Suppr超能文献

非暴发和暴发环境下长期护理机构中有效的感染预防和控制措施:系统文献回顾。

Effective infection prevention and control measures in long-term care facilities in non-outbreak and outbreak settings: a systematic literature review.

机构信息

Division of Infectious Diseases and Hospital Epidemiology, Cantonal Hospital St.Gallen, St.Gallen, Switzerland.

Federal Office of Public Health, Bern, Switzerland.

出版信息

Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2023 Oct 18;12(1):113. doi: 10.1186/s13756-023-01318-9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Healthcare-associated infections in long-term care are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. While infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines are well-defined in the acute care setting, evidence of effectiveness for long-term care facilities (LTCF) is missing. We therefore performed a systematic literature review to examine the effect of IPC measures in the long-term care setting.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and Cochrane libraries for articles evaluating the effect of IPC measures in the LTCF setting since 2017, as earlier reviews on this topic covered the timeframe up to this date. Cross-referenced studies from identified articles and from mentioned earlier reviews were also evaluated. We included randomized-controlled trials, quasi-experimental, observational studies, and outbreak reports. The included studies were analyzed regarding study design, type of intervention, description of intervention, outcomes and quality. We distinguished between non-outbreak and outbreak settings.

RESULTS

We included 74 studies, 34 (46%) in the non-outbreak setting and 40 (54%) in the outbreak setting. The most commonly studied interventions in the non-outbreak setting included the effect of hand hygiene (N = 10), oral hygiene (N = 6), antimicrobial stewardship (N = 4), vaccination of residents (N = 3), education (N = 2) as well as IPC bundles (N = 7). All but one study assessing hand hygiene interventions reported a reduction of infection rates. Further successful interventions were oral hygiene (N = 6) and vaccination of residents (N = 3). In outbreak settings, studies mostly focused on the effects of IPC bundles (N = 24) or mass testing (N = 11). In most of the studies evaluating an IPC bundle, containment of the outbreak was reported. Overall, only four articles (5.4%) were rated as high quality.

CONCLUSION

In the non-outbreak setting in LTCF, especially hand hygiene and oral hygiene have a beneficial effect on infection rates. In contrast, IPC bundles, as well as mass testing seem to be promising in an outbreak setting.

摘要

背景

长期护理机构中的医疗保健相关感染与大量发病率和死亡率相关。虽然急性护理环境中已经明确了感染预防和控制(IPC)指南,但长期护理机构(LTCF)的有效性证据却缺失了。因此,我们进行了系统的文献综述,以检查 LTCF 环境中的 IPC 措施的效果。

方法

我们系统地在 PubMed 和 Cochrane 文库中搜索了自 2017 年以来评估 LTCF 环境中 IPC 措施效果的文章,因为之前关于该主题的综述涵盖了截至该日期的时间范围。还评估了从确定的文章和更早的综述中交叉引用的研究。我们纳入了随机对照试验、准实验、观察性研究和暴发报告。对纳入的研究进行了分析,内容包括研究设计、干预类型、干预描述、结果和质量。我们区分了非暴发和暴发环境。

结果

我们纳入了 74 项研究,其中 34 项(46%)在非暴发环境中,40 项(54%)在暴发环境中。非暴发环境中最常研究的干预措施包括手部卫生(N=10)、口腔卫生(N=6)、抗菌药物管理(N=4)、居民接种疫苗(N=3)、教育(N=2)以及 IPC 捆绑(N=7)。评估手部卫生干预措施的所有研究(除了一项)均报告了感染率的降低。另外成功的干预措施还包括口腔卫生(N=6)和居民接种疫苗(N=3)。在暴发环境中,研究主要集中在 IPC 捆绑(N=24)或大规模检测(N=11)的效果上。在评估 IPC 捆绑的大多数研究中,均报告了暴发的控制。总体而言,仅有 4 篇文章(5.4%)被评为高质量。

结论

在 LTCF 的非暴发环境中,特别是手部卫生和口腔卫生对感染率有有益的影响。相比之下,IPC 捆绑以及大规模检测在暴发环境中似乎很有前景。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c887/10585745/210adb3251eb/13756_2023_1318_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验