Efficacy of a once-a-week screening programme to control extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing bacteria in a neonatal intensive care unit.

Helena Rybczynska, Eva Melander, Hugo Johansson, Fredrik Lundberg
{"title":"Efficacy of a once-a-week screening programme to control extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing bacteria in a neonatal intensive care unit.","authors":"Helena Rybczynska,&nbsp;Eva Melander,&nbsp;Hugo Johansson,&nbsp;Fredrik Lundberg","doi":"10.3109/00365548.2014.896027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing bacteria are an escalating problem threatening health. Devastating consequences can result in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) due to these bacteria. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of once-a-week screening (July 2010 to September 2012) versus screening on demand (April 2008 to June 2010).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The investigation was an open retrospective descriptive study comparing 2 unpaired groups, the first exposed to screening on demand and the second to screening once a week. All other infection control measures were unchanged. Both groups were cared for in the NICU of Skåne University Hospital. Parameters compared were the proportion of cultured neonates, prevalence, time before detection, number of secondary cases, and clinical infections due to ESBL-producing bacteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The proportion of cultured neonates increased from 28% to 49% (p < 0.05) in period 2. The time from admission to detection was 8 days shorter in period 2 (p < 0.05). Secondary cases decreased from 44% to 9% (p < 0.05), and clinical infections from 4 to 0 cases (p < 0.05). During period 2, the prevalence of colonization was 1.77%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Once-a-week screening is a strategy to control the epidemiology of unwanted pathogens among newborn infants. It provides the opportunity for early intervention, thereby avoiding secondary cases and infections. Premature neonates in particular benefit from this approach. The prevalence of ESBL of 1.77% is low from an international perspective. ESBL appear to be introduced onto the ward by mothers colonized with ESBL.</p>","PeriodicalId":21541,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":"46 6","pages":"426-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/00365548.2014.896027","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/00365548.2014.896027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Background: Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing bacteria are an escalating problem threatening health. Devastating consequences can result in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) due to these bacteria. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of once-a-week screening (July 2010 to September 2012) versus screening on demand (April 2008 to June 2010).

Materials and methods: The investigation was an open retrospective descriptive study comparing 2 unpaired groups, the first exposed to screening on demand and the second to screening once a week. All other infection control measures were unchanged. Both groups were cared for in the NICU of Skåne University Hospital. Parameters compared were the proportion of cultured neonates, prevalence, time before detection, number of secondary cases, and clinical infections due to ESBL-producing bacteria.

Results: The proportion of cultured neonates increased from 28% to 49% (p < 0.05) in period 2. The time from admission to detection was 8 days shorter in period 2 (p < 0.05). Secondary cases decreased from 44% to 9% (p < 0.05), and clinical infections from 4 to 0 cases (p < 0.05). During period 2, the prevalence of colonization was 1.77%.

Conclusions: Once-a-week screening is a strategy to control the epidemiology of unwanted pathogens among newborn infants. It provides the opportunity for early intervention, thereby avoiding secondary cases and infections. Premature neonates in particular benefit from this approach. The prevalence of ESBL of 1.77% is low from an international perspective. ESBL appear to be introduced onto the ward by mothers colonized with ESBL.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在新生儿重症监护病房,每周一次的筛查方案对控制广谱β -内酰胺酶产生细菌的效果。
背景:产生广谱β -内酰胺酶(ESBL)的细菌是一个日益严重的威胁健康的问题。这些细菌可导致新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)的毁灭性后果。本研究的目的是调查每周一次筛查(2010年7月至2012年9月)与按需筛查(2008年4月至2010年6月)的效果。材料与方法:本研究为开放式回顾性描述性研究,比较两组未配对组,第一组接受按需筛查,第二组接受每周一次筛查。所有其他感染控制措施保持不变。两组患儿均在sk大学附属医院新生儿重症监护室接受护理。比较的参数是培养新生儿的比例、患病率、检测前的时间、继发病例数和产esbl细菌引起的临床感染。结果:第2期培养的新生儿比例由28%提高到49% (p < 0.05)。第2期患者入院至检测时间缩短8 d (p < 0.05)。继发病例由44%降至9% (p < 0.05),临床感染由4例降至0例(p < 0.05)。在第二阶段,殖民化盛行率为1.77%。结论:每周一次的筛查是控制新生儿中不想要的病原体流行病学的一种策略。它为早期干预提供了机会,从而避免继发病例和感染。早产儿尤其受益于这种方法。ESBL的患病率为1.77%,在国际上属于低水平。ESBL似乎是由感染了ESBL的母亲引入病房的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Risk of neonatal and childhood morbidity among preterm infants exposed to marijuana. Performance of the Simplexa™ Flu A/B & RSV Direct Kit on respiratory samples collected in saline solution. Elevated levels of circulating histones indicate disease activity in patients with hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD). The decline of the impetigo epidemic caused by the epidemic European fusidic acid-resistant impetigo clone: an 11.5-year population-based incidence study from a community in Western Norway. Efficacy and safety of switching to raltegravir plus atazanavir dual therapy in pretreated HIV-1-infected patients over 144 weeks: a cohort study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1