Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-01T19:47:41.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Laboratory-Based Surveillance for Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci: Utility of Screening Stool Specimens Submitted for Clostridium difficile Toxin Assay

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Amy L. Leber ,
Janet F. Hindler ,
Ellen O. Kato ,
David A. Bruckner  and
David A. Pegues
Amy L. Leber
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
Janet F. Hindler
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
Ellen O. Kato
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
David A. Bruckner
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
David A. Pegues*
Affiliation:
Department Internal Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
*
Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, UCLA School of Medicine, 10833 LeConteAve, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1688
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To study vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) gastrointestinal colonization prevalence in high-risk hospitalized patients and to assess the cost and utility of this laboratory-based surveillance.

Setting:

Large university teaching hospital.

Design:

Quarterly prevalence culture survey of 50 stool specimens submitted for Clostridium difficile toxin A assay from October 1996 through June 1999 (n=526). Screening culture survey of all C difficile-positive stool specimens from July 1998 through June 1999 (n=140).

Patients:

Specimens for analysis were collected from patients who were admitted to the hospital and who had C difficile toxin A testing ordered. Patient samples were excluded from analysis if they were obtained from patients not hospitalized at UCLA Medical Center, if the C difficile toxin assay result was indeterminate, or if the patient was known to have previous VRE colonization or infection.

Results:

During quarterly surveillance, VRE was detected in 19.8%, C difficile toxin A in 9.5%, and both VRE and C difficile toxin A in 3.2% of stool specimens submitted for C difficile toxin assay. Patients whose stool specimens were positive for C difficile toxin A were significantly more likely than those whose specimens were negative to have VRE detected (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-4.5). Based on these findings, in July 1998, we began routine screening of all C difficile-positive stool specimens for VRE. From July 1998 through June 1999, 58 (41.4%) of 140 patients with C difficile-positive specimens had VRE newly detected in the stool. The combined cost of the two laboratory-based surveillance strategies was approximately $62 per VRE-positive patient identified and $5,800 per year.

Conclusion:

Quarterly surveillance of stool submitted for C difficile assay combined with screening all C difficile-positive stools is a cost-effective and efficient strategy for detecting VRE stool colonization among high-risk hospitalized patients. Such a laboratory-based surveillance should be included as part of a comprehensive program to limit nosocomial VRE transmission.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , March 2001 , pp. 160 - 164
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Gerding, DN. Is there a relationship between vancomycin-resistant enterococcal infection and Clostridium difficile infection? Clin Infect Dis 1997;25(suppl 2):S206–S210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Bignardi, GE. Risk factors for Clostridium difficile infection. J Hosp Infect 1998;40:1–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Shay, DK, Maloney, SA, Montecalvo, M, Banerjee, S, Wormser, GP, Arduino, MJ, et al. Epidemiology and mortality risk of vancomycin-resistant enterococcal bloodstream infections. J Infect Dis 1995;172:993–1000.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Roghmann, MC, McCarter, RJ Jr Brewrink, J, Cross, AS, Morris, JG Jr Clostridium difficile infection is a risk factor for bacteremia due to vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in VRE-colonized patients with acute leukemia. Clin Infect Dis 1997;25:1056–1059.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Schwalbe, RS, Qaiyumi, S, Hindler, J, Bruckner, DA, Carey, RB. A multi-center study evaluating four selective media for recovery of vancomycin resistant enterococci. Presented at the meeting of the American Society for Microbiology; 1997; Miami Beach, FL. Abstract C-8.Google Scholar
6. Garner, JS, Jarvis, WR, Emori, TG, Horan, TC, Hughes, JM. CDC definitions for nosocomial infections, 1988. Am J Infect Control 1988;16:128–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Garner, JS. Guideline for isolation precautions in hospitals. The Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996;17:53–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recommendations for preventing the spread of vancomycin resistance. Recommendations of the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC). MMWR 1995;44:1–13.Google Scholar
9. Tenover, F. Laboratory methods for surveillance of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Clin Microbiol Newsletter 1998;20:1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Boyce, JM, Opal, SM, Chow, JW, Zervos, MJ, Potter-Bynoe, G, Sherman, CB, et al. Outbreak of multidrug-resistant Enterococcus faecium with transferable vanB class vancomycin resistance. J Clin Microbiol 1994;32:1148–1153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Tokars, Jl, Satake, S, Rimland, D, Carson, L, Miller, ER, Killum, E, et al. The prevalence of colonization with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus at a Veterans' Affairs institution. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20:171–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Muto, CA, Cage, EG, Durbin, LJ, Simonton, BM, Farr, BM. Cost effectiveness of perirectal surveillance cultures for controlling vancomycin resistant Enterococcus. Program and Abstracts of the Ninth Annual Scientific Meeting, Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America; April 18-20, 1999; San Francisco, CA. Page 44.Google Scholar
13. Rafferty, ME, McCormick, MI, Bopp, LH, Baltch, AL, George, M, Smith, RP, et al. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci in stool specimens submitted for Clostridium difficile cytotoxin assay. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1997;18:342–344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Garbutt, JM, Littenberg, B, Evanoff, BA, Sahm, D, Mundy, LM. Enteric carriage of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium in patients tested for Clostridium difficile . Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20:664–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed