Sarah Browning , Joshua S. Davis , Brett G. Mitchell
{"title":"手套和长袍过得愉快吗?澳大利亚和新西兰关于耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌和VRE定植的接触预防措施的实践和态度调查。","authors":"Sarah Browning , Joshua S. Davis , Brett G. Mitchell","doi":"10.1016/j.idh.2023.03.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>‘Contact precautions,’ are recommended for hospitalised patients with known methicillin-resistant <em>Staphylococcus aureus</em> (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant <em>Enterococci</em> (VRE) colonisation. Despite increasing observational evidence suggesting that gowns and gloves are of no added benefit over hand hygiene and environmental cleaning, guidelines continue to recommend them.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cross-sectional online survey of infection prevention professionals, infectious diseases physicians and microbiologists in Australian and New Zealand hospitals was conducted. The purpose was to explore variations in current approaches to known MRSA and VRE colonisation, and determine clinical equipoise for a proposed randomised control trial (RCT) to withdraw the use of gowns and gloves in this setting.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>226 responses from 122 hospitals across all Australian jurisdiction and multiple regions of New Zealand were received. While most hospitals implement contact precautions for MRSA (86%) and VRE (92%), variations based on MRSA and VRE subtypes are common. There was strong interest in removing glove and gown use for MRSA (72% and 73%, respectively) and VRE (70% and 68%, respectively). 62% of surveyed hospitals expressed interest in participating in a proposed cluster RCT comparing discontinuation of gown and glove use as part of contact precautions for MRSA and VRE, with their ongoing use.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The mandated use of PPE in the context of MRSA and VRE colonisation warrants further examination. An RCT is needed to definitively address this issue and to promote a widespread change in practice, if warranted.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45006,"journal":{"name":"Infection Disease & Health","volume":"28 3","pages":"Pages 221-225"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Have gloves and gowns had their day? An Australian and New Zealand practice and attitudes survey about contact precautions for MRSA and VRE colonisation\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Browning , Joshua S. Davis , Brett G. Mitchell\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.idh.2023.03.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>‘Contact precautions,’ are recommended for hospitalised patients with known methicillin-resistant <em>Staphylococcus aureus</em> (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant <em>Enterococci</em> (VRE) colonisation. Despite increasing observational evidence suggesting that gowns and gloves are of no added benefit over hand hygiene and environmental cleaning, guidelines continue to recommend them.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cross-sectional online survey of infection prevention professionals, infectious diseases physicians and microbiologists in Australian and New Zealand hospitals was conducted. The purpose was to explore variations in current approaches to known MRSA and VRE colonisation, and determine clinical equipoise for a proposed randomised control trial (RCT) to withdraw the use of gowns and gloves in this setting.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>226 responses from 122 hospitals across all Australian jurisdiction and multiple regions of New Zealand were received. While most hospitals implement contact precautions for MRSA (86%) and VRE (92%), variations based on MRSA and VRE subtypes are common. There was strong interest in removing glove and gown use for MRSA (72% and 73%, respectively) and VRE (70% and 68%, respectively). 62% of surveyed hospitals expressed interest in participating in a proposed cluster RCT comparing discontinuation of gown and glove use as part of contact precautions for MRSA and VRE, with their ongoing use.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The mandated use of PPE in the context of MRSA and VRE colonisation warrants further examination. An RCT is needed to definitively address this issue and to promote a widespread change in practice, if warranted.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45006,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infection Disease & Health\",\"volume\":\"28 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 221-225\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infection Disease & Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468045123000305\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Disease & Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468045123000305","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Have gloves and gowns had their day? An Australian and New Zealand practice and attitudes survey about contact precautions for MRSA and VRE colonisation
Background
‘Contact precautions,’ are recommended for hospitalised patients with known methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE) colonisation. Despite increasing observational evidence suggesting that gowns and gloves are of no added benefit over hand hygiene and environmental cleaning, guidelines continue to recommend them.
Methods
A cross-sectional online survey of infection prevention professionals, infectious diseases physicians and microbiologists in Australian and New Zealand hospitals was conducted. The purpose was to explore variations in current approaches to known MRSA and VRE colonisation, and determine clinical equipoise for a proposed randomised control trial (RCT) to withdraw the use of gowns and gloves in this setting.
Results
226 responses from 122 hospitals across all Australian jurisdiction and multiple regions of New Zealand were received. While most hospitals implement contact precautions for MRSA (86%) and VRE (92%), variations based on MRSA and VRE subtypes are common. There was strong interest in removing glove and gown use for MRSA (72% and 73%, respectively) and VRE (70% and 68%, respectively). 62% of surveyed hospitals expressed interest in participating in a proposed cluster RCT comparing discontinuation of gown and glove use as part of contact precautions for MRSA and VRE, with their ongoing use.
Conclusion
The mandated use of PPE in the context of MRSA and VRE colonisation warrants further examination. An RCT is needed to definitively address this issue and to promote a widespread change in practice, if warranted.
期刊介绍:
The journal aims to be a platform for the publication and dissemination of knowledge in the area of infection and disease causing infection in humans. The journal is quarterly and publishes research, reviews, concise communications, commentary and other articles concerned with infection and disease affecting the health of an individual, organisation or population. The original and important articles in the journal investigate, report or discuss infection prevention and control; clinical, social, epidemiological or public health aspects of infectious disease; policy and planning for the control of infections; zoonoses; and vaccination related to disease in human health. Infection, Disease & Health provides a platform for the publication and dissemination of original knowledge at the nexus of the areas infection, Disease and health in a One Health context. One Health recognizes that the health of people is connected to the health of animals and the environment. One Health encourages and advances the collaborative efforts of multiple disciplines-working locally, nationally, and globally-to achieve the best health for people, animals, and our environment. This approach is fundamental because 6 out of every 10 infectious diseases in humans are zoonotic, or spread from animals. We would be expected to report or discuss infection prevention and control; clinical, social, epidemiological or public health aspects of infectious disease; policy and planning for the control of infections; zoonosis; and vaccination related to disease in human health. The Journal seeks to bring together knowledge from all specialties involved in infection research and clinical practice, and present the best work in this ever-changing field. The audience of the journal includes researchers, clinicians, health workers and public policy professionals concerned with infection, disease and health.