Cargando…
896. A Safe, More Cost-Effective Protocol: Universal Decolonization vs. MRSA Screening and Contact Precautions
BACKGROUND: A trial of universal decolonization (alcohol-based nasal antiseptic plus chlorhexidine gluconate bathing) was instituted for 12 months, in a 536-bed short-term acute care hospital, as a replacement for nasal screening, contact precautions (CP) and decolonization of methicillin-resistant...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6809439/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz359.055 |
_version_ | 1783461988659101696 |
---|---|
author | Whitaker, Jacqueline Kusha, Barmak Longcoy, Joshua Rutter, Amanda H Ferrier, Sheryl Marzi, Caitlin R Montalvo Gonzalez, Leslie |
author_facet | Whitaker, Jacqueline Kusha, Barmak Longcoy, Joshua Rutter, Amanda H Ferrier, Sheryl Marzi, Caitlin R Montalvo Gonzalez, Leslie |
author_sort | Whitaker, Jacqueline |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A trial of universal decolonization (alcohol-based nasal antiseptic plus chlorhexidine gluconate bathing) was instituted for 12 months, in a 536-bed short-term acute care hospital, as a replacement for nasal screening, contact precautions (CP) and decolonization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-colonized patients. The impact on the rate of MRSA bacteremia and costs associated with nasal screening tests, isolation, and gown use was assessed. METHODS: Prior to the universal decolonization trial, patients at high-risk for MRSA colonization were screened using a nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test, and those that tested positive were decolonized with 5 days of mupirocin nasal ointment and daily CHG bathing, and were placed in CP. Starting in April 2018, a universal decolonization protocol was instituted for all hospitalized patients, with a twice-daily alcohol-based nasal antiseptic (in place of mupirocin), and daily bathing with CHG foam soap (in place of CHG cloths). Nasal screening of high-risk patients, targeted decolonization and CP for MRSA-colonized patients, was discontinued during the 12-month universal decolonization trial period. Outcome measures for the trial included MRSA bacteremia per National Healthcare Surveillance Network (NHSN) multi-drug-resistant organism (MDRO) Lab ID definition, isolation day count, utilization of gowns, and nasal screening tests with estimated costs associated. Measures for the 12-month trial period were compared with those of the prior 12-month period, i.e., April 2017–March 2018. RESULTS: Compared with prior 12-month period, during the universal decolonization trial, there was a 42% reduction in isolation days ($118/day), a 74% reduction in nasal PCR tests ($36/each), and an 11% decrease in the monthly use of gowns ($12/each). The total cost avoidance (after accounting for the cost of the alcohol-based nasal antiseptic and CHG soap) was $1,394,685. There was no statistical change in the MRSA bacteremia rate (0.067 to 0.070) per 1,000 patient-days. CONCLUSION: Replacement of nasal screening, decolonization, and CP for colonized MRSA patients with universal decolonization, using twice daily alcohol-based nasal antiseptic paired with daily CHG bathing, was found to be a safe and cost-saving protocol. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported Disclosures. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6809439 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68094392019-10-28 896. A Safe, More Cost-Effective Protocol: Universal Decolonization vs. MRSA Screening and Contact Precautions Whitaker, Jacqueline Kusha, Barmak Longcoy, Joshua Rutter, Amanda H Ferrier, Sheryl Marzi, Caitlin R Montalvo Gonzalez, Leslie Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: A trial of universal decolonization (alcohol-based nasal antiseptic plus chlorhexidine gluconate bathing) was instituted for 12 months, in a 536-bed short-term acute care hospital, as a replacement for nasal screening, contact precautions (CP) and decolonization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-colonized patients. The impact on the rate of MRSA bacteremia and costs associated with nasal screening tests, isolation, and gown use was assessed. METHODS: Prior to the universal decolonization trial, patients at high-risk for MRSA colonization were screened using a nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test, and those that tested positive were decolonized with 5 days of mupirocin nasal ointment and daily CHG bathing, and were placed in CP. Starting in April 2018, a universal decolonization protocol was instituted for all hospitalized patients, with a twice-daily alcohol-based nasal antiseptic (in place of mupirocin), and daily bathing with CHG foam soap (in place of CHG cloths). Nasal screening of high-risk patients, targeted decolonization and CP for MRSA-colonized patients, was discontinued during the 12-month universal decolonization trial period. Outcome measures for the trial included MRSA bacteremia per National Healthcare Surveillance Network (NHSN) multi-drug-resistant organism (MDRO) Lab ID definition, isolation day count, utilization of gowns, and nasal screening tests with estimated costs associated. Measures for the 12-month trial period were compared with those of the prior 12-month period, i.e., April 2017–March 2018. RESULTS: Compared with prior 12-month period, during the universal decolonization trial, there was a 42% reduction in isolation days ($118/day), a 74% reduction in nasal PCR tests ($36/each), and an 11% decrease in the monthly use of gowns ($12/each). The total cost avoidance (after accounting for the cost of the alcohol-based nasal antiseptic and CHG soap) was $1,394,685. There was no statistical change in the MRSA bacteremia rate (0.067 to 0.070) per 1,000 patient-days. CONCLUSION: Replacement of nasal screening, decolonization, and CP for colonized MRSA patients with universal decolonization, using twice daily alcohol-based nasal antiseptic paired with daily CHG bathing, was found to be a safe and cost-saving protocol. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported Disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6809439/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz359.055 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Abstracts Whitaker, Jacqueline Kusha, Barmak Longcoy, Joshua Rutter, Amanda H Ferrier, Sheryl Marzi, Caitlin R Montalvo Gonzalez, Leslie 896. A Safe, More Cost-Effective Protocol: Universal Decolonization vs. MRSA Screening and Contact Precautions |
title | 896. A Safe, More Cost-Effective Protocol: Universal Decolonization vs. MRSA Screening and Contact Precautions |
title_full | 896. A Safe, More Cost-Effective Protocol: Universal Decolonization vs. MRSA Screening and Contact Precautions |
title_fullStr | 896. A Safe, More Cost-Effective Protocol: Universal Decolonization vs. MRSA Screening and Contact Precautions |
title_full_unstemmed | 896. A Safe, More Cost-Effective Protocol: Universal Decolonization vs. MRSA Screening and Contact Precautions |
title_short | 896. A Safe, More Cost-Effective Protocol: Universal Decolonization vs. MRSA Screening and Contact Precautions |
title_sort | 896. a safe, more cost-effective protocol: universal decolonization vs. mrsa screening and contact precautions |
topic | Abstracts |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6809439/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz359.055 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT whitakerjacqueline 896asafemorecosteffectiveprotocoluniversaldecolonizationvsmrsascreeningandcontactprecautions AT kushabarmak 896asafemorecosteffectiveprotocoluniversaldecolonizationvsmrsascreeningandcontactprecautions AT longcoyjoshua 896asafemorecosteffectiveprotocoluniversaldecolonizationvsmrsascreeningandcontactprecautions AT rutteramandah 896asafemorecosteffectiveprotocoluniversaldecolonizationvsmrsascreeningandcontactprecautions AT ferriersheryl 896asafemorecosteffectiveprotocoluniversaldecolonizationvsmrsascreeningandcontactprecautions AT marzicaitlinr 896asafemorecosteffectiveprotocoluniversaldecolonizationvsmrsascreeningandcontactprecautions AT montalvogonzalezleslie 896asafemorecosteffectiveprotocoluniversaldecolonizationvsmrsascreeningandcontactprecautions |