SEARCH · PubMed Health
Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Examinations for oral health surveys and screenings are performed by dentists or dental hygienists in a variety of settings. To date, CDC has made no recommendations for infection control specifically for these brief examinations. General principles for infection control can be applied during oral health surveys and screenings.
Patient safety in hospital care depends on effective infection control (IC) programmes. The Antimicrobial Resistance Prevention and Control (ARPAC) study assessed the organisation, components and human resources of IC programmes in European hospitals. A questionnaire survey of policies and procedures implemented in 2001 for the surveillance and control of nosocomial infection and antibiotic resistance was completed by 169 acute-care hospitals from 32 European countries, categorised by five geographical regions. A formal IC programme existed in 72% of hospitals, and a multidisciplinary IC committee was operational in 90%. Trained IC nurses (ICNs) were present in 80% of hospitals (ranging from 54% in south-east and central-eastern Europe, to 100% in northern Europe), whereas 74% had one or more trained IC doctors (ICDs) (ranging from 46% in south-east Europe to 84% in western Europe). Median staffing levels were 2.33 ICNs/1,000 beds and 0.94 ICDs/1,000 beds. The intensity of IC programmes scored higher in centres from northern and western Europe than from other European regions. Written guidelines promoted hand hygiene for healthcare workers in 89% of hospitals, education in 85%, and audit in 46%. Guidelines recommended use of alcohol-based solutions (70%) and/or medicated/antiseptic soap (43%) for decontamination of non-soiled hands. Use of alcohol-based solutions varied according to region, from 41% in southern Europe to 100% in northern Europe, compared with use of medicated soap from 77% in southern Europe to 11% in northern Europe (p < 0.01). These findings showed that IC programmes in European hospitals suffer from major deficiencies in human resources and policies. Staffing levels for ICNs were below recommended standards in the majority of hospitals. Education programmes were incomplete and often not supported by audit of performance. Hand hygiene procedures were sub-standard in one-third of centres. Strengthening of IC policies in European hospitals should be a public health priority.
Important characteristics of hospital infection control are specific to pediatric facilities. For example, colonization and infection with vancomycin-resistant enterococci, which are widely spread in many units housing adult patients, are uncommon in children, especially in the neonatal intensive care unit where vancomycin use is heavy. Characteristics of the neonatal intensive care unit, such as the insulated environment and infrequent treatment with antibiotics with broad anaerobic activity, likely account for this finding. Artificial fingernails have been discovered to promote colonization with potential pathogens; their implication in recent nursery epidemics emphasizes the need to prohibit their use in this environment in particular. Finally, nosocomial viral infections occur with regularity in pediatric hospitals. Programs that successfully and cost-effectively control hospital spread of respiratory syncytial virus, however, demonstrate that rational, multifaceted interventions can nearly eliminate transmission of certain viral pathogens on the pediatric wards.
A microbiologic surveillance study was performed in order to estimate the point prevalence, source, and nosocomial acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) within the Iowa City Veterans Affairs Medical Center (IC VAMC). Immediately following the microbiologic surveillance study, a cluster of nosocomial MRSA infections was detected by routine infection control surveillance. An epidemiologic investigation was conducted and all isolates of MRSA detected during the microbiologic surveillance study and the subsequent cluster of nosocomial infections were characterized by restriction endonuclease analysis of plasmid DNA (REAP). REAP subtyping defined a total of ten distinct subtypes from 24 patients infected or colonized with MRSA. The documentation of a single subtype of MRSA (subtype A2) in nine patients from the surgical service, eight of which were hospitalized in the surgical intensive care unit, provided convincing evidence of a breakdown of infection control practices in that unit. REAP subtyping was a highly discriminating means of identifying different subtypes among the various isolates of MRSA and was useful in directing infection control efforts to specific problem areas within the hospital. Molecular typing methods, such as REAP, when used appropriately in conjunction with careful epidemiologic investigation provide an effective approach to the investigation and control of the spread of MRSA within the hospital.
BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile (CD) infection and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization are increasingly common in elderly patients, are associated with cephalosporin or prolonged aminopenicillin courses and can be transmitted by direct contact. Management is by side-room isolation. Ward closure may be required to control outbreaks. METHODS: following prolonged bed closures due to CD and MRSA in an acute age-related geriatric service, an enhanced infection control policy was introduced-emphasis on handwashing, cephalosporin restriction, 7-day time limits on antibiotics and feedback of infection rates. The effect of this policy was evaluated by investigating 2,467 consecutive admissions in the 9 months before and after its introduction. RESULTS: CD infection fell from 36/1,075 admissions (3.35 per 100) to 27/1,392 (1.94 per 100; P < 0.05). MRSA incidence fell from 3.95 per 100 to 1.94 (P < 0.01) whilst that in the rest of the hospital continued to fluctuate. Cephalosporin use fell (and aminopenicillin and trimethoprim use rose) by a factor of three. Unoccupied bed days fell from 1,164 (12.6%) to 513 (5.1%) over the winter, an increase in bed availability of 4.95 a day. CONCLUSIONS: introduction of the policy was associated with significant reductions in CD infection and unoccupied bed-days and helped maintain a lower incidence of MRSA. It is not clear which elements of the policy most influenced outcome. A multi-centre study is needed to determine whether our findings are generally applicable.
The number of people living in nursing homes is increasing because of the ageing population. Older people are particularly vulnerable to infection, so it is important that infection control policies are drawn up for use in nursing homes. Staff need to be fully aware of such guidance and infection control should be incorporated into their everyday nursing practice. The author discusses information that should be included and gives advice on formulating policies.
A completed questionnaire was returned by 246 (85%) intensive care units participating in a national survey of infection control practice in intensive care. Thirty-three units had no provision for isolating patients in single side wards. Sixty percent of responding ICU had fewer than one washbasin per bedspace. Several units reported using ventilator filters or tubing more frequently than is currently recommended. Excessive numbers of catheter urine specimens were sent for laboratory examination by some units. A small number of units used open urinary drainage systems. A significant proportion of ICU had no formally recognized policy on the management of intravascular cannulae. Only 8% of ICU in the U.K. were using a selective decontamination regimen, and nine of these (50%) had no full time consultant microbiologist available to supervise the recommended microbiological management. The majority of ICU received a regular visit (greater than or equal to one per week) from a microbiologist. Proposals are made on the development of a specialized infection control service in order to reduce the risk of nosocomial infection in intensive care, and to improve on existing resource management.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the economic impact, from a societal perspective, of a multidimensional infection control education program (ICEP) in a preschool for children with Down syndrome. METHODS: Krilov et al implemented a comprehensive ICEP in a specialized preschool setting and reported a significant decrease in medical resource utilization and days absent from school. Clinical and economic data from Krilov et al and other sources were incorporated into a health-state transition (Markov) decision analysis model that estimated annual expected costs for the baseline and intervention years. Procedure and diagnosis codes were assigned to all physician office visits, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and laboratory and diagnostic tests. Cost estimates then were derived using 1999 national reimbursement schedules and other sources. Productivity losses for parents were estimated using national wage rates. The costs of the ICEP were compared with the reduction in the costs of illness (direct medical costs plus costs associated with lost parental working time). The outcomes measured were mean annual costs of illness per child, total annual ICEP costs, and net annual costs or savings. RESULTS: With a comprehensive ICEP, the mean costs of illness in the baseline year was $1235 per child, of which 68% and 14% were for productivity losses and physician visits, respectively. In the intervention year, the mean costs of illness per child was $615, of which 71% and 20% were for productivity losses and physician visits, respectively. The cost of the preexisting infection control (IC) practices in place at the onset of the study (baseline year) was $716. The comprehensive ICEP cost (intervention year) was $75 627, 92% of which was spent to hire a cleaning service to decontaminate toys 3 times per week. When a secondary analysis was performed to reflect a less intensive ICEP in a nonspecialized preschool setting, the mean costs of illness in the baseline and intervention years were $962 and $614 per child, respectively, representing a total annual cost-of-illness savings of $13 224 for the 38 children who participated in the study by Krilov et al. The annual incremental cost of the less intensive ICEP was $2371; therefore, the estimated net annual savings of the less intensive ICEP in a nonspecialized preschool was $10 853. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the reduction in the costs of illness could more than offset the cost of implementing a multidimensional ICEP in a preschool setting.
This study investigated dental surgery assistants' (DSAs) role in providing cross-infection control in general dental practice. DSAs' knowledge about using autoclaves and their compliance with the recommended procedures were used as measures. Eighty-nine practices in three districts of the North Western Region of England were approached. Fifty-six agreed to permit the study and DSAs in these practices were observed at work and questioned, a response rate of 63%. Eighteen tasks relating to use of autoclaves (eg correct loading of instruments and correct storage) were observed and knowledge about them was assessed by questioning. Each was scored positively if correctly undertaken and answered. Scores for compliance varied between 2 and 12 and between 3 and 15 in the case of knowledge. In all instances certificated DSAs scored more highly than uncertificated DSAs. The study illustrated the value of certification, background education and membership of a vocational organisation. It supports the belief that all DSAs should be educated to the level of certification and that this improved education and training would improve cross-infection control in general dental practice.
The authors, after defining basic concepts, make the case that nosocomial surveillance is an indispensable tool without which up-to-date infection control is impossible. They provide an overview of the nosocomial surveillance practices in many countries in Europe and overseas, comparing their methods, results and protocols, keeping in mind cost effectiveness and quality assurance considerations. The authors' view is that in Hungary two kinds of nosocomial surveillance programs should be established: 1. There should be reliable surveys to follow up the incidence of nosocomial infections. Without such data any national infection control strategy is at best uncertain. Obtaining this information is mostly in the interest of the government. Procedures should be coordinated from a central office, financial backing for the surveys should be provided, and the personal and institutional infrastructure should be built up in a consensual manner, with much care and technical expertise, relying on domestic and foreign experience. 2. Each institution should decide, based on their current goals, which selective nosocomial surveillance method is most appropriate for a given occasion. This decision should be voluntary and government regulation of these activities would be counterproductive.
This report supplements the 2001 statement by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) (CDC. Vaccinia [smallpox] vaccine: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP], 2001. MMWR 2001;50[No. RR-10]:1-25). This supplemental report provides recommendations for using smallpox vaccine in the pre-event vaccination program in the United States. To facilitate preparedness and response, smallpox vaccination is recommended for persons designated by public health authorities to conduct investigation and follow-up of initial smallpox cases that might necessitate direct patient contact. ACIP recommends that each state and territory establish and maintain > or = 1 smallpox response team. ACIP and the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) recommend that each acute-care hospital identify health-care workers who can be vaccinated and trained to provide direct medical care for the first smallpox patients requiring hospital admission and to evaluate and manage patients who are suspected as having smallpox. When feasible, the first-stage vaccination program should include previously vaccinated health-care personnel to decrease the potential for adverse events. Additionally persons administering smallpox vaccine in this pre-event vaccination program should be vaccinated. Smallpox vaccine is administered by using the multiple-puncture technique with a bifurcated needle, packaged with the vaccine and diluent. According to the product labeling, 2-3 punctures are recommended for primary vaccination and 15 punctures for revaccination. A trace of blood should appear at the vaccination site after 15-20 seconds; if no trace of blood is visible, an additional 3 insertions should be made by using the same bifurcated needle without reinserting the needle into the vaccine vial. If no evidence of vaccine take is apparent after 7 days, the person can be vaccinated again. Optimal infection-control practices and appropriate site care should prevent transmission of vaccinia virus from vaccinated health-care workers to patients. Health-care personnel providing direct patient care should keep their vaccination sites covered with gauze in combination with a semipermeable membrane dressing to absorb exudates and to provide a barrier for containment of vaccinia virus to minimize the risk of transmission; the dressing should also be covered by a layer of clothing. Dressings used to cover the site should be changed frequently to prevent accumulation of exudates and consequent maceration. The most critical measure in preventing contact transmission is consistent hand hygiene. Hospitals should designate staff to assess dressings for all vaccinated health-care workers. When feasible, staff responsible for dressing changes for smallpox health-care teams should be vaccinated, all persons handling dressings should observe contact precautions. Administrative leave is not required routinely for newly vaccinated health-care personnel unless they are physically unable to work as a result of systemic signs and symptoms of illness; have extensive skin lesions that cannot be adequately covered or if they are unable to adhere to the recommended infection-control precautions. Persons outside the patient-care setting can keep their vaccination sites covered with a porous dressing hand hygiene remains key to preventing inadvertent inoculation. FDA has recommended that recipients of smallpox vaccine be deferred from donating blood for 21 days or until the scab has separated. Contacts of vaccinees, who have inadvertently contracted vaccinia, also should be deferred from donating blood for 14 days after complete resolution of their complication. In the pre-event vaccination program, smallpox vaccination is contraindicated for persons with a history or presence of eczema or atopic dermatitis; who have other acute, chronic, or exfoliative skin conditions; who have conditions associated with immunosuppression; are aged < 1 year; who have a serious allergy to any component of the vaccine; or who are pregnant or breastfeeding. ACIP does not recommend smallpox vaccination for children and adolescents aged < 18 years during the pre-event vaccination program. Pre-event vaccination also is contraindicated among persons with household contacts who have a history or presence of eczema or atopic dermatitis; who have other acute, chronic, or exfoliative skin conditions; who have conditions associated with immunosuppression; or who are pregnant. For purposes of screening for contraindications for pre-event vaccination, household contacts include persons with prolonged intimate contact (e.g., sexual contacts) with the potential vaccinee and others who might have direct contact with the vaccination site. Persons with inflammatory eye disease might be at increased risk for inadvertent inoculation as a result of touching or rubbing the eye. Therefore, deferring vaccination is prudent for persons with inflammatory eye diseases requiring steroid treatment until the condition resolves and the course of therapy is complete. Eczema vaccinatum, a serious form of disseminated vaccinia infection, can occur among persons with atopic dermatitis and other dermatologic conditions. Potential vaccinees should be queried regarding the diagnosis of atopic dermatitis or eczema in themselves or any member of their household, or regarding the presence of chronic or recurrent rashes consistent with these diagnoses. Persons reporting such a rash in themselves or household members should not be vaccinated, unless a health-care provider determines that the rash is not eczema or atopic dermatitis. Before vaccination, women of childbearing age should be asked if they are pregnant or intend to become pregnant during the next 4 weeks; women who respond positively should not be vaccinated. Any woman who thinks she might be pregnant or who wants additional assurance that she is not pregnant should perform a urine pregnancy test on the day scheduled for vaccination. If a pregnant woman is inadvertently vaccinated or if she becomes pregnant within 4 weeks after smallpox vaccination, she should be counseled regarding concerns for the fetus. Vaccination during pregnancy should not ordinarily be a reason to terminate pregnancy. CDC has established a pregnancy registry to prospectively follow the outcome of such pregnancies and facilitate the investigation of any adverse pregnancy outcome among pregnant women who were inadvertently vaccinated. For enrollment in the registry, contact CDC at 404-639-8253. Smallpox vaccine should not be administered to persons with human immunodeficiency virus infection (HIV) or acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) as part of a pre-event program because of their increased risk for progressive vaccinia. HIV testing is recommended for persons who have any history of a risk factor for HIV infection or for anyone who is concerned that he or she might have HIV infection. HIV testing should be available in a confidential or anonymous setting, in accordance with local laws and regulations, with results communicated to the potential vaccinee before the planned date of vaccination. Smallpox vaccine can be administered simultaneously with any inactivated vaccine. With the exception of varicella vaccine, smallpox vaccine can be administered simultaneously with other live-virus vaccines. To avoid confusion in ascertaining which vaccine might have caused postvaccination skin lesions or other adverse events, varicella vaccine and smallpox vaccine should be administered >4 weeks apart. Health-care workers scheduled to receive an annual purified protein derivative (PPD) skin test for tuberculosis screening should not receive the skin test until >1 month after smallpox vaccination. Persons with progressive vaccinia, eczema vaccinatum, and severe generalized vaccinia or inadvertent inoculation might benefit from therapy with VIG or cidofovir, although the latter has not been approved by FDA for this indication. Suspected cases of these illnesses or other severe adverse events after smallpox vaccination should be reported immediately to state health departments. VIG and cidofovir are available from CDC under Investigational New Drug protocols. Clinically severe adverse events after smallpox vaccination should be reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. Reports can be made online at https://secure.vaers.org/VaersDataEntryintro.htm, or by postage-paid form, which is available by calling 800-822-7967 (toll-free). ACIP will review these recommendations periodically as new information becomes available related to smallpox disease, smallpox vaccines, the risk of smallpox attack, smallpox vaccine adverse events, and the experience gained as recent recommendations are implemented. Revised recommendations will be developed as needed.
In short, the author of this article holds that there are many forces working to upgrade facilities, assisted by a thorough administrative sanitation program to control cross-infection, that will enable them to keep their infection rates at an absolute minimum and help them to approach ever more closely their ultimate goal of curing the sick while simultaneously protecting the well.
Despite considerable awareness amongst the healthcare community about the importance of hand hygiene in controlling Healthcare Acquired Infections (HAIs), the problem persists. Mike Allen of Dart Valley Systems explores the issues surrounding good hand hygiene practice in UK hospitals.
Earlier this month astonishing figures causing major concern were released from the Department of Health (DoH) showing the number of cases of Clostridium difficile in the over 65s in hospitals in England. This article focuses upon what is already known about infection control and concludes that a greater collaborative approach to infection control is needed, with a prudent use of broad spectrum antibiotics and a greater use of precautionary isolation measures based on patient symptoms, if infection rates are to fall.
The aim was to investigate late response and nonresponse bias in a survey related to HIV and infection control. Questionnaires with ID numbers were mailed to a stratified random sample of dentists in Canada with additional mailings 4 and 7 weeks later (n = 6444). We compared responses received after < 4 weeks, 4-7 weeks, > 7 weeks. Extrapolation was used to estimate nonresponse bias. Univariate analyses showed significant differences between responses received < 4 weeks after initial mailing and those received later for items on sociodemographics, knowledge, infection control practices and attitudes: late responders were more likely to report that they would refuse to treat any patients with HIV (P < 0.01). Multiple logistic regression indicated that the best predictors of responses received > or = 4 weeks were disagreement that HBV is more infectious than HIV (OR = 1.7); unwillingness to attend a dentist who treats HIV/AIDS patients (OR = 1.3); incorrect perception of the risk of HIV infection after an HIV-contaminated needlestick injury (OR = 1.2); and sometimes or never heat-sterilizing handpieces after each patient (OR = 1.2). Extrapolation indicated that the percentage of all respondents who reported refusal to treat (15.2%) would have been 17.1% if a 100% response rate had been obtained. We found significant evidence of late response and nonresponse bias primarily in knowledge and fears related to HIV infectivity; however, the impact on the final results was small and we concluded that additional follow-up to improve response rates would not be worthwhile.
Recent standards established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regarding protection against occupational exposure to hepatitis B virus (HBV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) presents a challenge to staff development and inservice educators to provide the necessary education and training in light of the 24-hour operation of a hospital, the nursing shortage, and the use of part-time personnel. In order to provide initial and periodic infection control programs for nursing personnel, a self-managed module in the form of a programmed unit of instruction (PUI) was developed and tested to determine its effectiveness and efficiency for teaching the basic principles of infection control to inservice nurses. Results of the study indicated that nurses who took a PUI in the basic principles of infection control scored higher on posttests than those who attended a lecture, regardless of their pretest scores, educational level, and experience (p less than .0001).
This article presents the authors' views on infection control in hospitals in Kosova, focusing on the main problems and appropriate solutions. Past and present government initiatives are briefly presented, and available data on the prevalence of hospital infections and antimicrobial resistance in Kosova are outlined.
Mouse brains harboring the Chinese NT strain of Toxoplasma gondii cysts were homogenized with normal saline and irradiated with cobalt-60 gamma rays at various doses. The homogenate was introduced intraperitoneally into NIH mice or per os into kittens. Loss of infectivity was confirmed according to the following criteria: no cyst found in mouse brain impression smears on the 50th day after inoculation; no oocyst found in feces of kittens 3-15 days after inoculation; subinoculation in mice and a negative IHA test. All bioassays, parasitological examinations and serological tests in the control group gave positive results. Activity of radioactive source: 10 KCi; uniform dosage: 1238 rad/min; dose range of irradiation: 0.1-1.0 KGy. Minimal effective dose of gamma rays to control infectivity of T. gondii cysts was 0.55 KGy. Infectivity of bradyzoites irradiated with gamma rays at a dose of 0.45 KGy decreased by 10,000 times. Minimal effective dose of gamma rays to control infectivity of American ME-49 and Ts-2 strain, is slightly higher (0.6KGy) than that of NT strain. These studies present useful data for practical use of cobalt-60 to control infectivity of T. gondii in meat products.