SUBMITTER: Khader K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7844588 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The emergence of vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA) has become a global concern for public health. The proximity of vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) is considered to be one of the foremost risk factors for the development of VRSA. This study aimed to determine the incidence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of intestinal co-colonization with VRE and MRSA. METHODS:A case-control study was conducted in 52-bed intensive care units (ICUs) of a university-affiliated hospital from September 2012 to October 2017. Active surveillance using rectal cultures for VRE were conducted at ICU admission and on a weekly basis. Weekly surveillance cultures for detection of rectal MRSA were also conducted in patients with VRE carriage. Patients with intestinal co-colonization of VRE and MRSA were compared with randomly selected control patients with VRE colonization alone (1:1). Vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) for MRSA isolates were determined by the Etest. RESULTS:Of the 4679 consecutive patients, 195 cases and 924 controls were detected. The median monthly incidence and duration of intestinal co-colonization with VRE and MRSA were 2.3/1000 patient-days and 7 days, respectively. The frequency of both MRSA infections and mortality attributable to MRSA were higher in the case group than in the control group: 56.9% vs. 44.1% (P?=?0.011) and 8.2% vs. 1.0% (P?=?0.002), respectively. Independent risk factors for intestinal co-colonization were enteral tube feeding (odds ratio [OR], 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32-3.32), metabolic diseases (OR, 1.75; 95% CI 1.05-2.93), male gender (OR, 1.62; 95% CI 1.06-2.50), and Charlson comorbidity index?<?3 (OR, 3.61; 95% CI 1.88-6.94). All MRSA isolates from case patients were susceptible to vancomycin (MIC???2 mg/L). CONCLUSIONS:Our study indicates that intestinal co-colonization of VRE and MRSA occurs commonly among patients in the ICU with MRSA endemicity, which might be associated with poor clinical outcomes.

Project description:ImportanceThe effectiveness and importance of contact precautions for endemic pathogens has long been debated, and their use has broad implications for infection control of other pathogens.ObjectiveTo estimate the association between contact precautions and transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) across US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study used mathematical models applied to data from a population-based sample of adults hospitalized in 108 VA acute care hospitals for at least 24 hours from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2017. Data were analyzed from May 2, 2019, to December 11, 2020.ExposuresA positive MRSA test result, presumed to indicate contact precautions use according to the VA MRSA Prevention Initiative.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was the association between contact precautions and MRSA transmission, defined as the relative transmissibility attributed to contact precautions. A contact precaution effect estimate (<1 indicates a reduction in transmission associated with contact precautions) was estimated for each hospital and then pooled over time and across hospitals using meta-regression.ResultsIn this cohort study of 108 VA hospitals, more than 2 million unique individuals had over 5.6 million admissions, of which 14.1% were presumed to have contact precautions with more than 8.4 million MRSA surveillance tests. Pooled estimates found associations between contact precautions and transmission to be stable from 2008 to 2017, with estimated transmission reductions ranging from 43% (95% credible interval [CrI], 38%-48%) to 51% (95% CrI, 46%-55%). Over the entire 10-year study period, contact precautions reduced transmission 47% (95% CrI, 45%-49%), and the intrafacility autocorrelation coefficient estimate was 0.99, suggesting consistent estimates over time within facilities. Larger facilities and those with higher admission screening compliance observed additional reductions in transmission associated with contact precautions (relative rate, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74-0.96 and 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.96, respectively) compared with smaller facilities and those with lower admission screening compliance. Facilities in the southern US had a smaller transmission reduction attributable to contact precautions (relative rate, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.28) compared with facilities in other regions in the US.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of adults in VA hospitals, transmissibility of MRSA was found to be reduced by approximately 50% among patients with contact precautions. These results provide an explanation for decreasing acquisition rates in VA hospitals since the MRSA Prevention Initiative.

Project description:BackgroundCleaning of environmental surfaces in hospitals is important for the control of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and other hospital-acquired infections transmitted by the contact route. Guidance regarding the best approaches for cleaning, however, is limited.MethodsIn this study, a mathematical model based on ordinary differential equations was constructed to study MRSA concentration dynamics on high-touch and low-touch surfaces, and on the hands and noses of two patients (in two hospitals rooms) and a health care worker in a hypothetical hospital environment. Two cleaning interventions - whole room cleaning and wipe cleaning of touched surfaces - were considered. The performance of the cleaning interventions was indicated by a reduction in MRSA on the nose of a susceptible patient, relative to no intervention.ResultsWhole room cleaning just before first patient care activities of the day was more effective than whole room cleaning at other times, but even with 100% efficiency, whole room cleaning only reduced the number of MRSA transmitted to the susceptible patient by 54%. Frequent wipe cleaning of touched surfaces was shown to be more effective that whole room cleaning because surfaces are rapidly re-contaminated with MRSA after cleaning. Wipe cleaning high-touch surfaces was more effective than wipe cleaning low-touch surfaces for the same frequency of cleaning. For low wipe cleaning frequency (?3 times per hour), high-touch surfaces should be targeted, but for high wipe cleaning frequency (>3 times per hour), cleaning should target high- and low-touch surfaces in proportion to the surface touch frequency. This study reproduces the observations from a field study of room cleaning, which provides support for the validity of our findings.ConclusionsDaily whole room cleaning, even with 100% cleaning efficiency, provides limited reduction in the number of MRSA transmitted to susceptible patients via the contact route; and should be supplemented with frequent targeted cleaning of high-touch surfaces, such as by a wipe or cloth containing disinfectant.