Health and Medical News and Resources

General interest items edited by Janice Flahiff

[Scientific article] The dissemination of staph infections in hospitals

From the ScienceDaily summary

Date:March 19, 2015
Source:PLOS
Summary:Wireless sensors recording human interactions explain the transmission of germs, such as MRSA, in hospitals, according to new research.

The results indicate that the study of individuals contact may help identify increased risk of transmission situations and ultimately reduce the burden of nosocomial S. aureus transmission.

The researchers say: “Contact networks have been increasingly used in modeling the spread of infectious diseases. Yet, the contacts collected were often incomplete or used proxies that were thought to capture situation at risk. In this unique experiment, the joint analysis of contact and carriage validates the use of close-proximity interactions recorded by electronic devices, and opens a new field for prevention measures in hospitals.”

March 24, 2015 Posted by | Public Health | , , , , , | Leave a comment

[Reblog] Germs. The pseudoscience of quality improvement

hmmm…position justifications? power plays?

C-Dif

From the 7 December 2014 post by Karen Siebel, MD at the HealthCare Blog

No one wants a hospital-acquired infection—a wound infection, a central line infection, or any other kind.  But today, the level of concern in American hospitals about infection rates has reached a new peak—better termed paranoia than legitimate concern.

The fear of infection is leading to the arbitrary institution of brand new rules. These aren’t based on scientific research involving controlled studies.  As far as I can tell, these new rules are made up by people who are under pressure to create the appearance that action is being taken.

Here’s an example.  An edict just came down in one big-city hospital that all scrub tops must be tucked into scrub pants. The “Association of periOperative Registered Nurses” (AORN) apparently thinks that this is more hygienic because stray skin cells may be less likely to escape, though there is no data proving that surgical infection rates will decrease as a result.  Surgeons, anesthesiologists, and OR nurses are confused, amused, and annoyed in varying degrees.  Some are paying attention to the new rule, and many others are ignoring it.  One OR supervisor stopped an experienced nurse and told to tuck in her scrub top while she was running to get supplies for an emergency aortic repair, raising (in my mind at least) a question of misplaced priorities.

The Joint Commission, of course, loves nothing more than to make up new rules, based sometimes on real data and other times on data about as substantial as fairy dust.

A year or two ago, another new rule surfaced, mandating that physicians’ personal items such as briefcases must be placed in containers or plastic trash bags if they are brought into the operating room.  Apparently someone thinks trash bags are cleaner.

Now one anesthesiology department chairman has taken this concept a step further, decreeing that no personal items at all are to be brought into the operating room–except for cell phones and iPods.  That’s right, iPods, not iPads.  This policy (of course) probably won’t be applied uniformly to high-ranking surgeons or to people like the pacemaker technicians who routinely bring entire suitcases of equipment into the OR with them.

What’s particularly irrational about this rule is that cell phones likely are more contaminated with bacteria than briefcases or purses, even if they’re wiped off frequently.

 

Instead of creating more and more rules governing the care of all patients, perhaps we need to focus on the subsets of patients and case types that we already know are at higher risk, and examine what additional steps we need to take on their behalf.

 

 

 

December 9, 2014 Posted by | health care | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Work With Germ-Killing Copper Could Save Thousands of Lives

From the 7 September 2012 Science Daily article

The technology is based on copper alloys that kill bacteria, fungi and viruses. The metals can be fashioned into everything from IV poles to sinks to bed rails — just about anything that is frequently touched in hospitals.

While these surfaces might look benign, they’re covered with organisms that contribute to hospital-acquired infections, the fourth leading cause of death in the United States, killing more people than AIDS and breast cancer combined. That’s 2 million infections annually, and 100,000 deaths — one infection for every 20 people admitted to hospitals.

While disease-causing organisms can lurk on stainless steel surfaces for two weeks, according to a recent UA research study, 99.9 percent die within two hours on surfaces that contain at least 60 percent copper, Estelle says…

..

New policies from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that go into effect next year should help spur this changeover. Treatment for hospital-acquired infections costs between $35 billion and $45 billion each year in the U.S., and Medicare and Medicaid will no long reimburse hospitals for that treatment if the infections are judged to have been preventable and a hospital mistake.

But even without the new rules, the changeover makes economic sense, Estelle explained. Under today’s reimbursement system, individual hospitals spend $5 million on average each year to treat infections. “Even on the low end, it’s $30,000 per infection,” he said. Clinical trials at three hospitals funded by the U.S. Department of Defense have recently proved that copper surfaces can reduce infections in the intensive care unit by more than 50 percent.

Using published estimates, about 500,000 Americans will contract an infection this year in the ICU. This will cost our hospitals an additional $3.5 billion in treatment, and about 40,000 people will not survive the ordeal. The clinical trial results suggest that installing copper surfaces could cut these figures in half.

“By implementing these surfaces, hospitals can see real, continuous savings year after year,” Estelle said. “This is a passive way to prevent infection that doesn’t depend on human behavior, such as hand-washing or hydrogen peroxide vapor machines. There is no need for maintenance beyond the normal surface cleaning procedures that are already in place.”

September 9, 2012 Posted by | Consumer Health, health care | , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: