Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28597809›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology and infection2017

Discontinuation of contact precautions with the introduction of universal daily chlorhexidine bathing.

J A McKinnell, S J Eells, E Clark, D D Rand, G T Kiet, R Macias-Gil, J M Mendez, S S Huang, E N Milefchik, L G Miller

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiology and infection, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

J A McKinnellTorrance Memorial Medical Center,Torrance,California,USA.
S J EellsDivision of Infectious Disease,Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute,Torrance,California,USA.
E ClarkTorrance Memorial Medical Center,Torrance,California,USA.
D D RandTorrance Memorial Medical Center,Torrance,California,USA.
G T KietTorrance Memorial Medical Center,Torrance,California,USA.
R Macias-GilDivision of Infectious Disease,Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute,Torrance,California,USA.
J M MendezDivision of Infectious Disease,Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute,Torrance,California,USA.
S S HuangDivision of Infectious Diseases and Health Policy Research Institute,University of California,Irvine School of Medicine,Irvine,California,USA.
E N MilefchikTorrance Memorial Medical Center,Torrance,California,USA.
L G MillerDivision of Infectious Disease,Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute,Torrance,California,USA.
Torrance Memorial Medical Center · USThe Lundquist Institute · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USUniversity of California, Irvine · US

Funding

UCLA Clinical and Translational Science InstituteKL2TR000122 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI DUBINETT, STEVEN M. · 2012 to 2015
$4.5M
Comparative Effectiveness of MRSA Decolonization StrategiesRC4AI092327 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI HUANG, SUSAN S. · 2010 to 2010
$1.2M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000122NIAID NIH HHS RC4 AI092327
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contact precautions are a traditional strategy to prevent transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Chlorhexidine bathing is increasingly used to decrease MRSA burden and transmission in intensive care units (ICUs). We sought to evaluate a hospital policy change from routine contact precautions for MRSA compared with universal chlorhexidine bathing, without contact precautions. We measured new MRSA acquisition in ICU patients and surveyed for MRSA environmental contamination in common areas and non-MRSA patient rooms before and after the policy change. During the baseline and chlorhexidine bathing periods, the number of patients (453 vs. 417), ICU days (1999 vs. 1703) and MRSA days/1000 ICU days (109 vs. 102) were similar. MRSA acquisition (2/453 vs. 2/457, P = 0·93) and environmental MRSA contamination (9/474 vs. 7/500, P = 0·53) were not significantly different between time periods. There were 58% fewer contact precaution days in the ICU during the chlorhexidine period (241/1993 vs. 102/1730, P < 0·01). We found no evidence that discontinuation of contact precautions for patients with MRSA in conjunction with adoption of daily chlorhexidine bathing in ICUs is associated with increased MRSA acquisition among ICU patients or increased MRSA contamination of ICU fomites. Although underpowered, our findings suggest this strategy, which has the potential to reduce costs and improve patient safety, should be assessed in similar but larger studies.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsAnti-Infective Agents, LocalCaliforniaChlorhexidineInfection ControlMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusStaphylococcal InfectionsAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidineChlorhexidinecontact precautionshospital epidemiologyhygeine and hospital infectionsinfection preventionMRSAVRE

Identifiers

PMID28597809
PMCPMC5943043
OpenAlexW2622485052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.