Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30022738›Full record

Observational studyInfection control and hospital epidemiology2018

Active screening and interfacility communication of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) in a tertiary-care hospital.

Teppei Shimasaki, John Segreti, Alexander Tomich, Julie Kim, Mary K Hayden, Michael Y Lin, CDC Prevention Epicenters Program

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Infection control and hospital epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Predicting Carbapenem-ResistantOpen forum infectious diseases · 2019
    Article
  12. 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

7 authors.

Teppei ShimasakiDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7571-6431
John SegretiDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Alexander TomichInfection Prevention and Control Department, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Julie KimDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Mary K HaydenDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Michael Y LinDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
CDC Prevention Epicenters Program

Funding

NCEZID CDC HHS U54 CK000481
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHospitals may implement admission screening cultures and may review transfer documentation to identify patients colonized with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) to implement isolation precautions; however, outcomes and logistical considerations have not been well described.

methodsAt an academic hospital in Chicago, we retrospectively studied the implementation and outcomes of CRE admission screening from 2013 to 2016 during 2 periods. During period 1, we implemented active CRE rectal culture screening for all adults patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) and for those transferred from outside facilities to general wards. During period 2, screening was restricted only to adults transferred from outside facilities. For a subset of transferred patients who were previously reported to the health department as CRE positive, we reviewed transfer paperwork for appropriate documentation of CRE.

resultsOverall, 11,757 patients qualified for screening; rectal cultures were performed for 8,569 patients (73%). Rates of CRE screen positivity differed by period, previous facility type (if transferred), and current inpatient location. A higher combined CRE positivity rate was detected in the medical and surgical ICUs among period 2 patients (3.3%) versus all other ward-period comparisons (P<.001). Among 13 transferred patients previously known to be CRE colonized, appropriate CRE transfer documentation was available for only 4 patients (31%).

conclusionsActive screening for CRE is feasible, and screening patients transferred from outside facilities to the medical or surgical ICU resulted in the highest screen positivity rate. Furthermore, CRE carriage was inconsistently documented in transfer paperwork, suggesting that admission screening or enhanced inter-facility communication are needed to improve the identification of CRE-colonized patients.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarbapenem-Resistant EnterobacteriaceaeCarrier StateChicagoCross InfectionEnterobacteriaceae InfectionsFemaleHumansInfection ControlIntensive Care UnitsMaleMass ScreeningMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID30022738
PMCPMC8366752

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.