Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23995982›Full record

Trial reportIntensive care medicine2013

Impact of contact isolation for multidrug-resistant organisms on the occurrence of medical errors and adverse events.

J R Zahar, M Garrouste-Orgeas, A Vesin, C Schwebel, A Bonadona, F Philippart, C Ara-Somohano, B Misset, J F Timsit

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Intensive care medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04699682 (Carriage Clearance of Emerging Highly Resistant Bacteria in Chronic Dialysis Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04699682 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Carriage Clearance of Emerging Highly Resistant Bacteria in Chronic Dialysis Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorFondation Hôpital Saint-JosephRan2021 to 2025Enrolled600ConditionsChronic Kidney Diseases, DialysisArmsControl, BHR Case
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Doff Thy Gown-Shedding Contact Precautions for COVID-19.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

J R ZaharUniversity Grenoble 1-U823-Team 11: Outcome of Cancer and Critical Illnesses, Albert Bonniot Institute, 38706 La Tronche, CEDEX, France, jean-ralph.zahar@nck.aphp.fr.
M Garrouste-Orgeas
A Vesin
C Schwebel
A Bonadona
F Philippart
C Ara-Somohano
B Misset
J F Timsit

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledContact isolation of infected or colonised hospitalised patients is instrumental to interrupting multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) cross-transmission. Many studies suggest an increased rate of adverse events associated with isolation. We aimed to compare isolated to non-isolated patients in intensive care units (ICUs) for the occurrence of adverse events and medical errors.

methodsWe used the large database of the Iatroref III study that included consecutive patients from three ICUs to compare the occurrence of pre-defined medical errors and adverse events among isolated vs. non-isolated patients. A subdistribution hazard regression model with careful adjustment on confounding factors was used to assess the effect of patient isolation on the occurrence of medical errors and adverse events.

resultsTwo centres of the Iatroref III study were eligible, an 18-bed and a 10-bed ICU (nurse-to-bed ratio 2.8 and 2.5, respectively), with a total of 1,221 patients. After exclusion of the neutropenic and graft transplant patients, a total of 170 isolated patients were compared to 980 non-isolated patients. Errors in insulin administration and anticoagulant prescription were more frequent in isolated patients. Adverse events such as hypo- or hyperglycaemia, thromboembolic events, haemorrhage, and MDRO ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) were also more frequent with isolation. After careful adjustment of confounders, errors in anticoagulant prescription [subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) = 1.7, p = 0.04], hypoglycaemia (sHR = 1.5, p = 0.01), hyperglycaemia (sHR = 1.5, p = 0.004), and MDRO VAP (sHR = 2.1, p = 0.001) remain more frequent in isolated patients.

conclusionContact isolation of ICU patients is associated with an increased rate of some medical errors and adverse events, including non-infectious ones.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialAgedCross InfectionFemaleHumansIncidenceIntensive Care UnitsMaleMedical ErrorsMiddle AgedPatient Isolation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.