When did the doctors become fomites?

Tacconelli, Evelina

doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03499.x

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…All of these studies, however, used culture-based methods to target pathogenic bacteria, primarily in healthcare settings. While cell phones have been suggested as “Trojan horses” for pathogenic infection (Walia et al, 2014), there is no direct evidence that pathogens on mobile phones influence the rate of hospital acquired infections (Tacconelli, 2011; Manning et al, 2013), or that mobile phones present any more infection risk than any other human possession. Since we employed short-read 16S sequencing, and this method is unsuitable for strain-specific pathogen detection, we did not assess mobile phone pathogen risk potential in the present study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobile phones carry the personal microbiome of their owners

Meadow

Altrichter

Green

2014

PeerJ

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most people on the planet own mobile phones, and these devices are increasingly being utilized to gather data relevant to our personal health, behavior, and environment. During an educational workshop, we investigated the utility of mobile phones to gather data about the personal microbiome — the collection of microorganisms associated with the personal effects of an individual. We characterized microbial communities on smartphone touchscreens to determine whether there was significant overlap with the skin microbiome sampled directly from their owners. We found that about 22% of the bacterial taxa on participants’ fingers were also present on their own phones, as compared to 17% they shared on average with other people’s phones. When considered as a group, bacterial communities on men’s phones were significantly different from those on their fingers, while women’s were not. Yet when considered on an individual level, men and women both shared significantly more of their bacterial communities with their own phones than with anyone else’s. In fact, 82% of the OTUs were shared between a person’s index and phone when considering the dominant taxa (OTUs with more than 0.1% of the sequences in an individual’s dataset). Our results suggest that mobile phones hold untapped potential as personal microbiome sensors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobile phones carry the personal microbiome of their owners

Meadow

Altrichter

Green

2014

PeerJ

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hospital charts, together with stethoscopes, white coats, faucets, and keyboards, have the potential to act as vectors of bacteria. This fact highlights once again the importance of effective hand washing before and after handling medical charts, entering casenotes [20], touching patients, and performing procedures, since effective hand washing is the best way to block the transmission of pathogens from vectors to vectors, and from vectors to hosts [1]–[4], [29]. Nevertheless, managers and clinical staff in healthcare institutions should pay more attention to the issue of chart contamination and may consider some interventions in response to the problem, in order to reduce possible HAIs and to promote quality of medical care and patient safety.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contamination of Medical Charts: An Important Source of Potential Infection in Hospitals

Chen

Wang

2014

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThis prospective study aims to identify and compare the incidence of bacterial contamination of hospital charts and the distribution of species responsible for chart contamination in different units of a tertiary hospital.MethodsAll beds in medical, surgical, pediatric, and obstetric-gynecologic general wards (556) and those in corresponding special units (125) including medical, surgical, pediatric intensive care units (ICUs), the obstetric tocolytic unit and delivery room were surveyed for possible chart contamination. The outer surfaces of included charts were sampled by one experienced investigator with sterile cotton swabs rinsed with normal saline.ResultsFor general wards and special units, the overall sampling rates were 81.8% (455/556) and 85.6% (107/125) (p = 0.316); the incidence of chart contamination was 63.5% and 83.2%, respectively (p<0.001). Except for obstetric-gynecologic charts, the incidence was significantly higher in each and in all ICUs than in corresponding wards. Coagulase-negative staphylococci was the most common contaminant in general wards (40.0%) and special units (34.6%) (p>0.05). Special units had a significantly higher incidence of bacterial contamination due to Staphylococcus aureus (17.8%), Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (9.3%), Streptococcus viridans (9.4%), Escherichia coli (11.2%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (7.5%), and Acinetobacter baumannii (7.5%). Logistic regression analysis revealed the incidence of chart contamination was 2- to 4-fold higher in special units than in general wards [odds ratios: 1.97–4.00].ConclusionsNoting that most hospital charts are contaminated, our study confirms that a hospital chart is not only a medical record but also an important source of potential infection. The plastic cover of the medical chart can harbor potential pathogens, thus acting as a vector of bacteria. Additionally, chart contamination is more common in ICUs. These findings highlight the importance of effective hand-washing before and after handling medical charts. However, managers and clinical staff should pay more attention to the issue and may consider some interventions.

show abstract

“…There may well have been consultation but no one sought to defend an ill-fitting off-white bug-laden fomite gracing the wards. 11 Indeed, doctors tacitly accepted the view that their coats were an outdated icon and should be extinguished in the name of infection control. Let us consider what has happened to HAIs in our hospitals since the 2008 Dress Code.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes to clinician attire have done more harm than good

Dancer¹,

Bi²

2014

J R Coll Physicians Edinb

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of 'bare below the elbows' policies to facilitate handwashing led to the disappearance of the white coat from medical and surgical wards. While rates of key healthcare acquired infections in hospitals, e.g. Clostridium difficile and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia, have fallen, argument continues around the contribution of hand hygiene and dress codes to these changes. Conversely, the number of complaints against clinicians continues to rise, and respect for medical staff is falling. Are these phenomena linked to the disappearance of the white coat? Here, we debate the effects of these changes to clinician attire and ask whether the putative benefits in terms of infection control are outweighed by the possible harms to the doctor-patient relationship alleged to be caused by the loss of the white coat.

show abstract

When did the doctors become fomites?

Cited by 12 publications

References 15 publications

Mobile phones carry the personal microbiome of their owners

Mobile phones carry the personal microbiome of their owners

Contamination of Medical Charts: An Important Source of Potential Infection in Hospitals

Changes to clinician attire have done more harm than good

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About