Louh Irene K, Greendyke William G, Hermann Emilia A, Davidson Karina W, Falzon Louise, Vawdrey David K, Shaffer Jonathan A, Calfee David P, Furuya E Yoko, Ting Henry H
1Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health,Department of Medicine,Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons,New York,New York.
3Division of Infectious Diseases,Department of Medicine,Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons,New York,New York.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017 Apr;38(4):476-482. doi: 10.1017/ice.2016.324.
OBJECTIVE Prevention of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in acute-care hospitals is a priority for hospitals and clinicians. We performed a qualitative systematic review to update the evidence on interventions to prevent CDI published since 2009. DESIGN We searched Ovid, MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, the ISI Web of Knowledge, and grey literature databases from January 1, 2009 to August 1, 2015. SETTING We included studies performed in acute-care hospitals. PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS We included studies conducted on hospitalized patients that investigated the impact of specific interventions on CDI rates. INTERVENTIONS We used the QI-Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS) to assess the quality of included studies. Interventions were grouped thematically: environmental disinfection, antimicrobial stewardship, hand hygiene, chlorhexidine bathing, probiotics, bundled approaches, and others. A meta-analysis was performed when possible. RESULTS Of 3,236 articles screened, 261 met the criteria for full-text review and 46 studies were ultimately included. The average quality rating was 82% according to the QI-MQCS. The most effective interventions, resulting in a 45% to 85% reduction in CDI, included daily to twice daily disinfection of high-touch surfaces (including bed rails) and terminal cleaning of patient rooms with chlorine-based products. Bundled interventions and antimicrobial stewardship showed promise for reducing CDI rates. Chlorhexidine bathing and intensified hand-hygiene practices were not effective for reducing CDI rates. CONCLUSIONS Daily and terminal cleaning of patient rooms using chlorine-based products were most effective in reducing CDI rates in hospitals. Further studies are needed to identify the components of bundled interventions that reduce CDI rates. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:476-482.
目的 在急症医院预防艰难梭菌感染(CDI)是医院和临床医生的首要任务。我们进行了一项定性系统评价,以更新自2009年以来发表的关于预防CDI干预措施的证据。设计 我们检索了2009年1月1日至2015年8月1日期间的Ovid、MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、CINAHL、ISI Web of Knowledge以及灰色文献数据库。研究背景 我们纳入了在急症医院进行的研究。患者或参与者 我们纳入了针对住院患者开展的研究,这些研究调查了特定干预措施对CDI发生率的影响。干预措施 我们使用质量改进-最低质量标准集(QI-MQCS)来评估纳入研究的质量。干预措施按主题分组:环境消毒、抗菌药物管理、手卫生、洗必泰沐浴、益生菌、综合措施及其他。尽可能进行荟萃分析。结果 在筛选的3236篇文章中,261篇符合全文审查标准,最终纳入46项研究。根据QI-MQCS,平均质量评分为82%。最有效的干预措施使CDI降低了45%至85%,包括每天至每天两次对高接触表面(包括床栏)进行消毒以及用含氯产品对病房进行终末清洁。综合干预措施和抗菌药物管理显示出降低CDI发生率的前景。洗必泰沐浴和强化手卫生措施对降低CDI发生率无效。结论 使用含氯产品对病房进行日常和终末清洁在降低医院CDI发生率方面最为有效。需要进一步研究以确定降低CDI发生率的综合干预措施的组成部分。《感染控制与医院流行病学》2017年;38:476 - 482。