Showing posts with label Mckenna. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mckenna. Show all posts

Friday, December 28, 2012

Study: Weighing The Risks Of MRSA Colonization

colorized scanning electron micrograph (SEM) of MRSA

MRSA - Photo Credit CDC


# 6807

 

The CDC tells us, in their Definition of MRSA page, that:

 

While 25% to 30% of people are colonized* in the nose with staph, less than 2% are colonized with MRSA (Gorwitz RJ et al. Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2008:197:1226-34.).

*Colonized:
When a person carries the organism/bacteria but shows no clinical signs or symptoms of infection. For Staph aureus the most common body site colonized is the nose.

 

 

Although 2% doesn’t sound like a lot, there are signs that number may be increasing. Once considered primarily a hospital acquired infection, CA-MRSA (community acquired) is growing in incidence.

 

As an example, in Firefighters & Paramedics At Greater Risk Of MRSA and Firefighters & MRSA Revisited we looked at research showing a 10x’s greater incidence of MRSA colonization (20%) among a sampling of firefighters tested in Washington State.

 

Since one person’s colonization can become another person’s infection, topics of debate have included:

 

  1. What risks are there to the individual from long-term colonization?
  2. What risks are there to others In the Community or a household?
  3. What risks are there to others in a hospital or long-term care environment?
  4. What (if any) steps should be taken to decolonize carriers, and in what setting (hospital admission? Outpatient?) is decolonization desirable and effective?

 

There are, it seems, few easy answers. 

 

Mary McKenna, editor of the terrific Superbug Blog, took a look at the problems inherent with the decolonization of MRSA carriers in 2009 with:

 

Decolonization: disappointing news 


The upshot was that while studies have shown that decolonization procedures on hospitalized patients about to undergo surgery can reduce infections, the value to other patients is far less clear.

 

And as Maryn points out, overuse of mupirocin – the primary antibiotic used to decolonize patients –can lead to increased resistance over time.

 


And Mary also tells of a paper published in Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, that evaluated the success of decolonization protocols in 3 major Illinois hospitals, that less than reassuring results: a temporary reduction in patients’ being colonized with MRSA, but no success in preventing infection.

 

In 2011, the Infectious Diseases Society of America published their clinical practice guidelines for treating MRSA in adults and children, where they endorse `decolonization’, but only under select scenarios (note SSTI = Skin & Soft Tissue Infection):

 

  • 14. Decolonization may be considered in selected cases if:

    • i. A patient develops a recurrent SSTI despite optimizing wound care and hygiene measures (C-III).

    • ii. Ongoing transmission is occurring among household members or other close contacts despite optimizing wound care and hygiene measures (C-III).

     

    • ii. Contacts should be evaluated for evidence of S. aureus infection:
    • a. Symptomatic contacts should be evaluated and treated (A-III); nasal and topical body decolonization strategies may be considered following treatment of active infection (C-III).
    • b. Nasal and topical body decolonization of asymptomatic household contacts may be considered (C-III)
  •  

    But what, if anything, to do about asymptomatic carriers who are colonized, but not infected with MRSA remains up in the air.

     

    Hospital strategies to contain and control MRSA range from passive surveillance to aggressive `search & destroy’ policies – with variations in between.

     

    Passive surveillance – which is the most commonly used protocol in the United States – involves  testing only those who have clinical signs or symptoms of
    MRSA.

    Since patients may be colonized without exhibiting outward signs, this will fail to detect a great many carriers of the bacteria.

    Active Surveillance – requires the testing of high risk admissions (ie.  Hx of MRSA, Antibiotic Use, Admission to Hospital in past year, Resident of Long-term care facility, etc.) for the bacteria.

    Patients testing positive may be isolated and decolonized or treated, with strict infection control precautions enforced.

    Universal Surveillance – takes the above steps to a higher level, where all admissions and personnel are routinely swabbed and tested for MRSA.

    “Search & Destroy” – which is the most intensive protocol, has been used successfully in countries like Finland, Denmark and the Netherlands.

    It combines Active or Universal Surveillance with testing of patients in high-risk wards at intervals and prior to discharge.

     

    The reluctance to adopt the more aggressive of these measures have been the costs, the inconvenience to patients and their visitors, and quite frankly, objections by some hospital staff over being repeatedly tested.


    A recent study appearing in Critical Care Medicine, looked at the effects of a strict S&D policy instituted at a rural trauma center, and found an immediate reduction specific types of HAIs (Hospital Acquired Infections) after implementation.

     

    Search & Destroy (S&D): Eradication of Mrsa Colonization Is Associated With Decreased Mrsa Infections in Trauma Patients

    Borst, Gregory; Waibel, Brett; Toschlog, Eric; Coogan, Michael; Skarupa, David; Rotondo, Michael; Ramsey, Keith

    Conclusions: Search and destroy is associated with significant decreases in the incidence of MRSA VAP and CLABSI in trauma patients. Decreases in MRSA CAUTI and wound infections were also seen after the implementation of this program. Pre-emptive strategies to identify and eradicate MRSA are worthwhile endeavors in terms of preventing nosocomial infection.

     

    Despite its critics, S&D policies have often shown reductions in HAIs. 

     

    Which brings us to another study, published last week in the journal Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, that finds (among a relatively small cohort of patients) that colonization with MRSA posed a substantial risk of MRSA infection, increased mortality, or readmission to the hospital, compared to patients without MRSA colonization.

     

     

    Long-Term Risk for Readmission, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Infection, and Death among MRSA-Colonized Veterans.

    Quezada Joaquin NM, Diekema DJ, Perencevich EN, Bailey G, Winokur PL, Schweizer ML.

    Source

    Division of Infectious Diseases.

    Abstract

    Background: While numerous studies assessed outcomes of MRSA colonization over the short term, little is known about longer-term outcomes after discharge. An assessment of long-term outcomes could inform the utility of various MRSA prevention approaches.

    Methods: A matched cohort study was performed among Veterans Affairs (VA) patients screened for MRSA colonization between the years 2007 and 2009 and followed to evaluate outcomes until 2010. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association between MRSA colonization and long-term outcomes such as infection-related readmission, and crude mortality.

    Results: 404 veterans were included, 206 of whom were MRSA carriers and 198 who were non-carriers. There were no culture-proven MRSA infections on readmission among the non-carriers, but 13% of MRSA-carriers were readmitted with culture proven MRSA infections on readmission (P<0.01).

    MRSA carriers were significantly more likely to be readmitted, be readmitted more than once due to proven or probable MRSA infections, and be readmitted within 90 days of discharge compared to non-carriers (p<0.05). Infection-related readmission (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] =4.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.16, 7.67) and mortality (AHR=2.71; 95% CI: 1.87, 3.91) were significantly higher among MRSA carriers compared to non-carriers, after statistically adjusting for potential confounders.

    Conclusions: Among a cohort of VA patients, MRSA carriers are at high risk of infection-related readmission, MRSA infection and mortality compared to non-carriers. Non- carriers are at very low risk of subsequent MRSA infection. Future studies should address whether interventions such as nasal or skin decolonization could result in improved outcomes for MRSA carriers.

    Although based on a small cohort, this study suggests that being colonized (but not infected) with MRSA is a significant risk factor for future infection, and if these findings can be confirmed by others, may influence how MRSA colonization is viewed in the future.

     

    Despite some recent improvements in MRSA rates among hospitalized patients in the United States, HAIs (which include many other pathogens) continue to exact a heavy toll. This oft quoted assessment from the CDC on the burden of Hospital Acquired Infections in the United States is from 2010.

     

    A new report from CDC updates previous estimates of healthcare-associated infections. In American hospitals alone, healthcare-associated infections account for an estimated 1.7 million infections and 99,000 associated deaths each year. Of these infections:

    • 32 percent of all healthcare-associated infection are urinary tract infections
    • 22 percent are surgical site infections
    • 15 percent are pneumonia (lung infections)
    • 14 percent are bloodstream infection


    For more on MRSA, and many other antibiotic-resistant threats, you can do no better than to visit Maryn McKenna’s terrific Superbug Blog, and to read her book Superbug: The Fatal Menace of MRSA . . . which won last year’s  NASW Science in Society Journalism Award.

    You’ll find my review of her book HERE

    Friday, June 24, 2011

    Referral: McKenna On E. Coli

     

     

     

    # 5649

     

    This week we’ve seen a number of new journal articles on Germany’s EHEC outbreak, appearing in The Lancet , Eurosurveillance Journal, and the NEJM.

     

    Maryn McKenna gives us an excellent walk-thru of their findings this morning in her SUPERBUG BLOG post:

     

    E. coli: Some Answers, Many Questions Still

     

    Highly Recommended.

     

    And for a terrific (ongoing) multi-part series on HUS (Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome) – a devastating complication in some toxic E. Coli infections - I would refer you to Tara C. Smith’s Aetiology Blog.

    Friday, January 22, 2010

    The MRSA Beat

     

     

    # 4276

     

    Back in the early 1990s, when I was a computer consultant and software developer, I was commissioned to write a custom nosocomial (Hospital acquired) infection tracking system for a local hospital. 

     

    My familiarity with medical terminology and hospital procedures from my days as a paramedic proved an asset in that project.  And it sparked an ongoing interest on my part in infection control.

     

    The two `big’ concerns back then were ordinary staph infections and nosocomial pneumonia.  MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus), while first identified in 1961, really wasn’t perceived to be the problem that it is now.

     

    Today, HAIs  (Hospital Acquired Infections) take a tremendous toll on patients lives and on health care costs.   

     

    This overview from an eMedicine article by Quoc V Nguyen, MD, Assistant Professor, Department of Pediatrics, New York State Health Department.

     

    Hospital-Acquired Infections

    (Excerpt)

    Nosocomial infections are estimated to occur in 5% of all acute-care hospitalizations; the incidence rate is 5 infections per 1,000 patient-days. Based on the 35 million patients admitted to 7,000 acute-care institutions in the United States, the incidence of HAIs is more than 2 million cases per year.2 HAIs result in an additional 26,250 deaths (range 17,500-70,000) and an added expenditure in excess of $4.5 billion.


    International

    The impact of HAIs on the health care systems of developed countries is significant and is proportionate to that of the United States.


    Mortality/Morbidity

    Nosocomial infections are estimated to more than double the mortality and morbidity risks of any admitted patient and probably result in as many as 70,000 deaths per year in the United States. This is the equivalent of 350,000 years of life lost in the United States.

     

    It isn’t just MRSA today, of course.

     

    C. Difficle, Acinetobacter baumannii, various pneumonias, and even viral infections (influenza) are just a few of the culprits in behind Hospital Acquired Infections.  But MRSA, due to its ever growing incidence, and difficulty in treating, is perhaps of greatest concern.

     

    In order to learn how to control MRSA, it is imperative that scientists learn how it is introduced, and spread, in a hospital environment.

     

    Which brings us to a fascinating report (well, two actually) from Maryn McKenna, whose book on MRSA is due to be published in late March.   

     

    Scientists have created a method to quickly, and in great detail, produce whole genomes of MRSA isolates.

     

    Since these isolates often pick up small, single letter changes (SNPs) to their genetic code as they bounce from one host to the next, it is possible to track (with pretty good precision) the spread of the bacteria within a facility. 

     

    Maryn brings us some of the surprising results in an article for CIDRAP News, along with a follow up on her Superbug blog.

     

    First the CIDRAP piece.

     

    New tool helps trace MRSA's local, global spread

    Maryn McKenna * Contributing Writer

    Jan 21, 2010 (CIDRAP News) – A multi-national team of researchers has applied a new genomic tool to a 50-year-old bacterial foe, using minute mutations to track the spread of drug-resistant staph both across continents and within a single hospital.

     

    On a global scale, their sleuthing tracked the movement of one clone of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) back and forth across the planet, pinpointing when individual cases transported infections across national borders to spark new outbreaks. Separately, their method demonstrated that what appeared to be a hospital epidemic of MRSA was not a single outbreak, but rather a mixed event of patient-to-patient transmission of one strain that was accompanied by multiple importations from outside the hospital of similar but unrelated strains.

     

    The work was published today in Science.

    (Continue . . .)

     

     

    As a follow up to her CIDRAP piece, Maryn has also posted on her Superbug Blog why she thinks this is so important.

     

    Follow the link to read it in its entirety.

     

    MRSA in the journal Science - spread, outbreaks and an argument for active surveillance

    I have a story tonight at CIDRAP about a paper published this evening in the journal Science. To respect fair use and make sure my colleagues get clicks, I just quote the story here — but then I want to talk about why I think it's such an important study.

    (Continue . . .)

    Tuesday, January 05, 2010

    The Rise Of A MRSA Clone

     

    # 4221

     

     

    In the past year, I’ve known 3 people who have contracted a resistant bacterial infection. Two of the three eventually recovered, but the third person (who had comorbidities) died.

     

    Maryn McKenna, who writes for CIDRAP and pens the always excellent Superbug Blog, has recently completed her book on MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus), and it will be published in late March.  

     

    I ordered my pre-publication copy today as an early birthday present, and expect to have it in my hot little hands the first week of April. 

     

    You can order it here (hint . . hint):

     

    Superbug: The Fatal Menace of MRSA (Hardcover)

    ~ Maryn McKenna 

     

    The bad thing about Maryn’s blog is, once you visit, you may not leave for hours.  It is a tremendous resource.

     

    Yesterday Maryn wrote a piece for CIDRAP News on ST398, a MRSA Clone that has been increasingly found in farm animals.

     

    MRSA clone in food animals worrisome, expert says

    Maryn McKenna * Contributing Writer

    Jan 4, 2010 (CIDRAP News) – The emergence and wide spread of a new clone of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in food animals is a worrisome development that should be watched closely, one of the strain's lead researchers has warned in a medical journal.

     

    Writing in Clinical Microbiology and Infection, Dr. Jan Kluytmans of Amphia Hospital in Breda, the Netherlands, recounts the identification of MRSA multilocus sequence type 398 (or ST398).

     

    The new strain, which was first noted in French livestock in 2005, is widely distributed. It was successively found in the Netherlands in pigs, in agricultural workers and their families, and in unrelated healthcare workers and hospital patients—and then in a variety of livestock species, and in retail meat, in Europe, Canada, and the United States.

     

    (Continue . . .)

     

     

    Maryn also covers this story in her blog post yesterday.

     

    Warning on ST398: Monitor this now

     

    A search of Maryn’s blog will turn up numerous other reports on this MRSA Clone over the past year or so.

    Wednesday, December 23, 2009

    NEJM: Pregnancy and Postpartum Risks Of Novel H1N1 Infection

     

     

    # 4189

     

    Very early on in the pandemic outbreak of 2009 it became apparent the pregnant women faced higher risks for complications than did otherwise healthy members of the general public. 

     

    Intensive care units in the US, and around the world, reported roughly 6% of their admissions of H1N1 patients were of pregnant women, and we’ve seen reports that pregnant women are between 5 and 6 times more likely to die from H1N1 influenza.

     

    This is, quite sadly, something that has been observed during pandemic outbreaks of the past; including 1957 and 1918. 

     

    Some blogs over the past six months dealing with issues of pregnancy and influenza include:

     

    Australian Study: H1N1 Hospitalized Patients
    UK: DOH Urges Doctors To Reassure Pregnant Women About Vaccine
    Pregnancy & Flu: A Bad Combination
    Lancet Study: Pregnancy And H1N1
    Branswell On Swine Flu And Pregnancy Complications

     

     

    While some of these complications may be caused by structural issues (increased abdominal pressure on internal organs and the diaphragm), some of it probably comes from the mother’s down-regulated immune system, something the pregnant woman’s body does to avoid rejecting the fetus.

     

    Today, in the NEJM (New England Journal of Medicine) we get fresh analysis of severe H1N1 influenza infection in pregnant women . . . and postpartum women who had delivered in the previous two weeks.  

     

    First however, from CIDRAP news, Maryn McKenna brings us an excellent summary of the NEJM article.

     

    H1N1 poses grave risk to pregnant women, new moms

    Maryn McKenna * Contributing Writer

    Dec 23, 2009 (CIDRAP News) – Infection with H1N1 influenza poses a grave danger to pregnant women and those who have just delivered, and the risk increases when they do not receive antiviral treatment very rapidly, California and Atlanta researchers report today online ahead of print in the New England Journal of Medicine.

     

    "This pandemic has the potential to notably increase overall maternal mortality in the United States in 2009," they write.

     

    In surveillance data gathered by the California Department of Public Health between April and August 2009, early in the H1N1 pandemic, 22 of 102 pregnant and postpartum women who had been hospitalized for flu symptoms needed to be admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU), 16 were put on ventilators, and 8 died.

    (Continue . . . )

     

     

    Below you’ll find the link to the NEJM study. 

     

     

    Severe 2009 H1N1 Influenza in Pregnant and Postpartum Women in California


    Janice K. Louie, M.D., M.P.H., Meileen Acosta, M.P.H., Denise J. Jamieson, M.D., M.P.H., Margaret A. Honein, Ph.D., M.P.H., for the California Pandemic (H1N1) Working Group


    ABSTRACT


    Background Like previous epidemic and pandemic diseases, 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) may pose an increased risk of severe illness in pregnant women.

    Methods Statewide surveillance for patients who were hospitalized with or died from 2009 H1N1 influenza was initiated by the California Department of Public Health. We reviewed demographic and clinical data reported from April 23 through August 11, 2009, for all H1N1-infected, reproductive-age women who were hospitalized or died — nonpregnant women, pregnant women, and postpartum women (those who had delivered 2 weeks previously).


    <SNIP>

    Conclusions 2009 H1N1 influenza can cause severe illness and death in pregnant and postpartum women; regardless of the results of rapid antigen testing, prompt evaluation and antiviral treatment of influenza-like illness should be considered in such women. The high cause-specific maternal mortality rate suggests that 2009 H1N1 influenza may increase the 2009 maternal mortality ratio in the United States.

     

    (Continue . . . )

     

    Saturday, December 12, 2009

    CIDRAP: Prospects For New Vaccine Technologies

     

     

    # 4151

     

    Maryn McKenna, who pens the superb Superbug Blog, is a contributing writer for CIDRAP, and had just authored a piece on new vaccine technologies on the horizon.  

     

    The current egg-based technology, while `tried and true’, is poorly suited for dealing with a pandemic outbreak.   It takes at least 6 months from the time a virus is isolated to having a vaccine begin to roll off the assembly line, and the yield is far less than we’d need during a severe pandemic.

     

    First this update, then a reminder of some earlier McKenna articles.

     

     

    New vaccine technologies on horizon but face roadblocks

    Maryn McKenna * Contributing Writer

    Dec 11, 2009 (CIDRAP News) – New ways of producing influenza vaccine that would free the process from long-standing problems are on the horizon, federal officials said today, but they added that scientific and regulatory hurdles will slow the products' movement past licensure and into the market.

     

    Speaking at an educational seminar held on the campus of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and broadcast online, senior members of federal heath agencies acknowledged that production of both seasonal and pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccines has been hobbled by outdated egg-based technology.

     

    "It will be several more years before we are able to wean ourselves away from egg-based vaccine, but we are committed to moving ahead with 21st century vaccine development," Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a taped opening statement.

    (Continue . . . )

     

     

    Some of you may remember that on May 1st of this year, barely a week after the isolation of the novel H1N1 virus, Maryn McKenna wrote a piece for CIDRAP entitled:

     

    Path to swine flu vaccine has major hurdles

     

    Maryn gave us a sober analysis of the difficulties that vaccine producers would face, and was the first reporter I’m aware of to warn that the seed virus being developed by the CDC was not growing well in eggs. 

     

    And finally, there is probably no better overview of the problems inherent in the creation, production, and distribution of a vaccine than Maryn McKenna’s award winning 7-part series the Pandemic Vaccine Puzzle which she wrote for CIDRAP in 2007.

     

    Part 1: Flu research: a legacy of neglect
    Part 2: Vaccine production capacity falls far short
    Part 3: H5N1 poses major immunologic challenges
    Part 4: The promise and problems of adjuvants
    Part 5: What role for prepandemic vaccination?
    Part 6: Looking to novel vaccine technologies
    Part 7: Time for a vaccine 'Manhattan Project'?
    Bibliography

    Wednesday, November 18, 2009

    Referral: Superbug Blog On European Antibiotic Awareness Day

     

     

    # 4035

     

     

    Maryn McKenna, is the editor of the always excellent Superbug blog, the author Beating Back The Devil and an upcoming book on MRSA, and is a contributing writer for CIDRAP (Center for Infectious Disease Research & Policy) News. 

     

    Today Maryn brings us a reminder that today is European Antibiotic Awareness Day.   Something, admittedly, I’d thought about mentioning myself today. 

     

    Fortunately for all concerned, Maryn beat me to it.

     

    Follow the link to read more about it, and while you are there, take some time to explore the rest of Maryn’s terrific blog. 

     

     

    18 November 2009

    It's (European) Antibiotic Awareness Day

    Friday, October 02, 2009

    Referral: World MRSA Day

     

     

    # 3795

     

     

    A visit this evening to Maryn McKenna’s superb Superbug Blog reminded me that today is World MRSA Day.

     

    image



    Thanks Maryn for the reminder, and congratulations on your blog being selected by RNCentral.com as one of the "50 Excellent Public Health Blogs" on the Internet.  

     

    Congratulations are due to the other others as well, a list that includes Effect Measure and The Pump Handle.   I look forward to exploring the ones I’m unfamiliar with over the coming days and weeks.  

    Tuesday, September 29, 2009

    Referral: McKenna On Bacterial Co-Infections

     


    # 3780

     

    Maryn McKenna, who (when she isn’t writing books) pens the superb Superbug Blog and is a staff writer for CIDRAP news, brings us some new details about bacterial co-infections among pandemic flu fatalities.

     

    Last night, in a piece for CIDRAP news, Maryn wrote of a conference call for clinicians held by the CDC yesterday.  This is a detail rich story, so follow the link to read it in its entirety.

     

    CDC cites bacterial infections in some H1N1 deaths

    Maryn McKenna * Contributing Writer

    Sep 28, 2009 (CIDRAP News) – Almost one third of a group of patients who died in the past 4 months from H1N1 influenza had bacterial infections that complicated their illnesses, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said today in a conference call with healthcare providers. But the agency cautioned against applying that ratio to all cases of H1N1, saying the death records it reviewed were submitted by hospitals and medical examiners and did not represent a statistically valid sample.

     

    Nevertheless, the 22 cases (among 77 deaths confirmed to be from H1N1) emphasize that bacterial co-infections are playing a role in the ongoing pandemic, something that was not clear at first, the CDC's Dr. Matthew Moore said on the call.

    (Continue . . . )

     

    See also:

    CDC recommendation for pneumococcal vaccination for adults
    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/provisional/downloads/pneumo-Oct-2008-508.pdf

    CDC recommendation for pneumococcal vaccination for children
    http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/rr/rr4909.pdf

     

    In a follow up to this piece, Maryn provides details of other similar studies on her Superbug blog, in a piece called:

     

    More evidence of MRSA involvement in H1N1 flu

     

    Once again, Maryn provides a good deal of detail, and draws on some of what she gleaned from the recent ICAAC meeting.  

     

    The CDC is urging those who are at high risk of pneumonia to avail themselves of the pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV).  Incredibly, only about 16% of the target population in the US has taken this protective shot.

     

    Although I don’t offer medical advice in this blog, I have long suggested that people consult with their primary care provider about the advisability of taking the Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV) – even if you aren’t sure you fall into a recommended category.


    A few past blogs where I’ve discussed this option include:

     

    Referral: Effect Measure On Pneumococcal Vaccines
    CDC Issues Pneumococcal Vaccine Recommendations
    Seven Steps You Can Take Now To Prepare For A Pandemic
    It Doesn't Have To Be Pandemic Flu
    With Flu Season Upon Us

     

    If you’ve not talked to your doctor about the Pneumonia Vaccine, now is a very good time to do so.