Indications for Alcohol or Bland Soap in Removal of Aerobic Gram-Negative Skin Bacteria: Assessment by a Novel Method

1989 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 306-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Debra G. Eckert ◽  
N. Joel Ehrenkranz ◽  
Blanca C. Alfonso

AbstractA patient contact model was devised for health care workers (HCWs) to define heavy hand contamination with aerobic gram-negative bacilli (AGNB) that requires alcohol for complete removal. In patients, AGNB quantitation was per ml cup scrub fluid; in HCWs, per ml glove juice. Following 15-second contact, two Proteeae groin carriers yielding ≥ 4 log10AGNB (high burden) transmitted ≥ 3 log10in 67% of 24 tests of six HCWs, and ≤ 2 log10in 29%. Two carriers yielding ≤ 3 log10(low burden) transmitted ≥ 3 log10in 8% and ≤ 2 log10in 38%. At ≤ 2 log10HCW acquisitions, soap eliminated all AGNB in six of seven tests; alcohol in nine of nine (p > 0.05). At ≥ 3 log10acquisitions, soap eliminated all AGNB in three of 10; alcohol in eight of eight Contacteight (p= 0.009). Contact with densely colonized patient skin may cause heavy AGNB contamination of HCWs' hands that generally necessitates alcohol for complete removal.

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth B. Schneider ◽  
John G. Benitez ◽  
Anne D’Angelo ◽  
Kathee Tyo

ABSTRACTObjectives: The primary objective of this study was to determine the preparedness for pandemic influenza of hospitals, in terms of amount of antiviral drugs on hand and employee vaccination rates, in the Finger Lakes region (FLR) of western New York.Methods: A survey of the 17 FLR hospitals was conducted via e-mail during the period of June 2007 to August 2007.Results: A total of 13 of 17 hospitals responded for a response rate of 76.5%. Only 23.1% of responding hospitals stockpile antiviral drugs. Vaccination rates for personnel with patient contact ranged from 36.8% to 76.1%.Conclusions: Hospitals in the FLR have insufficient quantities of antiviral agents stockpiled to provide for the protection of health care workers, and influenza vaccination rates for health care workers are low. To ensure that a high level of care is maintained during a pandemic, health care workers need to be provided with appropriate protection. This can be accomplished if hospitals stockpile antiviral agents designated for the treatment and prophylaxis of health care workers with patient contact and their families.(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2010;4:55-61)


2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Vanlalbiakdiki Sailo ◽  
Puja Pandey ◽  
Subhajit Mukherjee ◽  
Zothan Zami ◽  
Ralte Lalremruata ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The present study attempts to identify and determine the pattern of drug susceptibility of the microorganisms present in mobile phones of health care workers (HCWs) and non-HCWs in a hospital environment. Mobile phones of 100 participants including both genders were randomly swabbed from nine different wards/units and the bacterial cultures were characterized using VITEK 2 system. Results Forty-seven mobile phones were culture positive and a total of 57 isolates were obtained which consisted of 28 Gram-positive organisms and 29 Gram-negative organisms. The predominating organisms were Acinetobacter baumannii and Staphylococcus hominis. Among all the isolates from the mobile phones of HCW and non-HCWs, five isolates had ESBL and three isolates had colistin resistance. Incidentally, MRSA was not found on the mobile phones tested. The isolated organisms showed 100% susceptibility to linezolid, daptomycin, vancomycin, imipenem, meropenem, gentamicin, amikacin, ciprofloxacin and tigecycline, while high resistance was shown against benzylpenicillin (75.0%), cefuroxime and cefuroxime axetil (56.5%). Non-HCWs’ mobile phones were more contaminated as compared to HCWs (P = 0.001) and irrespective of individuals’ gender or toilet habits, both Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms were present on the mobile phones. Conclusion This study reports for the first time that the mobile phones of non-health care workers harbour more bacterial diversity and are more prone to cause transmission of pathogens. This study can serve to educate the public on personal hand hygiene practices and on maintaining clean mobile phones through antiseptic measures.


1984 ◽  
Vol 5 (12) ◽  
pp. 583-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
William M. Valenti

From time to time, health care workers are restricted from patient contact because of proven or suspected infectious illness or because of incubating disease after an exposure. The CDC Guideline for Infection Control in Hospital Personnel addresses a number of infectious illnesses and exposures which may require some type of employee restriction from patient contact. However, the Guideline does not address the administrative aspects that accompany putting an employee on a leave of absence for infection control purposes. This process is often complicated and questions frequently arise as to how an employee should be paid for the time lost from work. In general, there is no uniform way to approach the problem of “absence to prevent contagion.” As with many areas of infection control and employee health, hospitals can choose one of several options. However, the employee should never be penalized for reporting an infectious illness or exposure, and administrators should encourage reporting of proven or suspected disease or exposures (eg, exposure to chickenpox).


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 1634-1641
Author(s):  
Jessica L Moreau ◽  
Alison B Hamilton ◽  
Elizabeth M Yano ◽  
Lisa V Rubenstein ◽  
Susan E Stockdale

While patient-centered care (PCC) is a widely accepted aspect of health-care quality, its definition is still the subject of debate. We investigated health-care workers’ definitions of PCC by level of patient contact in job roles. Our qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with key stakeholder employees (n = 66) at 6 Veterans’ Affairs health-care locations in Southern California. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded for definitions of PCC, and analyzed by participants’ self-described level of patient contact. Stakeholders whose role primarily involved patient contact tended to define PCC through: patient as a person, patient preferences, and shared decision-making. Stakeholders whose role did not primarily involve patient contact tended to define PCC through: patient-centered redesign, customer service, and access to services. Stakeholders with more patient contact emphasized patient-level and interpersonal concepts, while those with less patient contact emphasized system-level and business-oriented concepts. The focus on PCC-as-access may reflect influence of changing institutional climate on definitions of PCC for some stakeholders. To facilitate successful PCC efforts, health-care systems may need to leverage differing but complementary definitions of PCC within its workforce.


2021 ◽  
pp. e2021045
Author(s):  
Amr Ehab El-Qushayri ◽  
Abdullah Dahy ◽  
Abdullah Reda ◽  
Mariam Abdelmageed Mahmoud ◽  
Sarah Abdel Mageed ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document