Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Am J Infect Control ; 49(6): 775-783, 2021 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1300594

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Daily use of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) has been shown to reduce risk of healthcare-associated infections. We aimed to assess moving CHG bathing into routine practice using a human factors approach. We evaluated implementation in non-intensive care unit (ICU) settings in the Veterans Health Administration. METHODS: Our multiple case study approach included non-ICU units from 4 Veterans Health Administration settings. Guided by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety, we conducted focus groups and interviews to capture barriers and facilitators to daily CHG bathing. We measured compliance using observations and skin CHG concentrations. RESULTS: Barriers to daily CHG include time, concern of increasing antibiotic resistance, workflow and product concerns. Facilitators include engagement of champions and unit shared responsibility. We found shortfalls in patient education, hand hygiene and CHG use on tubes and drains. CHG skin concentration levels were highest among patients from spinal cord injury units. These units applied antiseptic using 2% CHG impregnated wipes vs 4% CHG solution/soap. DISCUSSION: Non-ICUs implementing CHG bathing must consider human factors and work system barriers to ensure uptake and sustained practice change. CONCLUSIONS: Well-planned rollouts and a unit culture promoting shared responsibility are key to compliance with daily CHG bathing. Successful implementation requires attention to staff education and measurement of compliance.


Asunto(s)
Antiinfecciosos Locales , Infección Hospitalaria , Baños , Clorhexidina/análogos & derivados , Infección Hospitalaria/prevención & control , Ergonomía , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos
2.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251170, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1218426

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The recovery of other pathogens in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection has been reported, either at the time of a SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis (co-infection) or subsequently (superinfection). However, data on the prevalence, microbiology, and outcomes of co-infection and superinfection are limited. The purpose of this study was to examine the occurrence of co-infections and superinfections and their outcomes among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We searched literature databases for studies published from October 1, 2019, through February 8, 2021. We included studies that reported clinical features and outcomes of co-infection or superinfection of SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens in hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients. We followed PRISMA guidelines, and we registered the protocol with PROSPERO as: CRD42020189763. RESULTS: Of 6639 articles screened, 118 were included in the random effects meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of co-infection was 19% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14%-25%, I2 = 98%) and that of superinfection was 24% (95% CI: 19%-30%). Pooled prevalence of pathogen type stratified by co- or superinfection were: viral co-infections, 10% (95% CI: 6%-14%); viral superinfections, 4% (95% CI: 0%-10%); bacterial co-infections, 8% (95% CI: 5%-11%); bacterial superinfections, 20% (95% CI: 13%-28%); fungal co-infections, 4% (95% CI: 2%-7%); and fungal superinfections, 8% (95% CI: 4%-13%). Patients with a co-infection or superinfection had higher odds of dying than those who only had SARS-CoV-2 infection (odds ratio = 3.31, 95% CI: 1.82-5.99). Compared to those with co-infections, patients with superinfections had a higher prevalence of mechanical ventilation (45% [95% CI: 33%-58%] vs. 10% [95% CI: 5%-16%]), but patients with co-infections had a greater average length of hospital stay than those with superinfections (mean = 29.0 days, standard deviation [SD] = 6.7 vs. mean = 16 days, SD = 6.2, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that as many as 19% of patients with COVID-19 have co-infections and 24% have superinfections. The presence of either co-infection or superinfection was associated with poor outcomes, including increased mortality. Our findings support the need for diagnostic testing to identify and treat co-occurring respiratory infections among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , Coinfección/epidemiología , Sobreinfección/epidemiología , Infecciones Bacterianas/epidemiología , Infecciones Bacterianas/mortalidad , Infecciones Bacterianas/terapia , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/terapia , Coinfección/mortalidad , Coinfección/terapia , Hospitalización , Humanos , Micosis/epidemiología , Micosis/mortalidad , Micosis/terapia , Prevalencia , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Sobreinfección/mortalidad , Sobreinfección/terapia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Virosis/epidemiología , Virosis/mortalidad , Virosis/terapia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA