Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 304

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Risk of Hand or Glove Contamination After Contact With Patients Colonized With Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus or the Colonized Patients' Environment

Hayden, Mary K., Blom, Donald W., Lyle, Elizabeth A., Moore, Charity G., Weinstein, Robert A.·2008·Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology

Abstract

Objective.: To estimate the level of hand or glove contamination with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) among healthcare workers (HCWs) who touch a patient colonized with VRE and/or the colonized patient's environment during routine care. Design.: Structured observational study. Setting.: Medical intensive care unit of a 700-bed, tertiary-care teaching hospital. Participants.: VRE-colonized patients and their caregivers. Methods.: We obtained samples from sites on the intact skin of 22 patients colonized with VRE and samples from sites in the patients' rooms, before and after routine care, during 27 monitoring episodes. A total of 98 unique HCWs were observed during 131 HCW observations. Observers recorded the sites touched by HCWs. Culture samples were obtained from HCWs' hands and gloves before and after care. Results.: VRE were isolated from a mean (±SD) of 55% ± 24% of patient sites ( n = 256) and 17% ± 12% of environmental sites ( n = 1,572). Most HCWs (131 [56%]) touched both the patient and the patient's environment; no HCW touched only the patient. Of 103 HCWs whose hand samples were negative for VRE when they entered the room, 52% contaminated their hands or gloves after touching the environment, and 70% contaminated their hands or gloves after touching the patient and the environment ( P = .101). In a univariate logistic regression model, the risk of hand or glove contamination was associated with the number of contacts made (odds ratio, 1.1 [95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.19). In a multivariate model, the effect of the number of contacts could not be distinguished from the effect of type of contact (ie, touching the environment alone or touching both the patient and the environment). Overall, 37% of HCWs who did not wear gloves contaminated their hands, and 5% of HCWs who wore gloves did so (an 86% difference). Conclusion.: HCWs were nearly as likely to have contaminated their hands or gloves after touching the environment in a room occupied by a patient colonized by VRE as after touching the colonized patient and the patient's environment. Gloves were highly protective with respect to hand contamination.

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 · 10.1086/524331

Cites

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Hayden, M. K., Blom, D. W., Lyle, E. A., Moore, C. G., & Weinstein, R. A.
Venue
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
Published
2008-02
Volume
29
Issue
2
Pages
149-154
ISSN
  • 0899-823X (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-6834
OpenAlex
W2050012426
Cited by
304
References
0
FWCI
6.46
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.