PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

E Bryce

Publications and source records attributed to E Bryce.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

The evolution of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Canadian hospitals: 5 years of national surveillance.

BACKGROUND: To better understand the epidemiology of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in Canadian hospitals, surveillance has been conducted in sentinel hospitals across the country since 1995. We report the results of the first 5 years of the program. METHODS: For each newly identified inpatient with MRSA, medical records were reviewed for demographic and clinical data. Isolates were subjected to susceptibility testing and molecular typing by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. RESULTS: A total of 4507 patients infected or colonized with MRSA were identified between January 1995 and December 1999. The rate of MRSA increased each year from a mean of 0.95 per 100 S. aureus isolates in 1995 to 5.97 per 100 isolates in 1999 (0.46 per 1000 admissions in 1995 to 4.12 per 1000 admissions in 1999) (p < 0.05). Most of the increase in MRSA occurred in Ontario, Quebec and the western provinces. Of the 3009 cases for which the site of MRSA acquisition could be determined, 86% were acquired in a hospital, 8% were acquired in a long-term care facility and 6% were acquired in the community. A total of 1603 patients (36%) were infected with MRSA. The most common sites of infection were skin or soft tissue (25% of MRSA infections), pulmonary tissues (24%) and surgical sites (23%); 13% of the patients were bacteremic. An epidemiologic link with a previously identified MRSA patient was suspected in 53% of the cases. Molecular typing indicated that most (81%) of the isolates could be classified as related to 1 of the 4 Canadian epidemic strains of MRSA. INTERPRETATION: There has been a significant increase in the rate of isolating MRSA in many Canadian hospitals, related to the transmission of a relatively small number of MRSA strains.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Epidemic keratoconjunctivitis outbreak at a tertiary referral eye care clinic.

An outbreak of epidemic keratoconjunctivitis (EKC) occurred at a tertiary referral eye care clinic between late September and mid-November 1995. Before the outbreak, instruments were cleaned with 70% isopropyl alcohol and handwashing between patients was not routine. Infection control measures were implemented when the outbreak was recognized in mid-October. Control measures included triaging suspected cases to a separate waiting area, cohorting cases to a specific examining room, endorsing the use of gloves and handwashing during examinations of patients, and cleaning instruments with a buffered bleach solution. Thirty-six cases were diagnosed before the infection control measures were taken, and 3 cases were seen after the control measures were taken. Also, numerous secondary cases occurred in the community. No additional cases were diagnosed from DEcember to February 25, 1996. Acquisition of the infection was linked to visits to 4 of 20 physicians in the eye clinic with 61% of cases associated with visits to 1 of those 4 physicians. The use of diagnostic lenses applied directly to the eye was associated with infection (odds ratio = 2.83, 95% confidence interval = 0.79 to 10.4), although this did not reach statistical significance. The use of tonometers, ophthalmic solutions, or laser therapy was not associated with infection, and all environmental cultures were negative. This outbreak emphasizes the need for implementation of routine infection control guidelines to prevent nosocomial transmission of epidemic keratoconjunctivitis and stresses the need for appropriate disinfection of instruments.

Adenoviridae Infections↗
PubMed1998

Piperacillin/tazobactam versus imipenem: a double-blind, randomized formulary feasibility study at a major teaching hospital.

With the introduction of piperacillin/tazobactam to the North American market, hospitals have been faced with the task of making a decision regarding its formulary role. In view of its broad spectrum of activity, piperacillin/tazobactam could be considered as a formulary alternative to imipenem. To evaluate the formulary feasibility of substituting piperacillin/tazobactam for imipenem, a comparative assessment of these agents in the empiric treatment of serious bacterial infections was undertaken at this tertiary care hospital. This trial was conducted as a randomized, double-blind, single-center study. Consenting adult patients (>16 years of age) who were prescribed imipenem were randomized to receive either 4 g of i.v. piperacillin/tazobactam or imipenem 500 mg of i.v. Q6H with or without concurrent antibiotics. Doses were adjusted according to renal function. There were no restrictions regarding the use of nonstudy antibiotics before and during the study period. Patients with beta-lactam allergies or meningitis or who had received greater than 72 h of previous imipenem therapy were excluded. Patients were evaluated at the end of treatment, at discharge, and at 30 days postdischarge. Endpoints included both clinical and microbiologic efficacy as well as drug toxicity. Over the 433-day study period, 360 imipenem treatment courses were initiated. Of these, 150 treatment courses (75 piperacillin/tazobactam courses and 75 imipenem courses) met study criteria and were subsequently randomized. The distribution of prescriber services for enrolled patients was similar to that for all patients receiving imipenem during the study period (p = 0.15). Also, there were no statistically significant differences in demographic parameters between enrolled and excluded patients. For those patients enrolled in the study, demographic characteristics, treatment course indication(s), and accompanying antibiotics were similar across treatment arms. The mean duration of study drug therapy was 7.7 days (SD, 6.2) for imipenem and 7.5 days (SD, 6.7)for piperacillin/tazobactam (p = 0.84). In the majority of cases, treatment discontinuation occurred as a result of a favorable treatment course outcome, stepdown to a narrower spectrum parenteral agent, or stepdown to an oral agent and did not differ between study drugs (p = 0.73). Clinical and microbiologic treatment course outcomes were also similar across treatment arms. Clinical outcome was deemed successful or improved for 68% of imipenem and 70% of the piperacillin/tazobactam treatment courses (p = 0.54). Fifty-three percent of treatment courses were microbiologically confirmed. Of the 58 courses that were assessed for microbiological outcome, 93% demonstrated successful eradication of the causative pathogens. There was no difference between study drugs (96% imipenem; 90% piperacillin/tazobactam; p = 0.61). The proportion of treatment courses with at least one adverse event was similar between the study drugs (p = 1.0). Nausea and/or vomiting were/was observed more commonly in the imipenem arm (p = 0.03). Discontinuation of therapy due to drug toxicity occurred in 16% of imipenem and 5% of piperacillin/tazobactam treatment courses (p = 0.06). There was no statistically significant difference between the mean treatment course cost for imipenem ($762; range, $55-$3192) versus piperacillin/tazobactam ($696; range, $79-$2967; p = 0.59). In summary, piperacillin/tazobactam seems to represent a suitable alternative to imipenem for several clinical indications including intraabdominal infections, pneumonia, febrile neutropenia, and skin/soft tissue infections in which the causative pathogens are susceptible. However, in view of the prevalence of multiresistant Gram-negative aerobic pathogens at this institution, we do not believe that imipenem can be removed from the drug formulary. In addition, at the currently studied dosing regimen, there seems to be no evidence of a direct cost advantage associated with

Adolescent↗