ArticleAnnals of intensive care2025
Contact precautions prevent cross-contamination of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales in an intensive care unit: a prospective observational study.
Article in Annals of intensive care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond contact precautions: unmasking environmental and antibiotic drivers of ESBL-E in the ICU.Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe spread of multidrug-resistant microorganisms (MDROs), including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales (ESBL-E), has increased worldwide and constitutes a significant public health challenge. International guidelines vary in their recommendations for isolation in single rooms and contact precautions regarding carriers of MDR microorganisms to mitigate cross-contamination in the ICU. The aim of this study was to investigate whether contact precautions without single-room isolation prevent cross-contamination of ESBL-E in an intensive care unit (ICU).
methodsAll patients admitted to a general ICU during a period of 19 months were included. The study began before the COVID-19 pandemic and continued, albeit interrupted during the first wave, through the second and third wave. Rectal swabs, swabs from drainages and intravenous catheters were sampled for the detection of ESBL-E in all patients at the time of admission. Swabs were also taken from all patients co-treated with an ESBL-E-positive patient (i.e., the index patient) at the time of discharge. All cross-contaminated patient bacterial isolates were analyzed with whole-genome sequencing and compared to the isolate from the corresponding index patient.
resultsOf 1042 patients admitted to the ICU, 82 patients were index patients, either known ESBL-carriers or tested positive at admission. 365 ESBL-E-negative patients (n=365) at ICU admission were co-treated in the same room as an index patient during their ICU-stay. Post-ICU discharge, three patients from the latter group tested positive for ESBL-E. No bacterial ESBLisolates from the latter patients corresponded to those of the index patients when their bacterial genomes were identified and compared.
conclusionsContact precautions without single-room isolation of ESBL-E-positive patients did not result in any cross-contamination between ICU-patients in an endemic setting with a short length of stay.
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.