Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Impact of Alcohol-Based, Waterless Hand Antiseptic on the Incidence of Infection and Colonization With Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci

  • Kwan Kew Lai (a1), Sally Fontecchio (a1), Zita Melvin (a1) and Stephen P. Baker (a1)

Extract

Objective:

Colonized and infected inpatients are major reservoirs for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), and transient carriage of these pathogens on the hands of healthcare workers remains the most common mechanism of patient-to-patient transmission. We hypothesized that use of alcohol-based, waterless hand antiseptic would lower the incidence of colonization and/or infection with MRSA and VRE.

Methods.

On June 19, 2001, alcohol hand antiseptic was introduced at the University campus and not the nearby Memorial campus of the University of Massachusetts Medical School (Worcester, MA), allowing us to evaluate the impact of this antiseptic on the incidence of MRSA and VRE colonization and infection. From January 1 through December 31, 2001, the incidence of MRSA colonization or infection was compared between the 2 campuses before and after the hand antiseptic was introduced. Its effect on VRE colonization and infection was only studied in the medical intensive care unit at the University campus.

Results.

At the University campus, the incidence of MRSA colonization or infection decreased from 1.26 cases/1,000 patient-days before the intervention to 0.75 cases/1,000 patient-days after the intervention, for a 1.46-fold decrease (95% confidence interval, 1.04-2.58; P = .037). At the Memorial campus, the incidence of MRSA colonization or infection remained virtually unchanged, from 0.34 cases/1,000 patient-days to 0.49 cases/1,000 patient-days during the same period. However, a separate analysis of the University campus data that controlled for proximity to prevalent cases did not show a significant improvement in the rates of infection or colonization. The incidence of nosocomial VRE colonization or infection before and after the hand antiseptic decreased from 12.0 cases/1,000 patient-days to 3.0 cases/1,000 patient-days, a 2.25-fold decrease (P = .018). Compliance with rectal surveillance for detection of VRE was 86% before and 84% after implementation of the hand antiseptic intervention. The prevalences of VRE cases during these 2 periods were 25% and 29%, respectively (P = .017).

Conclusions.

Alcohol hand antiseptic appears to be effective in controlling the transmission of VRE. However, after controlling for proximity to prevalent cases (ie, for clustering), it does not appear to be more effective than standard methods for controlling MRSA. Further controlled studies are needed to evaluate its effectiveness.

Copyright

Corresponding author

104 School Street, Belmont, MA 02478, (kwankew@gmail.com)

References

Hide All
1. Larson, E. A causal link between handwashing and risk of infection? Examination of the evidence. Infect Control 1988; 9:2836.
2. Bonten, MJM, Slaughter, S, Ambergen, AW, et al. The role of “colonization pressure” in the spread of vancomycin-resistant enterococci: an important infection control variable. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158:11271132.
3. Morris, JG Jr, Shay, DK, Hebden, JN, et al. Enterococci resistant to multiple antimicrobial agents, including vancomycin: establishment of endemicity in a university medical center. Ann Intern Med 1995; 123:250259.
4. Boyce, JM, Potter-Bynoe, G, Chenevert, C, King, T. Environmental contamination due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus possible infection control implications. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1997; 18:622627.
5. Thompson, RL, Cabezulo, I, Wenzel, RP. Epidemiology of nosocomial infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus . Ann Int Med 1982; 97:309317.
6. Merrer, J, Santoli, F, Appere de Vecchi, C, Tran, B, De Jonghe, B, Outin, H. “Colonization pressure” and risk of acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a medical intensive care unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000; 21:718723.
7. Ostrowsky, BE, Trick, WE, Sohn, AH, et al. Control of vancomycin-resistant enterococcus in health care facilities in a region. N Engl J Med 2001;344:14271433.
8. Goldmann, DA, Huskins, WC. Control of nosocomial antimicrobial-resistant bacteria: a strategic priority for hospitals worldwide. Clin Infect Dis 1997; 24(Suppl 1):S139S145.
9. Farrington, M, Redpath, C, Trundle, C, Coomber, S, Brown, NM. Winning the battle but losing the law: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections at a teaching hospital. QJM 1998; 91:539548.
10. Larson, E. Skin hygiene and infection prevention: more of the same or different approaches? Clin Infect Dis 1999;29:12871294.
11. Pittet, D, Mourouga, P, Perneger, TV. Compliance with handwashing in a teaching hospital. Infection Control Program. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130:126130.
12. Graham, M. Frequency and duration of handwashing in an intensive care unit. Am J Infect Control 1990; 18:7780.
13. Wenzel, RP, Pfaller, MA. Handwashing: efficacy versus acceptance. A brief essay. J Hosp Infect 1991; 18(Suppl B):6568.
14. Nystrom, B. Impact of handwashing on mortality in intensive care: examination of the evidence. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1994; 15:435436.
15. Watanakunakorn, C, Wang, C, Hazy, J. An observational study of hand washing and infection control practices by healthcare workers. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1998; 19:858860.
16. Pittet, D, Hugonnet, S, Harbarth, S, et al. Effectiveness of a hospital-wide programme to improve compliance with hand hygiene. Infection Control Programme. Lancet 2000; 356:13071312.
17. Price, PB. Reevaluation of ethyl alcohol as a germicide. Arch Surg 1950; 60:492502.
18. Girou, E, Loyeau, S, Legrand, F, Oppein, F, Brun-Buisson, C. Efficacy of handrubbing with an alcohol-based solution versus standard handwashing with an antiseptic soap: a randomized clinical trial. BMJ 2002; 325:362366.
19. Lucet, JC, Rigaud, MP, Memtre, F, et al. Hand contamination before and after different hand hygiene techniques: a randomized clinical trial. J Hosp Infect 2002; 50:276280.
20. Larson, EL, Aiello, AE, Bastyr, J, et al. Assessment of two hand hygiene regimens for intensive care unit personnel. Crit Care Med 2001; 29:944951.
21. Ehrenkranz, NJ, Alfonso, BC. Failure of bland soap handwash to prevent hand transfer of patient bacteria to urethral catheters. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1991; 12:654662.
22. Kjrlen, H, Andersen, BM. Handwashing and disinfection of heavily contaminated hands-effective or ineffective? J Hosp Infect 1992; 21:6171.
23. Zaragoza, M, Sallés, M, Gomez, J, Bayas, JM, Trilla, A. Handwashing with soap or alcoholic solutions? A randomized clinical trial of its effectiveness. Am J Infect Control 1999; 27:258261.
24. Paulson, DS, Fendler, EJ, Dolan, MJ, Williams, RA. A close look at alcohol gel as an antimicrobial sanitizing agent. Am J Infect Control 1999; 27:332338.
25. Doebbeling, BN, Stanley, GL, Sheertz, CT, et al. Comparative efficacy of alternative hand-washing agents in reducing nosocomial infections in intensive care units. N Engl J Med 1992; 327:8893.
26. Nelder, JA, Wedderburn, RWM. Generalized linear models. J R Stat Soc [Ser A] 1972; 135:370384.
27. Stukel, TA. Comparison of methods for the analysis of longitudinal interval count data. Stat Med 1993; 12:13391351.
28. Stokes, ME, Davis, CS, Koch, GG. Categorical Data Analysis Using the SAS System. 2nd ed. Cary, NC: SAS Institute; 2000.
29. Boyce, JM, Pittet, D. Guideline for hand hygiene in healthcare settings: recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force, Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America/Association for Professionals in Infection Control/Infectious Diseases Society of America. MMWR Recomm Rep 2002; 51:145.
30. O'Boyle, CA, Henly, SJ, Larson, E. Understanding adherence to hand hygiene recommendations: the theory of planned behavior. Am J Infect Control 2001;29:352360.
31. Kaplan, LM, McGuckin, M. Increasing handwashing compliance with more accessible sinks. Infect Control 1986; 7:408410.
32. Lund, S, Jackson, J, Leggett, J, Hales, L, Dworkin, R, Gilbert, D. Reality of glove use and handwashing in a community hospital. Am J Infect Control 1994; 22:352357.
33. Muto, CA, Sistrom, MG, Farr, BM. Hand hygiene rates unaffected by installation of dispensers of a rapidly acting hand antiseptic. Am J Infect Control 2000; 28:273276.
34. Berg, DE, Hershow, RC, Ramirez, CA. Control of nosocomial infections in an intensive care unit in Guatemala City. Clin Infect Dis 1995; 21:588593.
35. Dubbert, PM, Dolce, J, Richter, W, Miller, M, Chapman, SW. Increasing ICU staff handwashing: effects of education and group feedback. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1990; 11:191193.
36. Bischoff, WE, Reynolds, TM, Sessler, CN, Edmond, MB, Wenzel, RP. Handwashing compliance by health care workers; the impact of introducing an accessible, alcohol-based hand antiseptic. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160:10171021.
37. Maury, E, Alzieu, M, Baudel, JL, et al. Availability of an alcohol solution can improve hand disinfection compliance in an intensive care unit. Am J Resp Crit Care Med 2000; 162:324327.
38. McGuckin, M, Waterman, R, Porten, L, et al. Patient education model for increasing handwashing compliance. Am J Infect Control 1999; 27:309314.
39. Boyce, JM, Kelliher, S, Vallande, N. Skin irritation and dryness associated with two hand-hygiene regimens: soap-and-water hand washing versus hand antisepsis with an alcohol hand gel. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000;21:442448.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Impact of Alcohol-Based, Waterless Hand Antiseptic on the Incidence of Infection and Colonization With Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci

  • Kwan Kew Lai (a1), Sally Fontecchio (a1), Zita Melvin (a1) and Stephen P. Baker (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.