Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T07:39:47.274Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variability of Contact Precaution Policies in US Emergency Departments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2016

Daniel J. Pallin ,
Carlos A. Camargo Jr. ,
Deborah S. Yokoe ,
Janice A. Espinola  and
Jeremiah D. Schuur
Daniel J. Pallin*
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
Carlos A. Camargo Jr.
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
Deborah S. Yokoe
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
Janice A. Espinola
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
Jeremiah D. Schuur
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
*
75 Francis Street, Neville House 304-D, Boston, MA 02115 (dpallin@partners.org)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Contact precautions policies in US emergency departments have not been studied. We surveyed a structured random sample and found wide variation; for example, 45% required contact precautions for stool incontinence or diarrhea, 84% for suspected Clostridium difficile, and 79% for suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. Emergency medicine departments and organizations should enact policies.

Type
Concise Communication
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , March 2014 , pp. 310 - 312
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2014

References

1. Zimlichman, E, Henderson, D, Tamir, O, et al. Health care-associated infections: a meta-analysis of costs and financial impact on the US health care system. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173: 2039–2046.Google Scholar
2. Hayden, MK, Blom, DW, Lyle, EA, Moore, CG, Weinstein, RA. Risk of hand or glove contamination after contact with patients colonized with vancomycin-resistant enterococcus or the colonized patients' environment. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:149–154.Google Scholar
3. Siegel, JD, Rhinehart, E, Jackson, M, Chiarello, L. Management of multidrug-resistant organisms in health care settings, 2006. Am J Infect Control 2007;35(suppl):S165–S193.Google Scholar
4. Calfee, DP, Saigado, CD, Classen, D, et al. Strategies to prevent transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in acute care hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29(supp 1):S62–S80.Google Scholar
5. Dubberke, ER, Gerding, DN, Classen, D, et al. Strategies to prevent Clostridium difficile infections in acute care hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29(suppl 1):S81–S92.Google Scholar
6. Martel, J, Bui-Xuan, EF, Carreau, AM, Carrier, JD, Larkin, E, Vla-chos-Mayer, H, Dumas, ME. Respiratory hygiene in emergency departments: compliance, beliefs, and perceptions. Am J Infect Control 2013;41:14–18.Google Scholar
7. Sullivan, AF, Richman, IB, Ahn, CJ, Auerbach, BS, Pallin, DJ, Schaf-ermeyer, RW, Clark, S, Camargo, CA Jr. A profile of US emergency departments in 2001. Ann Emerg Med 2006;48:694–701.Google Scholar
8. Moran, GJ, Krishnadasan, A, Gorwitz, RJ, Fosheim, GE, McDougal, LK, Carey, RB, Talan, DA. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus infections among patients in the emergency department. N Engl J Med 2006;355:666–674.Google Scholar
9. Siegel, JD, Rhinehart, E, Jackson, M, Chiarello, L. 2007 guideline for isolation precautions: preventing transmission of infectious agents in health care settings. Am J Infect Control 2007;35:S65–S164.Google Scholar
10. Pogorzelska, M, Stone, PW, Larson, EL. Wide variation in adoption of screening and infection control interventions for multidrug-resistant organisms: a national study. Am J Infect Control 2012;40:696–700.Google Scholar