A comparison of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) prevention and control recommendations, as stated in national/regional guidelines of 13 European countries was performed based on a structured questionnaire filled by representatives of professional societies or institutions. The aim of this study was to be a source of guidelines, references and views which can inform discussions at national/regional/local levels. Countries were devided in two groups based on proportion of MRSA in blood cultures positive with Staphylococcus aureus retrieved from EARSS 2008: low proportion (4 countries) and higher proportion (9 countries). Guidelines from all respective countries have several common general recommendations: MRSApositive patients have to have the same care as those that are not carrying MRSA, hand hygiene measures including the use of alcohol hand rubs are identified as important in the prevention of MRSA spread, environmental cleaning and/or disinfection has to be performed routinely, and personal protective equipment has to be used whilst working with MRSA positive patients. Surveillance and screening is also a part of all guidelines. Major differences among low and higher MRSA proportion countries, identified as successful practices, were: have guidelines and update it regularly, have guidelines not only for hospitals, but also for nursing homes and home practice, isolate MRSA positive patients in single room, perform MRSA screening based on risk categories in hospitals and nursing homes, and perform decolonisation of MRSA carriers.
A comparison of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) prevention and control recommendations, as stated in national/regional guidelines of 13 European countries was performed based on a structured questionnaire filled by representatives of professional societies or institutions. The aim of this study was to be a source of guidelines, references and views which can inform discussions at national/regional/local levels. Countries were devided in two groups based on proportion of MRSA in blood cultures positive with Staphylococcus aureus retrieved from EARSS 2008: low proportion (4 countries) and higher proportion (9 countries). Guidelines from all respective countries have several common general recommendations: MRSApositive patients have to have the same care as those that are not carrying MRSA, hand hygiene measures including the use of alcohol hand rubs are identified as important in the prevention of MRSA spread, environmental cleaning and/or disinfection has to be performed routinely, and personal protective equipment has to be used whilst working with MRSA positive patients. Surveillance and screening is also a part of all guidelines. Major differences among low and higher MRSA proportion countries, identified as successful practices, were: have guidelines and update it regularly, have guidelines not only for hospitals, but also for nursing homes and home practice, isolate MRSA positive patients in single room, perform MRSA screening based on risk categories in hospitals and nursing homes, and perform decolonisation of MRSA carriers.
The nosocomial infection was determinate as the direct cause of the dead in 49 (38.5%) patients. The highest mortality rate belonged to the PICU with 83.3% (10/12), follow by the NICU 71.4% (15/21); the mortality rate in the Newborn Unit was 70.5% (12/17); in contrast in the Surgery department the mortality rate was 0. In 65 of the cases at least one microorganism was isolated, being K. pneumonia Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamases (ESBLs), the most frequently isolated, 21.5% (14/65), it was also responsible of mostly of the mortal cases, and by area the most isolated from the NICU. No MRSA was isolated in this revision. Conclusion:Although the creation of the Nosocomial Infections Surveillances Committee, the nosocomial infections, its burden in costs, morbidity and mortality continuing being a big concern, especially in the NICU and Newborn Unit. Moreover, the high costs of the treatment for those kinds of infections sometimes are not affordable for patients in a weak healthcare system.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.