Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2011 Apr 14;364(15):1407-18.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1000373.

Intervention to reduce transmission of resistant bacteria in intensive care

Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Intervention to reduce transmission of resistant bacteria in intensive care

W Charles Huskins et al. N Engl J Med. .

Abstract

Background: Intensive care units (ICUs) are high-risk settings for the transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE).

Methods: In a cluster-randomized trial, we evaluated the effect of surveillance for MRSA and VRE colonization and of the expanded use of barrier precautions (intervention) as compared with existing practice (control) on the incidence of MRSA or VRE colonization or infection in adult ICUs. Surveillance cultures were obtained from patients in all participating ICUs; the results were reported only to ICUs assigned to the intervention. In intervention ICUs, patients who were colonized or infected with MRSA or VRE were assigned to care with contact precautions; all the other patients were assigned to care with universal gloving until their discharge or until surveillance cultures obtained at admission were reported to be negative.

Results: During a 6-month intervention period, there were 5434 admissions to 10 intervention ICUs, and 3705 admissions to 8 control ICUs. Patients who were colonized or infected with MRSA or VRE were assigned to barrier precautions more frequently in intervention ICUs than in control ICUs (a median of 92% of ICU days with either contact precautions or universal gloving [51% with contact precautions and 43% with universal gloving] in intervention ICUs vs. a median of 38% of ICU days with contact precautions in control ICUs, P<0.001). In intervention ICUs, health care providers used clean gloves, gowns, and hand hygiene less frequently than required for contacts with patients assigned to barrier precautions; when contact precautions were specified, gloves were used for a median of 82% of contacts, gowns for 77% of contacts, and hand hygiene after 69% of contacts, and when universal gloving was specified, gloves were used for a median of 72% of contacts and hand hygiene after 62% of contacts. The mean (±SE) ICU-level incidence of events of colonization or infection with MRSA or VRE per 1000 patient-days at risk, adjusted for baseline incidence, did not differ significantly between the intervention and control ICUs (40.4±3.3 and 35.6±3.7 in the two groups, respectively; P=0.35).

Conclusions: The intervention was not effective in reducing the transmission of MRSA or VRE, although the use of barrier precautions by providers was less than what was required. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; STAR*ICU ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00100386.).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Randomization of Intensive Care Units (ICUs) and Follow-up of Patients
The ICU-level percentage of patients with multiple admissions was 7.6% among all ICU stays and 6.1% among ICU stays of 3 days or more; therefore, each admission was treated as an independent event. A total of 20 ICUs were eligible for the study, of which 19 participated. In addition, 1 medical ICU assigned to the control group was withdrawn from the study owing to a failure to collect surveillance cultures according to the study protocol. Data from this ICU were excluded from all analyses. During the intervention period, there were 24,484 total ICU patient-days in the intervention ICUs and 16,579 total ICU patient-days in the control ICUs. A total of 18,136 ICU patient-days at risk (74% of total ICU patient-days) in the intervention group and 11,827 ICU patient-days at risk (71% of total ICU patient-days) in the control group were included in the primary analysis. ICU stays could have multiple reasons for not being eligible for the primary analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Use of Hand Hygiene, Gloves, and Gowns by Health Care Providers in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) during Contacts with Patients or Their Immediate Environment
The box plot diagram shows the distribution of ICU-level percentages for the use of component measures for all contacts (white boxes) and according to type of contact (colored boxes). The box represents the interquartile range and the horizontal line inside the box the median; vertical lines represent the maximum and minimum percentages. Contaminated refers to actual or potential contact with secretions, excretions, mucous membranes, non-intact skin, or items or surfaces that are likely to be contaminated with body secretions or excretions. Data regarding sterile contacts in both ICU groups and the use of standard precautions in intervention ICUs are not presented because of the small number of observed contacts. The distributions of types of contacts across all precaution categories were as follows: in intervention ICUs, contaminated, 15%; blood or body fluid, 8%; invasive device, 6%; any other patient, 34%; and environment only, 37%; in control ICUs, contaminated, 15%; blood or body fluid, 8%; invasive device, 8%; any other patient, 32%; and environment only, 37%. Data for individual ICUs are provided in Tables 6 through 11 in the Supplementary Appendix.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Monthly Incidence of Colonization or Infection with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus (VRE) among Patients in Intensive Care Units (ICUs)
The box plot diagram shows the distribution of ICU-level incidences of colonization or infection with MRSA or VRE. The box represents the interquartile range, and the horizontal line inside the box the median; vertical lines represent the maximum and minimum percentages. The median number of incidences of colonization or infection according to period were as follows: in intervention ICUs during the baseline period, 30.1 (range, 14.5 to 76.1) for MRSA or VRE, 11.9 (range, 6.8 to 19.6) for MRSA, and 25.7 (range, 9.7 to 78.2) for VRE, and in intervention ICUs during the intervention period, 40.3 (range, 20.8 to 54.9) for MRSA or VRE, 14.6 (range, 6.8 to 21.8) for MRSA, and 36.8 (range, 6.6 to 87.0) for VRE; in control ICUs during the baseline period, 32.5 (range, 12.3 to 58.4) for MRSA or VRE, 13.2 (range, 3.8 to 39.4) for MRSA, and 27.1 (range 9.9 to 53.4) for VRE, and in control ICUs during the intervention period, 32.6 (range, 15.8 to 60.7) for MRSA or VRE, 11.1 (range, 6.6 to 48.9) for MRSA, and 29.9 (range, 11.1 to 71.1) for VRE. Individual ICU data are provided in the figure and Table 2 in the Supplementary Appendix.

Comment in

References

    1. Hidron AI, Edwards JR, Patel J, et al. NHSN annual update: antimicrobial-resistant pathogens associated with healthcare-associated infections: annual summary of data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006-2007. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2008;29:996–1011. Erratum, Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009;30:107. - PubMed
    1. Duckro AN, Blom DW, Lyle EA, Weinstein RA, Hayden MK. Transfer of vancomycin-resistant enterococci via health care worker hands. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:302–7. - PubMed
    1. Hardy KJ, Oppenheim BA, Gossain S, Gao F, Hawkey PM. A study of the relationship between environmental contamination with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and patients’ acquisition of MRSA. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006;27:127–32. - PubMed
    1. Albrich WC, Harbarth S. Health-care workers: source, vector, or victim of MRSA? Lancet Infect Dis. 2008;8:289–301. - PubMed
    1. Muto CA, Jernigan JA, Ostrowsky BE, et al. SHEA guideline for preventing nosocomial transmission of multidrug-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus and enterococcus. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2003;24:362–86. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Associated data