取消对 VRE 感染者的隔离是否会改变医疗保健相关 VRE 的发病率?系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Huiling Pan BS, Chuanlai Zhang BS, Jie Song MS, Ruiqi Yang MS, Zonghong Zhang BS
{"title":"取消对 VRE 感染者的隔离是否会改变医疗保健相关 VRE 的发病率?系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Huiling Pan BS,&nbsp;Chuanlai Zhang BS,&nbsp;Jie Song MS,&nbsp;Ruiqi Yang MS,&nbsp;Zonghong Zhang BS","doi":"10.1016/j.ajic.2024.07.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Several single-center studies have suggested that eliminating isolation for vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) control in the context of endemic or nonoutbreak settings, has no impact on infection rates. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of discontinuing isolation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science through April 10, 2024 for studies evaluating discontinuation of isolation for VRE. Subgroup analyses assessed sources of heterogeneity.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Nine studies were included in the final review. Four reported the incidence of hospital-acquired VRE (HA-VRE) infections and 5 reported the incidence of hospital-acquired VRE bloodstream infections (HA-VRE BSI). No significant difference between the rates of HA-VRE infection before and after stopping isolation was observed (risk ratios, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.26; <em>P</em> = .62), as well as no significant difference on the incidence of HA-VRE BSI (risk ratios, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.07, <em>P</em> = .09). Furthermore, we conducted 2 subgroup analyses: one stratified by whether the studies were conducted during Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19), and the other stratified by whether clinicians continued to use personal protective equipment. Both analyses revealed no significant differences in the incidence of HA-VRE BSI and termination of isolation between the subgroups.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In the context of endemic or nonoutbreak settings, discontinuation of isolation for VRE patients has not been associated with an increased rate of HA-VRE infections.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7621,"journal":{"name":"American journal of infection control","volume":"52 11","pages":"Pages 1329-1335"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the removal of isolation for VRE-infected patients change the incidence of health care–associated VRE?: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Huiling Pan BS,&nbsp;Chuanlai Zhang BS,&nbsp;Jie Song MS,&nbsp;Ruiqi Yang MS,&nbsp;Zonghong Zhang BS\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajic.2024.07.018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Several single-center studies have suggested that eliminating isolation for vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) control in the context of endemic or nonoutbreak settings, has no impact on infection rates. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of discontinuing isolation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science through April 10, 2024 for studies evaluating discontinuation of isolation for VRE. Subgroup analyses assessed sources of heterogeneity.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Nine studies were included in the final review. Four reported the incidence of hospital-acquired VRE (HA-VRE) infections and 5 reported the incidence of hospital-acquired VRE bloodstream infections (HA-VRE BSI). No significant difference between the rates of HA-VRE infection before and after stopping isolation was observed (risk ratios, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.26; <em>P</em> = .62), as well as no significant difference on the incidence of HA-VRE BSI (risk ratios, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.07, <em>P</em> = .09). Furthermore, we conducted 2 subgroup analyses: one stratified by whether the studies were conducted during Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19), and the other stratified by whether clinicians continued to use personal protective equipment. Both analyses revealed no significant differences in the incidence of HA-VRE BSI and termination of isolation between the subgroups.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In the context of endemic or nonoutbreak settings, discontinuation of isolation for VRE patients has not been associated with an increased rate of HA-VRE infections.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7621,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of infection control\",\"volume\":\"52 11\",\"pages\":\"Pages 1329-1335\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of infection control\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196655324006333\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of infection control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196655324006333","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:一些单中心研究表明,在地方病或非疫情爆发的情况下,取消耐万古霉素肠球菌(VRE)的隔离控制对感染率没有影响。我们对停止隔离的影响进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析:截至 2024 年 4 月 10 日,我们在 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆和 Web of Science 上检索了评估终止 VRE 隔离的研究。分组分析评估了异质性的来源:最终审查纳入了九项研究。其中四项报告了医院获得性弧菌感染(HA-VRE)的发病率,五项报告了医院获得性弧菌血流感染(HA-VRE BSI)的发病率。在停止隔离前后,HA-VRE 感染率无明显差异(RR,0.93;95% CI,0.68-1.26;P = 0.62),HA-VRE BSI 发生率也无明显差异(RR,0.68;95% CI,0.44-1.07;P = 0.09)。此外,我们还进行了两项亚组分析:一项是按研究是否在 COVID-19 期间进行分层,另一项是按临床医生是否继续使用个人防护设备分层。这两项分析表明,不同亚组之间的HA-VRE BSI发病率和终止隔离率没有明显差异:结论:在疫情流行或非疫情爆发的情况下,终止对 VRE 患者的隔离与 HA-VRE 感染率的增加并无关联。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does the removal of isolation for VRE-infected patients change the incidence of health care–associated VRE?: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Several single-center studies have suggested that eliminating isolation for vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) control in the context of endemic or nonoutbreak settings, has no impact on infection rates. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of discontinuing isolation.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science through April 10, 2024 for studies evaluating discontinuation of isolation for VRE. Subgroup analyses assessed sources of heterogeneity.

Results

Nine studies were included in the final review. Four reported the incidence of hospital-acquired VRE (HA-VRE) infections and 5 reported the incidence of hospital-acquired VRE bloodstream infections (HA-VRE BSI). No significant difference between the rates of HA-VRE infection before and after stopping isolation was observed (risk ratios, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.26; P = .62), as well as no significant difference on the incidence of HA-VRE BSI (risk ratios, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.07, P = .09). Furthermore, we conducted 2 subgroup analyses: one stratified by whether the studies were conducted during Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19), and the other stratified by whether clinicians continued to use personal protective equipment. Both analyses revealed no significant differences in the incidence of HA-VRE BSI and termination of isolation between the subgroups.

Conclusions

In the context of endemic or nonoutbreak settings, discontinuation of isolation for VRE patients has not been associated with an increased rate of HA-VRE infections.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
4.10%
发文量
479
审稿时长
24 days
期刊介绍: AJIC covers key topics and issues in infection control and epidemiology. Infection control professionals, including physicians, nurses, and epidemiologists, rely on AJIC for peer-reviewed articles covering clinical topics as well as original research. As the official publication of the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信