急性护理中艰难梭菌或耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌传播的危险因素

Xuetao Wang, Matthew Garrod, Tamara Duncombe, Eunsun Lee, Katy Short Joyce Ng
{"title":"急性护理中艰难梭菌或耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌传播的危险因素","authors":"Xuetao Wang, Matthew Garrod, Tamara Duncombe, Eunsun Lee, Katy Short Joyce Ng","doi":"10.1017/ash.2023.376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Some hospitals continue to struggle with nosocomial transmission of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) despite years of infection control efforts. We investigated the relationship between unit infrastructural–organizational risk factors and nosocomial transmission of CDI and MRSA. Methods: This retrospective observational study included 100 eligible acute-care inpatient units from 12 hospitals in British Columbia, Canada, from April 1, 2020, to September 16, 2021. The outcome variables included whether a unit was on the CDI or MRSA vulnerable unit list (ie, defined as having ≥5 CDI cases or ≥6 MRSA cases being attributed to the unit in the last 6 fiscal periods), the average CDI/MRSA rate, as well as the average CDI/MRSA standardized infection ratio (SIR). Independent variables included, but were not limited to, infection control factors (eg hand hygiene rate), infrastructural factors (eg, unit age, total beds on unit), and organizational factors (eg, hallway bed utilization, nursing overtime). Multivariable regression was performed to identify statistically significant risk factors using SAS, R Studio, and Stata software. Results: For CDI, older units were associated with higher odds of being on the CDI vulnerable unit list (aOR, 1.086; 95% CI, 1.024–1.175), higher CDI rate (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.012; 95% CI, 0.004–0.020), and higher CDI SIR (aRR, 0.011; 95% CI, 0.003–0.020). Larger unit size was associated with higher odds of being on the CDI vulnerable unit list (aOR, 1.210; 95% CI, 1.095–1.400) and higher CDI SIR (aRR, 0.013; 95% CI, 0.001–0.026). For MRSA, an increase in hand hygiene rate was associated with lower odds of being on the MRSA vulnerable unit list (aOR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.897), lower MRSA rate (aRR, −0.035; 95% CI, −0.063 to −0.008), and lower MRSA SIR (aRR, −0.039; 95% CI, −0.069 to −0.008). Higher MRSA bioburden was associated with higher odds of being on the MRSA vulnerable unit list (aOR, &gt;999; 95% CI, &gt;999 to &gt;999), higher MRSA rate (aRR, 9.008; 95% CI, 5.586–12.429), and higher MRSA SIR (aRR, 4.964; 95% CI, 1.971–7.958). Additionally, higher MRSA rates were associated increased utilization of hallway beds (aRR, 0.680; 95% CI, 0.094–1.267), increased nursing overtime rate (aRR, 5.018; 95% CI, 1.210–8.826), and not having a clean supply room with the door consistently closed (aRR, −0.283; 95% CI, −0.536 to −0.03). Conclusions: Several infrastructural and organizational factors were associated with nosocomial transmissions of CDI and MRSA. Further research is needed to investigate the mechanisms by which these factors are associated. Disclosures: None","PeriodicalId":7953,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk factors for the transmission of <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> or methicillin-resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> in acute care\",\"authors\":\"Xuetao Wang, Matthew Garrod, Tamara Duncombe, Eunsun Lee, Katy Short Joyce Ng\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ash.2023.376\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Some hospitals continue to struggle with nosocomial transmission of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) despite years of infection control efforts. We investigated the relationship between unit infrastructural–organizational risk factors and nosocomial transmission of CDI and MRSA. Methods: This retrospective observational study included 100 eligible acute-care inpatient units from 12 hospitals in British Columbia, Canada, from April 1, 2020, to September 16, 2021. The outcome variables included whether a unit was on the CDI or MRSA vulnerable unit list (ie, defined as having ≥5 CDI cases or ≥6 MRSA cases being attributed to the unit in the last 6 fiscal periods), the average CDI/MRSA rate, as well as the average CDI/MRSA standardized infection ratio (SIR). Independent variables included, but were not limited to, infection control factors (eg hand hygiene rate), infrastructural factors (eg, unit age, total beds on unit), and organizational factors (eg, hallway bed utilization, nursing overtime). Multivariable regression was performed to identify statistically significant risk factors using SAS, R Studio, and Stata software. Results: For CDI, older units were associated with higher odds of being on the CDI vulnerable unit list (aOR, 1.086; 95% CI, 1.024–1.175), higher CDI rate (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.012; 95% CI, 0.004–0.020), and higher CDI SIR (aRR, 0.011; 95% CI, 0.003–0.020). Larger unit size was associated with higher odds of being on the CDI vulnerable unit list (aOR, 1.210; 95% CI, 1.095–1.400) and higher CDI SIR (aRR, 0.013; 95% CI, 0.001–0.026). For MRSA, an increase in hand hygiene rate was associated with lower odds of being on the MRSA vulnerable unit list (aOR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.897), lower MRSA rate (aRR, −0.035; 95% CI, −0.063 to −0.008), and lower MRSA SIR (aRR, −0.039; 95% CI, −0.069 to −0.008). Higher MRSA bioburden was associated with higher odds of being on the MRSA vulnerable unit list (aOR, &gt;999; 95% CI, &gt;999 to &gt;999), higher MRSA rate (aRR, 9.008; 95% CI, 5.586–12.429), and higher MRSA SIR (aRR, 4.964; 95% CI, 1.971–7.958). Additionally, higher MRSA rates were associated increased utilization of hallway beds (aRR, 0.680; 95% CI, 0.094–1.267), increased nursing overtime rate (aRR, 5.018; 95% CI, 1.210–8.826), and not having a clean supply room with the door consistently closed (aRR, −0.283; 95% CI, −0.536 to −0.03). Conclusions: Several infrastructural and organizational factors were associated with nosocomial transmissions of CDI and MRSA. Further research is needed to investigate the mechanisms by which these factors are associated. Disclosures: None\",\"PeriodicalId\":7953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2023.376\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2023.376","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管多年的感染控制努力,一些医院仍然与艰难梭菌感染(CDI)和耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)的院内传播作斗争。我们调查了单位基础设施-组织风险因素与CDI和MRSA医院传播的关系。方法:本回顾性观察性研究纳入了2020年4月1日至2021年9月16日来自加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省12家医院的100个符合条件的急性护理住院病房。结果变量包括一个单位是否在CDI或MRSA易感单位名单上(即定义为在过去6个财政期间有≥5个CDI病例或≥6个MRSA病例),平均CDI/MRSA率,以及平均CDI/MRSA标准化感染率(SIR)。自变量包括但不限于感染控制因素(如手卫生率)、基础设施因素(如单位年龄、单位总床位)和组织因素(如走廊床位利用率、护理加班时间)。采用SAS、R Studio和Stata软件进行多变量回归,以确定具有统计学意义的危险因素。结果:对于CDI,年龄较大的单位与CDI脆弱单位名单上的几率较高相关(aOR, 1.086;95% CI, 1.024-1.175),较高的CDI发生率(校正相对危险度[aRR], 0.012;95% CI, 0.004-0.020)和较高的CDI SIR (aRR, 0.011;95% ci, 0.003-0.020)。单位面积越大,出现在CDI脆弱单位名单上的几率越大(aOR, 1.210;95% CI, 1.095-1.400)和较高的CDI SIR (aRR, 0.013;95% ci, 0.001-0.026)。对于MRSA,手卫生率的增加与MRSA易感单位名单上的较低几率相关(aOR, 0.71;95% CI, 0.53-0.897), MRSA发生率较低(aRR,−0.035;95% CI,−0.063 ~−0.008),MRSA SIR较低(aRR,−0.039;95% CI,−0.069 ~−0.008)。较高的MRSA生物负荷与较高的MRSA易感单位名单相关(aOR, >999;95% CI, >999至>999), MRSA发生率较高(aRR, 9.008;95% CI, 5.586-12.429), MRSA SIR较高(aRR, 4.964;95% ci, 1.971-7.958)。此外,较高的MRSA发生率与走廊床位的利用率增加相关(aRR, 0.680;95% CI, 0.094-1.267),护理加班率增加(aRR, 5.018;95% CI, 1.210-8.826),并且没有清洁的供应室并始终关闭门(aRR, - 0.283;95% CI,−0.536 ~−0.03)。结论:一些基础设施和组织因素与CDI和MRSA的医院传播有关。需要进一步的研究来调查这些因素相互关联的机制。披露:没有
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Risk factors for the transmission of Clostridioides difficile or methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in acute care
Background: Some hospitals continue to struggle with nosocomial transmission of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) despite years of infection control efforts. We investigated the relationship between unit infrastructural–organizational risk factors and nosocomial transmission of CDI and MRSA. Methods: This retrospective observational study included 100 eligible acute-care inpatient units from 12 hospitals in British Columbia, Canada, from April 1, 2020, to September 16, 2021. The outcome variables included whether a unit was on the CDI or MRSA vulnerable unit list (ie, defined as having ≥5 CDI cases or ≥6 MRSA cases being attributed to the unit in the last 6 fiscal periods), the average CDI/MRSA rate, as well as the average CDI/MRSA standardized infection ratio (SIR). Independent variables included, but were not limited to, infection control factors (eg hand hygiene rate), infrastructural factors (eg, unit age, total beds on unit), and organizational factors (eg, hallway bed utilization, nursing overtime). Multivariable regression was performed to identify statistically significant risk factors using SAS, R Studio, and Stata software. Results: For CDI, older units were associated with higher odds of being on the CDI vulnerable unit list (aOR, 1.086; 95% CI, 1.024–1.175), higher CDI rate (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.012; 95% CI, 0.004–0.020), and higher CDI SIR (aRR, 0.011; 95% CI, 0.003–0.020). Larger unit size was associated with higher odds of being on the CDI vulnerable unit list (aOR, 1.210; 95% CI, 1.095–1.400) and higher CDI SIR (aRR, 0.013; 95% CI, 0.001–0.026). For MRSA, an increase in hand hygiene rate was associated with lower odds of being on the MRSA vulnerable unit list (aOR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.897), lower MRSA rate (aRR, −0.035; 95% CI, −0.063 to −0.008), and lower MRSA SIR (aRR, −0.039; 95% CI, −0.069 to −0.008). Higher MRSA bioburden was associated with higher odds of being on the MRSA vulnerable unit list (aOR, >999; 95% CI, >999 to >999), higher MRSA rate (aRR, 9.008; 95% CI, 5.586–12.429), and higher MRSA SIR (aRR, 4.964; 95% CI, 1.971–7.958). Additionally, higher MRSA rates were associated increased utilization of hallway beds (aRR, 0.680; 95% CI, 0.094–1.267), increased nursing overtime rate (aRR, 5.018; 95% CI, 1.210–8.826), and not having a clean supply room with the door consistently closed (aRR, −0.283; 95% CI, −0.536 to −0.03). Conclusions: Several infrastructural and organizational factors were associated with nosocomial transmissions of CDI and MRSA. Further research is needed to investigate the mechanisms by which these factors are associated. Disclosures: None
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Using whole genome sequencing to characterize Clostridioides difficile isolates at a tertiary center in Melbourne, Australia Influenza outbreak management tabletop exercise for congregate living settings Bring it on again: antimicrobial stewardship in transplant infectious diseases: updates and new challenges Professor Mahmood Bhutta on disrupting unhealthy supply chains and promoting environmental sustainability in health care Oral amoxicillin challenges for low-risk penicillin-allergic patients at a large Veterans Affairs facility: a retrospective feasibility analysis
×
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