Prospective analysis of nosocomial infection rates, antibiotic use, and patterns of resistance in a burn population.

Despite significant advances in burn care, infection remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in burn patients. We sought to determine accurate infection rates, risk factors for infection, and the percentage of infections caused by resistant organisms. In addition, we attempted to identify interventions to decrease the use of antimicrobial drugs. Data were collected prospectively from 157 burn patients admitted to the University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine burn treatment center from October 2001 to October 2002. A research assistant reviewed the medical record for each patient identified by burn surgeons as being infected to determine whether these episodes met the infection control criteria for nosocomial infections. The infection control assessment agreed with the surgeon's assessment for 16.7% of the pneumonias, 70.0% of the burn wound infections, 57.1% of the urinary tract infections, and 70.0% of the bloodstream infections. By multiple logistic regression analysis, body surface area burned, comorbidities, and use of invasive devices were significantly related to acquisition of nosocomial infections as identified by both the burn surgeons and the infection control criteria. Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas were the most common resistant organisms identified. In our population, surgeons could decrease antimicrobial use by using explicit criteria for identifying patients with hospital-acquired infections, limiting perioperative prophylaxis to patients at highest risk of infection, and decreasing the incidence of nosocomial infection with reduced use of devices and strict adherence to aseptic technique.

Methamphetamine-associated burn injuries: a retrospective analysis.

Methamphetamine production and use has increased dramatically during the past 10 years. Methamphetamine production requires combining hazardous and volatile chemicals that expose the manufacturer to burn injuries from explosions and chemical spills. We sought to review the epidemiology of burn injuries in a rural burn center secondary to the use of amphetamine or methamphetamine and/or the manufacture of methamphetamine. Review of the records of 507 patients who were admitted to our burn unit from December 1, 1998, to December 31, 2001, revealed 34 patients who were involved in the use of amphetamines or methamphetamines and/or the manufacture of methamphetamine. Thirty-one patients tested positive for either amphetamine (n = 2) or methamphetamine (n = 29) on routine admission urine drug screens. Twenty of these patients were involved in the manufacture of methamphetamines. Three additional patients were identified as methamphetamine manufacturers but tested negative for the use of methamphetamines. The mean age of the study population was 31.88 +/- 7.65 years, with a male:female ratio of 10.3:1. The average burn size was 18.86 +/- 20.72, with the majority secondary to flame (n = 26). Patient burn admission histories were vague, and the patient's involvement in the manufacture of methamphetamine was often only later confirmed by media, the fire marshal, family members, or the patient. Fifteen patients showed the usual withdrawal pattern of agitation and hypersomnolence, with seven patients requiring detoxification with benzodiazepines. Two were admitted acutely to the psychiatric ward for uncontrollable agitation. Eighteen patients were offered chemical dependency treatment, and two completed therapy. There was one mortality. The mean cost per person was US 77,580 dollars (range, US 112 dollars - US 426,386 dollars). The increasing use of and manufacture of methamphetamine presents new challenges for the burn team because these patients can become violent and frequently need assistance with detoxification. Routine drug screens are mandatory in identifying methamphetamine use to alert burn unit personnel to particular management problems and target individuals who may be receptive to drug rehabilitation.