Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 404

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reduction in Acquisition of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus after Enforcement of Routine Environmental Cleaning Measures

Hayden, M. K., Bonten, M. J. M., Blom, D. W., Lyle, E. A., van de Vijver, D. A. M. C., Weinstein, R. A.·2006·Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The role of environmental contamination in nosocomial cross-transmission of antibiotic-resistant bacteria has been unresolved. Using vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) as a marker organism, we investigated the effects of improved environmental cleaning with and without promotion of hand hygiene adherence on the spread of VRE in a medical intensive care unit. METHODS: The study comprised a baseline period (period 1), a period of educational intervention to improve environmental cleaning (period 2), a "washout" period without any specific intervention (period 3), and a period of multimodal hand hygiene intervention (period 4). We performed cultures for VRE of rectal swab samples obtained from patients at admission to the intensive care unit and daily thereafter, and we performed cultures of environmental samples and samples from the hands of health care workers twice weekly. We measured patient clinical and demographic variables and monitored intervention adherence frequently. RESULTS: Our study included 748 admissions to the intensive care unit over a 9-month period. VRE acquisition rates were 33.47 cases per 1000 patient-days at risk for period 1 and 16.84, 12.09, and 10.40 cases per 1000 patient-days at risk for periods 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The mean (+/-SD) weekly rate of environmental sites cleaned increased from 0.48+/-0.08 at baseline to 0.87+/-0.08 in period 2; similarly high cleaning rates persisted in periods 3 and 4. Mean (+/-SD) weekly hand hygiene adherence rate was 0.40+/-0.01 at baseline and increased to 0.57+/-0.11 in period 2, without a specific intervention to improve adherence, but decreased to 0.29+/-0.26 in period 3 and 0.43+/-0.1 in period 4. Mean proportions of positive results of cultures of environmental and hand samples decreased in period 2 and remained low thereafter. In a Cox proportional hazards model, the hazard ratio for acquiring VRE during periods 2-4 was 0.36 (95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.68); the only determinant explaining the difference in VRE acquisition was admission to the intensive care unit during period 1. CONCLUSIONS: Decreasing environmental contamination may help to control the spread of some antibiotic-resistant bacteria in hospitals.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/503845

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 404

Metadata

Authors
Hayden, M. K., Bonten, M. J. M., Blom, D. W., Lyle, E. A., van de Vijver, D. A. M. C., & Weinstein, R. A.
Venue
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Published
2006-06-01
Volume
42
Issue
11
Pages
1552-1560
ISSN
  • 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6591
OpenAlex
W2163604434
Cited by
404
References
1
FWCI
12.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.