title: Do active surveillance and contact precautions reduce MRSA acquisition? A prospective interrupted time series.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Consensus for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) control has still not been reached. We hypothesised that use of rapid MRSA detection followed by contact precautions and single room isolation would reduce MRSA acquisition.
  
  
  METHODS
  This study was a pre-planned prospective interrupted time series comparing rapid PCR detection and use of long sleeved gowns and gloves (contact precautions) plus single room isolation or cohorting of MRSA colonised patients with a control group. The study took place in a medical-surgical intensive care unit of a tertiary adult hospital between May 21(st) 2007 and September 21(st) 2009. The primary outcome was the rate of MRSA acquisition. A segmented regression analysis was performed to determine the trend in MRSA acquisition rates before and after the intervention.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The rate of MRSA acquisition was 18.5 per 1000 at risk patient days in the control phase and 7.9 per 1000 at-risk patient days in the intervention phase, with an adjusted hazard ratio 0.39 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.62). Segmented regression analysis showed a decline in MRSA acquisition of 7% per month in the intervention phase, (95%CI 1.9% to 12.8% reduction) which was a significant change in slope compared with the control phase. Secondary analysis found prior exposure to anaerobically active antibiotics and colonization pressure were associated with increased acquisition risk.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Contact precautions with single room isolation or cohorting were associated with a 60% reduction in MRSA acquisition. While this study was a quasi-experimental design, many measures were taken to strengthen the study, such as accounting for differences in colonisation pressure, hand hygiene compliance and individual risk factors across the groups, and confining the study to one centre to reduce variation in transmission. Use of two research nurses may limit its generalisability to units in which this level of support is available.
authors.affiliation: Victorian Infectious Diseases Service, Royal Melbourne Hospital and Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. caroline.marshall@mh.org.au
authors.forename: Caroline
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Marshall
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Richards
authors.forename: Emma
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: McBryde
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007049:Iatrogenic Disease; D007362:Intensive Care Units; D008297:Male; D055624:Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus / Q000235:genetics / Q000302:isolation & purification; D008875:Middle Aged; D016133:Polymerase Chain Reaction / Q000379:methods; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013203:Staphylococcal Infections / Q000235:genetics / Q000635:transmission
references.citation: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2008 Nov;29(11):1012-8
references.pmid: 18937571
references.citation: Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2011 Mar;25(1):155-79
references.pmid: 21315999
references.citation: Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005 May;49(5):1688-94
references.pmid: 15855482
references.citation: Lancet Infect Dis. 2006 Oct;6(10):641-52
references.pmid: 17008173
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2011 Apr 14;364(15):1407-18
references.pmid: 21488763
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2011 Apr 14;364(15):1419-30
references.pmid: 21488764
references.citation: Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(39):1-194
references.pmid: 14636487
references.citation: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2003 May;24(5):322-6
references.pmid: 12785404
references.citation: JAMA. 2008 Mar 12;299(10):1149-57
references.pmid: 18334690
references.citation: J Infect Dis. 2002 Feb 15;185(4):481-8
references.pmid: 11865400
references.citation: J Clin Microbiol. 2006 Aug;44(8):2904-8
references.pmid: 16891510
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 28;355(26):2725-32
references.pmid: 17192537
references.citation: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009 Feb;30(2):125-9
references.pmid: 19140745
references.citation: BMC Infect Dis. 2010 Feb 16;10:29
references.pmid: 20158891
references.citation: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011 May;32(5):481-9
references.pmid: 21515979
references.citation: Med J Aust. 2005 Nov 21;183(10):509-14
references.pmid: 16296963
references.citation: Clin Infect Dis. 2006 Oct 15;43(8):971-8
references.pmid: 16983607
references.citation: Lancet. 2005 Jan 22-28;365(9456):295-304
references.pmid: 15664224
references.citation: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2007 Jul;28(7):837-44
references.pmid: 17564987
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 2007 Apr 7;245(3):470-81
references.pmid: 17188714
references.citation: Lancet Infect Dis. 2007 Apr;7(4):282-8
references.pmid: 17376385
references.citation: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2003 May;24(5):362-86
references.pmid: 12785411
references.citation: Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Mar 15;48(6):766-71
references.pmid: 19196174
references.citation: Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Jun;54(11):1618-20
references.pmid: 22491330
references.citation: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2008 Nov;29(11):996-1011
references.pmid: 18947320
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2000 Dec 28;343(26):1925-32
references.pmid: 11136263
references.citation: J Hosp Infect. 2000 Sep;46(1):43-9
references.pmid: 11023722
references.citation: Am J Epidemiol. 1996 Mar 1;143(5):496-504
references.pmid: 8610665
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 2008 Mar 18;148(6):409-18
references.pmid: 18347349