Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Department of Medicine, Maine Medical Center, Portland, Maine, USA.
Clin Infect Dis. 2024 May 15;78(5):1289-1294. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciad571.
The recently updated Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, and the Association of Professionals in Infection Control practice recommendations for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) prevention in acute care facilities list contact precautions (CPs) for patients known to be infected or colonized with MRSA as an "essential practice," meaning that it should be adopted in all acute care facilities. We argue that existing evidence on benefits and harms associated with CP do not justify this recommendation. There are no controlled trials that support broad use of CP for MRSA prevention. Data from hospitals that have discontinued CP for MRSA have found no impact on MRSA acquisition or infection. The burden and harms of CP remain concerning, including the environmental impact of increased gown and glove use. We suggest that CP be included among other "additional approaches" to MRSA prevention that can be implemented under specific circumstances (eg outbreaks, evidence of ongoing transmission despite application of essential practices).
最近更新的美国医疗保健流行病学学会、美国传染病学会和感染控制专业人员协会关于耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌 (MRSA) 预防的实践建议将接触预防措施 (CP) 列为急性护理机构中已知感染或定植 MRSA 的患者的“基本实践”,这意味着所有急性护理机构都应采用。我们认为,与 CP 相关的益处和危害的现有证据并不能证明这一建议的合理性。没有支持广泛使用 CP 预防 MRSA 的对照试验。已经停止 CP 预防 MRSA 的医院的数据发现,CP 对 MRSA 的获得或感染没有影响。CP 的负担和危害仍然令人担忧,包括增加长袍和手套使用对环境的影响。我们建议将 CP 纳入其他“附加方法”中,以预防 MRSA,这些方法可以在特定情况下实施(例如暴发,尽管实施了基本实践,但仍有持续传播的证据)。