The impact of enhanced cleaning within the intensive care unit on contamination of the near-patient environment with hospital pathogens: A randomized crossover study in critical care units in two hospitals

Departments of Microbiology and Infection Control, University College London Hospitals, London, United Kingdom.
Critical care medicine (Impact Factor: 6.15). 04/2011; 39(4):651-8. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318206bc66
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine the effect of enhanced cleaning of the near-patient environment on the isolation of hospital pathogens from the bed area and staff hands.
Prospective randomized crossover study over the course of 1 yr.
Intensive care units at two teaching hospitals.
There were 1252 patients staying during enhanced cleaning and 1331 staying during standard cleaning.
In each of six 2-month periods, one unit was randomly selected for additional twice-daily enhanced cleaning of hand contact surfaces.
Agar contact samples were taken at five sites around randomly selected bed areas, from staff hands, and from communal sites three times daily for 12 bed days per week. Patients admitted in the year commencing April 2007 were analyzed for hospital-acquired colonization and infection. Over the course of 1152 bed days, 20,736 samples were collected. Detection of environmental methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus per bed-area day was reduced during enhanced cleaning phases from 82 of 561 (14.6%) to 51 of 559 (9.1%) (adjusted odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.86; p = .006). Other targeted pathogens (Acinetobacter baumannii, extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacteria, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, and Clostridium difficile) were rarely detected. Subgroup analyses showed reduced methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus contamination on doctors' hands during enhanced cleaning (3 of 425; 0.7% vs. 11 of 423; 2.6%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.95; p = .025) and a trend to reduction on nurses' hands (16 of 1647; 1.0% vs. 28 of 1694; 1.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-1.08; p = .077). All 1252 critical care patients staying during enhanced and 1,331 during standard cleaning were included, but no significant effect on patient methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus acquisition was observed (adjusted odds ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-1.65; p = .93).
Enhanced cleaning reduced environmental contamination and hand carriage, but no significant effect was observed on patient acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.
ISRCTN. Identifier: 06298448.

Download full-text


Available from: Ginny Moore, Aug 12, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We describe the epidemiology and characteristics of the pathogen and patients (n=7) associated with an outbreak of a carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) strain in a German university hospital from July 2010 to January 2011. Species identification and detection of carbapenem resistance were carried out using standard microbiological procedures. Carbapenemases were detected by phenotypic methods and specific polymerase chain reactions (PCRs). DNA fingerprinting profiles were performed with repetitive sequence-based PCR. Medical records of colonised or infected patients were retrospectively reviewed. Antibiotic resistance profiles, PCR-specific amplification products and genotyping demonstrated that the outbreak occurred because of the spread of a single CRKP clone harbouring both KPC-2 and VIM-1. Five of the seven patients had invasive infections with the CRKP strain; the deaths of four of them were directly related to the infection. Early implementation of infection control interventions brought about efficient containment of further cross-transmission. Rapid dissemination of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae is a serious concern in patient care and is a problem that has emerged in western Europe.
    Eurosurveillance: bulletin europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin 01/2011; 16(33). · 4.66 Impact Factor
  • Critical care medicine 04/2011; 39(4):881-2. DOI:10.1097/CCM.0b013e31820a4dfa · 6.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: More evidence is emerging on the importance of the clinical environment in encouraging hospital infection. This review considers the role of cleaning as an effective means to control infection. It describes the location of pathogen reservoirs and methods for evaluating hospitals' cleanliness. Novel biocides, antimicrobial coatings and equipment are available, many of which have not been assessed against patient outcome. Cleaning practices should be tailored to clinical risk, given the wide-ranging surfaces, equipment and building design. There is confusion between nursing and domestic personnel over the allocation of cleaning responsibilities and neither may receive sufficient training and/or time to complete their duties. Since less labourious practices for dirt removal are always attractive, there is a danger that traditional cleaning methods are forgotten or ignored. Few studies have examined detergent-based regimens or modelled these against infection risk for different patient categories. Fear of infection encourages the use of powerful disinfectants for the elimination of real or imagined pathogens in hospitals. Not only do these agents offer false assurance against contamination, their disinfection potential cannot be achieved without the prior removal of organic soil. Detergent-based cleaning is cheaper than using disinfectants and much less toxic. Hospital cleaning in the 21st century deserves further investigation for routine and outbreak practices.
    European Journal of Clinical Microbiology 04/2011; 30(12):1473-81. DOI:10.1007/s10096-011-1250-x · 2.67 Impact Factor
Show more