Trial reportPloS one2013
Do active surveillance and contact precautions reduce MRSA acquisition? A prospective interrupted time series.
Trial report in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of the effectiveness of cohorting to reduce transmission of healthcare-associatedInfection control and hospital epidemiology · 2020Pooled it
- Gloves, gowns and masks for reducing the transmission of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in the hospital setting.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Modeling relaxed policies for discontinuation of methicillin-resistantInfection control and hospital epidemiology · 2024Article
- Using spectral characterization to identify healthcare-associated infection (HAI) patients for clinical contact precaution.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Re-visiting contact precautions - 25 years on.Journal of infection prevention · 2021Article
- Aseptic Stethoscope Barriers PreventMayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2021Article
- Aseptic Barriers Allow a Clean Contact for Contaminated Stethoscope Diaphragms.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2020Article
- Noninfectious Hospital Adverse Events Decline After Elimination of Contact Precautions for MRSA and VRE.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2018Observational
- Elimination of Routine Contact Precautions for Endemic Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus: A Retrospective Quasi-Experimental Study.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2016Article
- Active Surveillance versus Spontaneous Reporting for First-Line Antiretroviral Medicines in Namibia: A Cost-Utility Analysis.Drug safety · 2016Article
- Will there ever be a universal Staphylococcus aureus vaccine?Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConsensus for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) control has still not been reached. We hypothesised that use of rapid MRSA detection followed by contact precautions and single room isolation would reduce MRSA acquisition.
methodsThis study was a pre-planned prospective interrupted time series comparing rapid PCR detection and use of long sleeved gowns and gloves (contact precautions) plus single room isolation or cohorting of MRSA colonised patients with a control group. The study took place in a medical-surgical intensive care unit of a tertiary adult hospital between May 21(st) 2007 and September 21(st) 2009. The primary outcome was the rate of MRSA acquisition. A segmented regression analysis was performed to determine the trend in MRSA acquisition rates before and after the intervention.
findingsThe rate of MRSA acquisition was 18.5 per 1000 at risk patient days in the control phase and 7.9 per 1000 at-risk patient days in the intervention phase, with an adjusted hazard ratio 0.39 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.62). Segmented regression analysis showed a decline in MRSA acquisition of 7% per month in the intervention phase, (95%CI 1.9% to 12.8% reduction) which was a significant change in slope compared with the control phase. Secondary analysis found prior exposure to anaerobically active antibiotics and colonization pressure were associated with increased acquisition risk.
conclusionContact precautions with single room isolation or cohorting were associated with a 60% reduction in MRSA acquisition. While this study was a quasi-experimental design, many measures were taken to strengthen the study, such as accounting for differences in colonisation pressure, hand hygiene compliance and individual risk factors across the groups, and confining the study to one centre to reduce variation in transmission. Use of two research nurses may limit its generalisability to units in which this level of support is available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.