Department of Population Health Sciences, School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, College of Engineering, Madison, Wisconsin.
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Apr 3;66(8):1192-1203. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix962.
Despite intensified efforts to reduce hospital-onset Clostridium difficile infection (HO-CDI), its clinical and economic impacts continue to worsen. Many institutions have adopted bundled interventions that vary considerably in composition, strength of evidence, and effectiveness. Considerable gaps remain in our knowledge of intervention effectiveness and disease transmission, which hinders HO-CDI prevention.
We developed an agent-based model of C. difficile transmission in a 200-bed adult hospital using studies from the literature, supplemented with primary data collection. The model includes an environmental component and 4 distinct agent types: patients, visitors, nurses, and physicians. We used the model to evaluate the comparative clinical effectiveness of 9 single interventions and 8 multiple-intervention bundles at reducing HO-CDI and asymptomatic C. difficile colonization.
Daily cleaning with sporicidal disinfectant and C. difficile screening at admission were the most effective single-intervention strategies, reducing HO-CDI by 68.9% and 35.7%, respectively (both P < .001). Combining these interventions into a 2-intervention bundle reduced HO-CDI by 82.3% and asymptomatic hospital-onset colonization by 90.6% (both, P < .001). Adding patient hand hygiene to healthcare worker hand hygiene reduced HO-CDI rates an additional 7.9%. Visitor hand hygiene and contact precaution interventions did not reduce HO-CDI, compared with baseline. Excluding those strategies, healthcare worker contact precautions were the least effective intervention at reducing hospital-onset colonization and infection.
Identifying and managing the vast hospital reservoir of asymptomatic C. difficile by screening and daily cleaning with sporicidal disinfectant are high-yield strategies. These findings provide much-needed data regarding which interventions to prioritize for optimal C. difficile control.
尽管为降低医院获得性艰难梭菌感染(HO-CDI)已付出巨大努力,但该病的临床和经济影响仍在恶化。许多机构已采用了各种组合干预措施,这些措施在组成、证据强度和效果方面差异很大。我们对干预效果和疾病传播的了解仍存在很大差距,这阻碍了 HO-CDI 的预防。
我们使用文献中的研究结果,结合原始数据收集,开发了一个基于代理的 200 张床位成人医院中艰难梭菌传播模型。该模型包括一个环境部分和 4 种不同的代理类型:患者、访客、护士和医生。我们使用该模型评估 9 种单一干预措施和 8 种多重干预措施组合在降低 HO-CDI 和无症状艰难梭菌定植方面的相对临床效果。
每日使用杀菌消毒剂清洁和入院时进行艰难梭菌筛查是最有效的单一干预策略,分别使 HO-CDI 减少 68.9%和 35.7%(均 P<0.001)。将这两种干预措施组合成一个两干预措施组合可使 HO-CDI 减少 82.3%,无症状医院获得性定植减少 90.6%(均 P<0.001)。将患者手部卫生纳入医护人员手部卫生可使 HO-CDI 率额外降低 7.9%。与基线相比,访客手部卫生和接触预防干预并未降低 HO-CDI。排除这些策略后,医护人员接触预防是降低医院获得性定植和感染的最无效干预措施。
通过筛查和使用杀菌消毒剂进行日常清洁来识别和管理大量无症状艰难梭菌的医院储库是一种高收益策略。这些发现为最佳艰难梭菌控制提供了急需的干预措施优先级数据。