Ultraviolet light disinfection of hospital water for preventing nosocomial Legionella infection: a 13-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: CDC has estimated that 23% of Legionella infections are nosocomial. When a new hospital was being constructed and a substantial increase in transplantation was anticipated, an ultraviolet light apparatus was installed in the water main of the new building because 27% of water samples from taps in the old hospital contained Legionella. This study reports the rate of nosocomial Legionella infection and water contamination since opening the new hospital. METHODS: Charts of all patients with positive Legionella cultures, direct immunofluorescent antibody (DFA), or urine antigen between April 1989 and November 2001 were reviewed. Frequencies of DFAs and urine antigens were obtained from the laboratory. RESULTS: None of the 930 cultures of hospital water have been positive since moving into the new building. Fifty-three (0.02%) of 219,521 patients had a positive Legionella test; 41 had pneumonia (40 community acquired). One definite L. pneumophila pneumonia confirmed by culture and DFA in August 1994 was nosocomial (0.0005%) by dates. This patient was transferred after prolonged hospitalization in another country, was transplanted 11 days after admission, and developed symptoms 5 days after liver transplant. However, tap water from the patient's room did not grow Legionella. Seventeen (2.5%) of 670 urine antigens were positive for Legionella (none nosocomial). Thirty-three (1.2%) of 2,671 DFAs were positive, including 7 patients (21%) without evidence of pneumonia and 6 (18%) who had an alternative diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Ultraviolet light usage was associated with negative water cultures and lack of clearly documented nosocomial Legionella infection for 13 years at this hospital.

Control of endemic vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus among inpatients at a university hospital.

We sought to determine the ability of surveillance cultures and isolation of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE)-colonized patients to control nosocomial VRE infection and colonization during a 5-year period (November 1994 through October 1999). During this period, VRE colonization was limited to 0.82% of admissions. The incidence of VRE infection was 0.12 cases per 1000 patient-days (attack rate, 0.07%). Colonized patients were first identified by surveillance (95%) or routine clinical cultures (5%); 14% of colonized patients had a positive clinical culture a median of 15 days after a positive surveillance culture. Ten percent of colonized patients were identified by surveillance at the time of transfer from another health care facility. Identification of these colonized patients was associated with reduction from a peak incidence rate of 2.07% to a rate of 1.25% and stabilization at this lower level. The use of surveillance cultures to identify and isolate patients with asymptomatic colonization can provide sustained control of the spread of VRE within a health care facility.

Spread of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) among household contacts of individuals with nosocomially acquired MRSA.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency with which methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is spread from colonized or infected patients to their household and community contacts. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: University hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Household and community contacts of MRSA-colonized or -infected patients for whom MRSA screening cultures were performed. RESULTS: MRSA was isolated from 25 (14.5%) of 172 individuals. Among the contacts of index patients who had at least one MRSA-colonized contact, those with close contact to the index patient were 7.5 times more likely to be colonized (53% vs 7%; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 50.3; P = .002). An analysis of antimicrobial susceptibility and DNA fingerprint patterns suggested person-to-person spread. CONCLUSIONS: MRSA colonization occurs frequently among household and community contacts of patients with nosocomially acquired MRSA, suggesting that transmission of nosocomially acquired MRSA outside of the healthcare setting may be a substantial source of MRSA colonization and infection in the community.

Cost-effectiveness of perirectal surveillance cultures for controlling vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus.

BACKGROUND: Several hospitals opting not to use active surveillance cultures to identify carriers of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) have reported that adoption of other parts of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline for controlling VRE has had little to no impact. Because use of surveillance cultures and contact isolation controlled a large outbreak at this hospital, their costs were estimated for comparison with the excess costs of VRE bacteremias occurring at a higher rate at a hospital not employing these measures. SETTING: Two university hospitals. METHODS: Inpatients deemed high risk for VRE acquisition at this hospital underwent weekly perirectal surveillance cultures. Estimated costs of cultures and resulting isolation during a 2-year period were compared with the estimated excess costs of more frequent VRE bacteremias at another hospital of similar size and complexity not using surveillance cultures to control spread throughout the hospital. RESULTS: Of 54,052 patients admitted, 10,400 had perirectal swabs taken. Cultures and isolation cost an estimated $253,099. VRE culture positivity was limited to 193 (0.38%) and VRE bacteremia to 1 (0.002%) as compared with 29 bacteremias at the comparison hospital. The estimated attributable cost of VRE bacteremia at the comparison hospital of $761,320 exceeded the cost of the control program at this hospital by threefold. CONCLUSIONS: The excess costs of VRE bacteremia may justify the costs of preventive measures. The costs of VRE infections at other body sites, of deaths from untreatable infections, and of dissemination of genes for vancomycin resistance also help to justify the costs of implementing an effective control program.