Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 2.504
Filter
1.
J Infus Nurs ; 47(3): 175-181, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38744242

ABSTRACT

Due to low compliance by bedside nursing with a central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) prevention bundle and increased CLABSI rates, a mandatory re-education initiative at a 1200-bed university-affiliated hospital was undertaken. Despite this, 2 units, housing high-risk immunocompromised patients, continued to experience increased CLABSI rates. A quality improvement before-after project design in these units replaced bedside nursing staff with 2 nurses from the vascular access team (VAT) to perform central vascular access device (CVAD) dressing changes routinely every 7 days or earlier if needed. The VAT consistently followed the bundled components, including use of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-impregnated dressings on all patients unless an allergy was identified. In this case, a non-CHG transparent semipermeable membrane dressing was used. There were 884 patients with 14 211 CVAD days in the preimplementation period and 1136 patients with 14 225 CVAD days during the postimplementation period. The VAT saw 602 (53.0%) of the 1136 patients, performing at least 1 dressing change in 98% of the patients (n = 589). The combined CLABSI rate for the 2 units decreased from 2.53 per 1000 CVAD days preintervention to 1.62 per 1000 CVAD days postintervention. The estimated incidence rate ratio (IRR) for the intervention was 0.639, a 36.1% reduction in monthly CLABSI rates during the postimplementation period.


Subject(s)
Bandages , Catheter-Related Infections , Catheterization, Central Venous , Chlorhexidine , Humans , Catheter-Related Infections/prevention & control , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/analogs & derivatives , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Quality Improvement , Vascular Access Devices , Infection Control/methods , Hospitals, University
2.
Crit Care Nurse ; 44(3): 45-53, 2024 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38821530

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Chlorhexidine gluconate has been considered the criterion standard of oral care for patients receiving mechanical ventilation because of its ability to reduce the incidence of ventilator-associated events. Optimal concentrations and frequencies remain unclear, as do adverse events related to mortality in various intensive care unit populations. OBJECTIVE: To examine the current evidence for the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate in reducing the incidence of ventilator-associated events, mortality, intensive care unit length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation in patients receiving ventilator support. METHODS: In this integrative review, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), MEDLINE, and Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition were searched using terms related to mechanical ventilation and chlorhexidine gluconate oral care with dates ranging from 2012 to 2023. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were included in this review: 8 systematic reviews, 8 randomized clinical trials (3 of which were not included in any systematic review), and 1 quasi-experimental study. Chlorhexidine gluconate oral care was associated with a reduced incidence of ventilator-associated events, but efficacy depended on concentration and frequency of administration. With stratification by intensive care unit population type, a nonsignificant trend toward increased mortality was found among non-cardiac surgical patients who received this care. CONCLUSION: The evidence regarding the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate oral care in reducing ventilator-associated events in specific intensive care unit populations is contradictory. Recently published guidelines recommend de-implementation of chlorhexidine gluconate oral care in all patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Such care may be beneficial only in the cardiac surgical population.


Subject(s)
Chlorhexidine , Respiration, Artificial , Chlorhexidine/analogs & derivatives , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Chlorhexidine/adverse effects , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Humans , Male , Female , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Critical Care Nursing/standards , Oral Hygiene/methods , Oral Hygiene/nursing , Intensive Care Units , Aged, 80 and over , Mouthwashes/therapeutic use , Administration, Oral
3.
Dent Med Probl ; 61(2): 181-190, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38652926

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Chemical plaque control with mouthwashes as an adjunct to mechanical plaque control with a toothbrush and dental floss has been considered an effective method for controlling gingivitis. The anti-inflammatory effects of chemical plaque control benefit the oral tissues by reducing inflammation and bleeding. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of probiotic, Aloe vera, povidine-iodine, and chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwashes in treating gingivitis patients by assessing changes in their clinical parameters. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study was conducted on 40 patients from our outpatient department, divided into 4 groups of 10 patients each: probiotic mouthwash group (group 1); herbal (Aloe vera) mouthwash group (group 2); povidone-iodine mouthwash group (group 3); and CHX mouthwash group (group 4). All participants were provided with the same type of manual toothbrush, the Pepsodent® toothpaste and a respective mouthwash for twice-daily use until the end of a 28-day observation period. Clinical parameters, such as the marginal plaque index (MPI) and bleeding on interdental brushing (BOIB), were recorded at baseline, and on the 14th and 28th day of the study period. RESULTS: All groups showed a significant decrease in the MPI and BOIB scores. The results were similar in patients who used a probiotic mouthwash and those who used a CHX mouthwash. A comparable change in the mean scores was observed among the herbal and povidone-iodine groups from baseline to day 28. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of chronic gingivitis patients,a probiotic mouthwash was nearly as effective as CHX in reducing the plaque and bleeding scores. It showed better results in all clinical parameters than herbal and povidone-iodine mouthwashes. Using a mouthwash along with routine tooth brushing can help in treating gingivitis and slow the progression of the periodontal disease.


Subject(s)
Aloe , Chlorhexidine , Gingivitis , Mouthwashes , Povidone-Iodine , Probiotics , Humans , Gingivitis/drug therapy , Gingivitis/therapy , Gingivitis/prevention & control , Mouthwashes/therapeutic use , Probiotics/therapeutic use , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Female , Adult , Male , Prospective Studies , Povidone-Iodine/administration & dosage , Povidone-Iodine/therapeutic use , Middle Aged , Young Adult , Periodontal Index , Treatment Outcome , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Dental Plaque Index , Phytotherapy , Plant Preparations/therapeutic use , Plant Preparations/administration & dosage
6.
Int J Pharm ; 657: 124121, 2024 May 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38621617

ABSTRACT

In-situ forming poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) implants offer a great potential for controlled drug delivery for a variety of applications, e.g. periodontitis treatment. The polymer is dissolved in a water-miscible solvent. The drug is dissolved or dispersed in this solution. Upon contact with aqueous body fluids, the solvent diffuses into the surrounding tissue and water penetrates into the formulation. Consequently, PLGA precipitates, trapping the drug. Often, N-methyl-2-pyrrolidine (NMP) is used as a water-miscible solvent. However, parenteral administration of NMP raises toxicity concerns. The aim of this study was to identify less toxic alternative solvent systems for in-situ forming PLGA implants. Various blends of polyethylene glycol 400 (PEG 400), triethyl citrate (TEC) and ethanol were used to prepare liquid formulations containing PLGA, ibuprofen (as an anti-inflammatory drug) and/or chlorhexidine dihydrochloride (as an antiseptic agent). Implant formation and drug release kinetics were monitored upon exposure to phosphate buffer pH 6.8 at 37 °C. Furthermore, the syringeability of the liquids, antimicrobial activity of the implants, and dynamic changes in the latter's wet mass and pH of the release medium were studied. Importantly, 85:10:5 and 60:30:10 PEG 400:TEC:ethanol blends provided good syringeability and allowed for rapid implant formation. The latter controlled ibuprofen and chlorhexidine release over several weeks and assured efficient antimicrobial activity. Interestingly, fundamental differences were observed concerning the underlying release mechanisms of the two drugs: Ibuprofen was dissolved in the solvent mixtures and partially leached out together with the solvents during implant formation, resulting in relatively pronounced burst effects. In contrast, chlorhexidine dihydrochloride was dispersed in the liquids in the form of tiny particles, which were effectively trapped by precipitating PLGA during implant formation, leading to initial lag-phases for drug release.


Subject(s)
Chlorhexidine , Drug Implants , Drug Liberation , Ibuprofen , Polyethylene Glycols , Polyglycolic Acid , Polylactic Acid-Polyglycolic Acid Copolymer , Solvents , Polylactic Acid-Polyglycolic Acid Copolymer/chemistry , Solvents/chemistry , Ibuprofen/chemistry , Ibuprofen/administration & dosage , Polyethylene Glycols/chemistry , Drug Implants/chemistry , Polyglycolic Acid/chemistry , Chlorhexidine/chemistry , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Lactic Acid/chemistry , Citrates/chemistry , Ethanol/chemistry
7.
JAMA ; 331(18): 1544-1557, 2024 05 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38557703

ABSTRACT

Importance: Infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, length of hospitalization, and health care costs. Regional interventions may be advantageous in mitigating MDROs and associated infections. Objective: To evaluate whether implementation of a decolonization collaborative is associated with reduced regional MDRO prevalence, incident clinical cultures, infection-related hospitalizations, costs, and deaths. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted from July 1, 2017, to July 31, 2019, across 35 health care facilities in Orange County, California. Exposures: Chlorhexidine bathing and nasal iodophor antisepsis for residents in long-term care and hospitalized patients in contact precautions (CP). Main Outcomes and Measures: Baseline and end of intervention MDRO point prevalence among participating facilities; incident MDRO (nonscreening) clinical cultures among participating and nonparticipating facilities; and infection-related hospitalizations and associated costs and deaths among residents in participating and nonparticipating nursing homes (NHs). Results: Thirty-five facilities (16 hospitals, 16 NHs, 3 long-term acute care hospitals [LTACHs]) adopted the intervention. Comparing decolonization with baseline periods among participating facilities, the mean (SD) MDRO prevalence decreased from 63.9% (12.2%) to 49.9% (11.3%) among NHs, from 80.0% (7.2%) to 53.3% (13.3%) among LTACHs (odds ratio [OR] for NHs and LTACHs, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40-0.57), and from 64.1% (8.5%) to 55.4% (13.8%) (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.93) among hospitalized patients in CP. When comparing decolonization with baseline among NHs, the mean (SD) monthly incident MDRO clinical cultures changed from 2.7 (1.9) to 1.7 (1.1) among participating NHs, from 1.7 (1.4) to 1.5 (1.1) among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 30.4%; 95% CI, 16.4%-42.1%), from 25.5 (18.6) to 25.0 (15.9) among participating hospitals, from 12.5 (10.1) to 14.3 (10.2) among nonparticipating hospitals (group × period interaction reduction, 12.9%; 95% CI, 3.3%-21.5%), and from 14.8 (8.6) to 8.2 (6.1) among LTACHs (all facilities participating; 22.5% reduction; 95% CI, 4.4%-37.1%). For NHs, the rate of infection-related hospitalizations per 1000 resident-days changed from 2.31 during baseline to 1.94 during intervention among participating NHs, and from 1.90 to 2.03 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.7%; 95% CI, 19.0%-34.5%). Associated hospitalization costs per 1000 resident-days changed from $64 651 to $55 149 among participating NHs and from $55 151 to $59 327 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.8%; 95% CI, 26.7%-26.9%). Associated hospitalization deaths per 1000 resident-days changed from 0.29 to 0.25 among participating NHs and from 0.23 to 0.24 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 23.7%; 95% CI, 4.5%-43.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: A regional collaborative involving universal decolonization in long-term care facilities and targeted decolonization among hospital patients in CP was associated with lower MDRO carriage, infections, hospitalizations, costs, and deaths.


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Local , Bacterial Infections , Cross Infection , Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial , Health Facilities , Infection Control , Aged , Humans , Administration, Intranasal , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use , Bacterial Infections/economics , Bacterial Infections/microbiology , Bacterial Infections/mortality , Bacterial Infections/prevention & control , Baths/methods , California/epidemiology , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Cross Infection/economics , Cross Infection/microbiology , Cross Infection/mortality , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Health Facilities/economics , Health Facilities/standards , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/economics , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/standards , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control/methods , Iodophors/administration & dosage , Iodophors/therapeutic use , Nursing Homes/economics , Nursing Homes/standards , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Patient Transfer , Quality Improvement/economics , Quality Improvement/statistics & numerical data , Skin Care/methods , Universal Precautions
9.
J Perinatol ; 44(5): 724-730, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38351274

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of active surveillance and decolonization strategies on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection rates in a NICU. STUDY DESIGN: MRSA infection rates were compared before (2014-2016) and during (2017-2022) an active surveillance program. Eligible infants were decolonized with chlorohexidine gluconate (CHG) bathing and/or topical mupirocin. Successful decolonization and rates of recolonization were assessed. RESULTS: Fifty-two (0.57%) of 9 100 hospitalized infants had invasive MRSA infections from 2014 to 2022; infection rates declined non-significantly. During the 6-year surveillance program, the risk of infection was 16.9-times [CI95 8.4, 34.1] higher in colonized infants than uncolonized infants. Those colonized with mupirocin-susceptible MRSA were more likely successfully decolonized (aOR 9.7 [CI95 4.2, 22.5]). Of 57 infants successfully decolonized who remained hospitalized, 34 (60%) became recolonized. CONCLUSIONS: MRSA infection rates did not significantly decline in association with an active surveillance and decolonization program. Alternatives to mupirocin and CHG are needed to facilitate decolonization.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents , Chlorhexidine , Cross Infection , Intensive Care Units, Neonatal , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Mupirocin , Staphylococcal Infections , Humans , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus/isolation & purification , Staphylococcal Infections/prevention & control , Staphylococcal Infections/drug therapy , Infant, Newborn , Mupirocin/administration & dosage , Mupirocin/therapeutic use , Chlorhexidine/analogs & derivatives , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Female , Male , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Bacterial Agents/administration & dosage , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/microbiology , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use , Baths
10.
Am J Infect Control ; 52(6): 731-738, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38342345

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recommendations for different types of bathing to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) are still divergent. The objective of this study was to verify whether bed bathing with wipes impregnated with 2% chlorhexidine (CHG) compared to conventional bed bathing is more effective in preventing CLABSI. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature by consulting the electronic databases PubMed/Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science from the date of inception until July 1, 2023, with no language or time restrictions. RESULTS: A total of 84,462 studies were examined, of which 6 were included in the meta-analysis. Data from 20,188 critical care patients included in primary studies were analyzed. The meta-analysis found that bed bathing with wipes impregnated with 2% CHG reduced the risk of CLABSI by 48% compared to conventional bed bathing (risk ratio 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.73), and this is moderate-quality evidence. The reduction in length of stay in the intensive care unit and length of hospital stay as well as the risk of death were not significantly different between the study groups. Whether bed bathing with 2% CHG-impregnated wipes increases the occurrence of skin reactions is unclear. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides moderate-quality evidence that daily bathing with 2% CHG-impregnated wipes is safe and helps prevent CLABSI among adult intensive care unit patients.


Subject(s)
Baths , Catheter-Related Infections , Chlorhexidine , Critical Illness , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/analogs & derivatives , Humans , Catheter-Related Infections/prevention & control , Baths/methods , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Intensive Care Units , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects
11.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 165(3): 1167-1171, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38205879

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare the amounts of water and plastic used in surgical hand washing with medicated soaps and with alcohol-based products and to compare costs and consumption in a year, based on scheduled surgical activity. METHOD: This retrospective study was carried out at Udine's Gynecology Operating Block from October to November 2022. We estimated the average amount of water with a graduated cylinder and the total cost of water usage based on euros/m3 indicated by the supplier; for each antiseptic agent we collected the data relevant to wash time, amount of water and product used per scrub, number of handscrubs made with every 500 mL bottle and cost of a single bottle. We put data into two hypothetical contexts, namely WHO guidelines and manufacturers' recommendations. Data were subjected to statistical analysis. RESULTS: The daily amount of water using povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine-gluconate and alcohol-based antiseptic agents was 187.6, 140.7 and 0 L/day (P value = 0.001), respectively; A total of 69 000 L/year of water would be saved if alcohol-based products were routinely used. A single unit of an alcohol-based product allows three times as many handscrubs as any other product (P value = 0.001) with consequent reduction in plastic packaging. CONCLUSION: Despite the cost saving being negligible, choosing alcohol-based handrub over medicated soap handrub - on equal antiseptic efficacy grounds - could lead to a significant saving of water and plastic, thus making our operating theaters more environmentally friendly.


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Local , Hand Disinfection , Operating Rooms , Povidone-Iodine , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Operating Rooms/economics , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/economics , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Povidone-Iodine/economics , Povidone-Iodine/administration & dosage , Water , Chlorhexidine/economics , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/analogs & derivatives , Soaps/economics , Female , Costs and Cost Analysis , Plastics , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/economics
12.
N Engl J Med ; 390(5): 409-420, 2024 Feb 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38294973

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating surgical-site infection have had conflicting results with respect to the use of alcohol solutions containing iodine povacrylex or chlorhexidine gluconate as skin antisepsis before surgery to repair a fractured limb (i.e., an extremity fracture). METHODS: In a cluster-randomized, crossover trial at 25 hospitals in the United States and Canada, we randomly assigned hospitals to use a solution of 0.7% iodine povacrylex in 74% isopropyl alcohol (iodine group) or 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol (chlorhexidine group) as preoperative antisepsis for surgical procedures to repair extremity fractures. Every 2 months, the hospitals alternated interventions. Separate populations of patients with either open or closed fractures were enrolled and included in the analysis. The primary outcome was surgical-site infection, which included superficial incisional infection within 30 days or deep incisional or organ-space infection within 90 days. The secondary outcome was unplanned reoperation for fracture-healing complications. RESULTS: A total of 6785 patients with a closed fracture and 1700 patients with an open fracture were included in the trial. In the closed-fracture population, surgical-site infection occurred in 77 patients (2.4%) in the iodine group and in 108 patients (3.3%) in the chlorhexidine group (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 1.00; P = 0.049). In the open-fracture population, surgical-site infection occurred in 54 patients (6.5%) in the iodine group and in 60 patients (7.3%) in the chlorhexidine group (odd ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.27; P = 0.45). The frequencies of unplanned reoperation, 1-year outcomes, and serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with closed extremity fractures, skin antisepsis with iodine povacrylex in alcohol resulted in fewer surgical-site infections than antisepsis with chlorhexidine gluconate in alcohol. In patients with open fractures, the results were similar in the two groups. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; PREPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03523962.).


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Local , Chlorhexidine , Fracture Fixation , Fractures, Bone , Iodine , Surgical Wound Infection , Humans , 2-Propanol/administration & dosage , 2-Propanol/adverse effects , 2-Propanol/therapeutic use , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/adverse effects , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use , Antisepsis/methods , Canada , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/adverse effects , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Ethanol , Extremities/injuries , Extremities/microbiology , Extremities/surgery , Iodine/administration & dosage , Iodine/adverse effects , Iodine/therapeutic use , Preoperative Care/adverse effects , Preoperative Care/methods , Skin/microbiology , Surgical Wound Infection/etiology , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Fractures, Bone/surgery , Cross-Over Studies , United States
13.
Pediatr Nephrol ; 39(7): 2171-2175, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38267590

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are a leading cause of hospitalizations and mortality among patients receiving hemodialysis (HD) therapy, especially those with a central venous catheter (CVC) for dialysis access. The use of chlorhexidine impregnated catheter caps (ClearGuard) has been associated with a decrease in the rate of HD catheter-related BSIs (CA-BSIs) in adults; similar data have not been published for children. METHODS: We compared CA-BSI data from participating centers within the Standardizing Care to Improve Outcomes in Pediatric Endstage Kidney Disease (SCOPE) collaborative based on the center's use of ClearGuard caps for patients with HD catheter access. Centers were characterized as ClearGuard (CG) or non-ClearGuard (NCG) centers, with CA-BSI data pre- and post-CG implementation reviewed. All positive blood cultures in participating centers were reported to the SCOPE collaborative and adjudicated by an infectious disease physician. RESULTS: Data were available from 1786 SCOPE enrollment forms completed January 2016-January 2022. January 2020 served as the implementation date for analyzing CG versus NCG center data, with this being the time when the last CG center underwent implementation. Post January 2020, there was a greater decrease in the rate of HD CA-BSI in CG centers versus NCG centers, with a decrease from 1.18 to 0.23 and 0.41 episodes per 100 patient months for the CG and NCG centers, respectively (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of ClearGuard caps in pediatric dialysis centers was associated with a reduction of HD CA-BSI rates in pediatric HD patients.


Subject(s)
Catheter-Related Infections , Central Venous Catheters , Chlorhexidine , Kidney Failure, Chronic , Renal Dialysis , Humans , Renal Dialysis/adverse effects , Renal Dialysis/methods , Child , Catheter-Related Infections/microbiology , Catheter-Related Infections/epidemiology , Catheter-Related Infections/etiology , Male , Female , Adolescent , Central Venous Catheters/adverse effects , Central Venous Catheters/microbiology , Kidney Failure, Chronic/therapy , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Chlorhexidine/analogs & derivatives , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Child, Preschool , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Catheterization, Central Venous/instrumentation , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use
15.
JAMA ; 330(14): 1337-1347, 2023 10 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37815567

ABSTRACT

Importance: Universal nasal mupirocin plus chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) bathing in intensive care units (ICUs) prevents methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections and all-cause bloodstream infections. Antibiotic resistance to mupirocin has raised questions about whether an antiseptic could be advantageous for ICU decolonization. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of iodophor vs mupirocin for universal ICU nasal decolonization in combination with CHG bathing. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two-group noninferiority, pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial conducted in US community hospitals, all of which used mupirocin-CHG for universal decolonization in ICUs at baseline. Adult ICU patients in 137 randomized hospitals during baseline (May 1, 2015-April 30, 2017) and intervention (November 1, 2017-April 30, 2019) were included. Intervention: Universal decolonization involving switching to iodophor-CHG (intervention) or continuing mupirocin-CHG (baseline). Main Outcomes and Measures: ICU-attributable S aureus clinical cultures (primary outcome), MRSA clinical cultures, and all-cause bloodstream infections were evaluated using proportional hazard models to assess differences from baseline to intervention periods between the strategies. Results were also compared with a 2009-2011 trial of mupirocin-CHG vs no decolonization in the same hospital network. The prespecified noninferiority margin for the primary outcome was 10%. Results: Among the 801 668 admissions in 233 ICUs, the participants' mean (SD) age was 63.4 (17.2) years, 46.3% were female, and the mean (SD) ICU length of stay was 4.8 (4.7) days. Hazard ratios (HRs) for S aureus clinical isolates in the intervention vs baseline periods were 1.17 for iodophor-CHG (raw rate: 5.0 vs 4.3/1000 ICU-attributable days) and 0.99 for mupirocin-CHG (raw rate: 4.1 vs 4.0/1000 ICU-attributable days) (HR difference in differences significantly lower by 18.4% [95% CI, 10.7%-26.6%] for mupirocin-CHG, P < .001). For MRSA clinical cultures, HRs were 1.13 for iodophor-CHG (raw rate: 2.3 vs 2.1/1000 ICU-attributable days) and 0.99 for mupirocin-CHG (raw rate: 2.0 vs 2.0/1000 ICU-attributable days) (HR difference in differences significantly lower by 14.1% [95% CI, 3.7%-25.5%] for mupirocin-CHG, P = .007). For all-pathogen bloodstream infections, HRs were 1.00 (2.7 vs 2.7/1000) for iodophor-CHG and 1.01 (2.6 vs 2.6/1000) for mupirocin-CHG (nonsignificant HR difference in differences, -0.9% [95% CI, -9.0% to 8.0%]; P = .84). Compared with the 2009-2011 trial, the 30-day relative reduction in hazards in the mupirocin-CHG group relative to no decolonization (2009-2011 trial) were as follows: S aureus clinical cultures (current trial: 48.1% [95% CI, 35.6%-60.1%]; 2009-2011 trial: 58.8% [95% CI, 47.5%-70.7%]) and bloodstream infection rates (current trial: 70.4% [95% CI, 62.9%-77.8%]; 2009-2011 trial: 60.1% [95% CI, 49.1%-70.7%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Nasal iodophor antiseptic did not meet criteria to be considered noninferior to nasal mupirocin antibiotic for the outcome of S aureus clinical cultures in adult ICU patients in the context of daily CHG bathing. In addition, the results were consistent with nasal iodophor being inferior to nasal mupirocin. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03140423.


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents , Baths , Chlorhexidine , Iodophors , Mupirocin , Sepsis , Staphylococcal Infections , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Administration, Intranasal , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Infective Agents/administration & dosage , Anti-Infective Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use , Baths/methods , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/microbiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Iodophors/administration & dosage , Iodophors/therapeutic use , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus/isolation & purification , Mupirocin/administration & dosage , Mupirocin/therapeutic use , Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic , Sepsis/epidemiology , Sepsis/microbiology , Sepsis/prevention & control , Staphylococcal Infections/epidemiology , Staphylococcal Infections/microbiology , Staphylococcal Infections/prevention & control , Staphylococcus aureus/isolation & purification , United States/epidemiology
16.
N Engl J Med ; 389(19): 1766-1777, 2023 Nov 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37815935

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents are at high risk for infection, hospitalization, and colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms. METHODS: We performed a cluster-randomized trial of universal decolonization as compared with routine-care bathing in nursing homes. The trial included an 18-month baseline period and an 18-month intervention period. Decolonization entailed the use of chlorhexidine for all routine bathing and showering and administration of nasal povidone-iodine twice daily for the first 5 days after admission and then twice daily for 5 days every other week. The primary outcome was transfer to a hospital due to infection. The secondary outcome was transfer to a hospital for any reason. An intention-to-treat (as-assigned) difference-in-differences analysis was performed for each outcome with the use of generalized linear mixed models to compare the intervention period with the baseline period across trial groups. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 28 nursing homes with a total of 28,956 residents. Among the transfers to a hospital in the routine-care group, 62.2% (the mean across facilities) were due to infection during the baseline period and 62.6% were due to infection during the intervention period (risk ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.04). The corresponding values in the decolonization group were 62.9% and 52.2% (risk ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.88), for a difference in risk ratio, as compared with routine care, of 16.6% (95% CI, 11.0 to 21.8; P<0.001). Among the discharges from the nursing home in the routine-care group, transfer to a hospital for any reason accounted for 36.6% during the baseline period and for 39.2% during the intervention period (risk ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.12). The corresponding values in the decolonization group were 35.5% and 32.4% (risk ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88 to 0.96), for a difference in risk ratio, as compared with routine care, of 14.6% (95% CI, 9.7 to 19.2). The number needed to treat was 9.7 to prevent one infection-related hospitalization and 8.9 to prevent one hospitalization for any reason. CONCLUSIONS: In nursing homes, universal decolonization with chlorhexidine and nasal iodophor led to a significantly lower risk of transfer to a hospital due to infection than routine care. (Funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Protect ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03118232.).


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Local , Asymptomatic Infections , Chlorhexidine , Cross Infection , Nursing Homes , Povidone-Iodine , Humans , Administration, Cutaneous , Administration, Intranasal , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use , Baths , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/therapy , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Patient Transfer/statistics & numerical data , Povidone-Iodine/administration & dosage , Povidone-Iodine/therapeutic use , Skin Care/methods , Asymptomatic Infections/therapy
17.
J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad ; 35(2): 269-274, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37422819

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The separators are a preliminary step for band insertion, but there is a potential risk of bacteraemia during their placement, particularly in susceptible patients. The objective of the study is to determine the effect of separators on the bacterial count in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) and to assess the efficacy of chlorhexidine mouth rinse and saline irrigation in the reduction of the bacterial count. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was conducted on 51 participants who were divided into three equal g roups randomly (brushing only/control, saline irrigation, and 2% chlorhexidine mouthwash rinse). The inclusion criteria were age between 18-25 years, good oral hygiene, gingival and plaque index <1, no previous orthodontic treatment, and healthy individuals. The bacterial count was obtained from GCF samples after two hours, on the third day, and on the seventh day. Kruskal Wallis test was used to compare the bacterial count among the three groups, and post hoc analysis was done using Dunn's test. Friedman test was applied to see the difference at three-time points in each group. RESULTS: In both saline and chlorhexidine groups the mean bacterial count decreased significantly from baseline to 3rd day and 7th day after separator placement (p<0.001). For the third day, a significant difference was found in control versus saline and control versus chlorhexidine. No significant difference was found between saline and chlorhexidine on the third day. Similar results were found on the 7 thday. For controls, the bacterial count increased with time and for both saline and chlorhexidine groups the bacterial count decreased. The highest decrease in the bacterial count was found for the chlorhexidine group. CONCLUSIONS: After the placement of separators, there was an increase in the bacterial count in GCF. Notably, chlorhexidine was found to be more effective than saline irrigation in reducing the bacterial count.


Subject(s)
Chlorhexidine , Gingival Crevicular Fluid , Mouthwashes , Orthodontic Appliances , Saline Solution , Adolescent , Adult , Humans , Young Adult , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Gingival Crevicular Fluid/drug effects , Gingival Crevicular Fluid/microbiology , Mouthwashes/administration & dosage , Mouthwashes/therapeutic use , Toothbrushing , Saline Solution/administration & dosage , Saline Solution/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Healthy Volunteers , Orthodontic Appliances/microbiology
18.
J Cataract Refract Surg ; 49(4): 443, 2023 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36975015

ABSTRACT

A 24-year-old woman presented with a 7-day history of blurry vision, redness, and extreme pain in her right eye. She had no pertinent medical or ocular history and did not use spectacles or contacts. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 20/40 in the right eye and could not be improved with refraction. Slitlamp examination revealed a 1.5 × 1.5 mm central epithelial defect with surrounding white blood cell recruitment. Confocal microscopy (Figure 1JOURNAL/jcrs/04.03/02158034-202304000-00020/figure1/v/2023-03-24T200747Z/r/image-tiff) was performed, and she was treated with chlorhexidine 0.02% drops every hour in the right eye. 2 weeks later, the cornea had completely re-epithelialized; however, persistent corneal haze, decreased visual acuity, and corneal thinning and flattening was noted. Pachymetry was 484 µm in the right eye and UDVA was 20/40 (Supplemental Figure 1, available at http://links.lww.com/JRS/A836). In the following 2 weeks, UDVA improved to 20/25. 6 months after the initial presentation, UDVA was unchanged and faint central corneal haze was noted on examination (Figure 2JOURNAL/jcrs/04.03/02158034-202304000-00020/figure2/v/2023-03-24T200747Z/r/image-tiff). Of interest, her family history is significant for her younger 16-year-old brother with 3 prior episodes of a similar type of keratitis/keratopathy over the course of 2 years in both eyes with similar central paracentral corneal haze, thinning, and flattening and similar confocal findings (Figure 3JOURNAL/jcrs/04.03/02158034-202304000-00020/figure3/v/2023-03-24T200747Z/r/image-tiff). He also was unresponsive to topical antibiotics and antivirals except topical chlorhexidine. Her brother has been our patient for the last several years prior to her first visit to our clinic. What is your diagnosis? What medical diagnostic tests, if any, would you recommend? Is this an infectious or simply an inflammatory response? Is there any genetic or familial predisposition?


Subject(s)
Chlorhexidine , Corneal Opacity , Keratitis , Adult , Female , Humans , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Cornea/pathology , Corneal Opacity/diagnosis , Corneal Opacity/drug therapy , Keratitis/diagnosis , Keratitis/drug therapy , Refraction, Ocular
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...