Less contact isolation is more in the ICU: pro
Document type :
Article dans une revue scientifique
Permalink :
Title :
Less contact isolation is more in the ICU: pro
Author(s) :
Poulakou, Garyphallia [Auteur]
University of Athens Medical School [Athens]
Nseir, Saad [Auteur]
Lille Inflammation Research International Center (LIRIC) - U995
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [Lille] [CHRU Lille]
Daikos, George L. [Auteur]
University of Athens Medical School [Athens]
University of Athens Medical School [Athens]
Nseir, Saad [Auteur]

Lille Inflammation Research International Center (LIRIC) - U995
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [Lille] [CHRU Lille]
Daikos, George L. [Auteur]
University of Athens Medical School [Athens]
Journal title :
Intensive Care Medicine
Abbreviated title :
Intensive Care Med
Volume number :
46
Pages :
1727-1731
Publisher :
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Publication date :
2020-07-09
ISSN :
1432-1238
HAL domain(s) :
Sciences du Vivant [q-bio]
English abstract : [en]
Additional contact precautions (ACP) have been endorsed by International Recommendations in patients with colonisation or infection by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) [1, 2]. Contact isolation (CI), considered initially ...
Show more >Additional contact precautions (ACP) have been endorsed by International Recommendations in patients with colonisation or infection by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) [1, 2]. Contact isolation (CI), considered initially as the holy grail of the interruption of transmission of MDROs, currently remains debated [3, 4]. Suboptimal contact of healthcare personnel with the patients has been associated with service care errors including falls, pressure ulcers, fluid/electrolyte disorders and suboptimal documentation of vital signs or physician notes. Patients’ dissatisfaction and stress as well as increased healthcare costs are the major downsides of CI [3]. In view of the divergent opinions in the literature, infection control practices in ICU vary considerably. In this narrative review, we will focus on the most relevant studies, with messages in line with the principle “less is more” (Table 1). In the present manuscript, we considered “less CI” as surrogate to “not universal" or “targeted” CI (and evidently not “no CI”). However, we also discuss studies in which CI seems less important or less effective compared to other pivotal infection control measures, therefore, less desirable.Show less >
Show more >Additional contact precautions (ACP) have been endorsed by International Recommendations in patients with colonisation or infection by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) [1, 2]. Contact isolation (CI), considered initially as the holy grail of the interruption of transmission of MDROs, currently remains debated [3, 4]. Suboptimal contact of healthcare personnel with the patients has been associated with service care errors including falls, pressure ulcers, fluid/electrolyte disorders and suboptimal documentation of vital signs or physician notes. Patients’ dissatisfaction and stress as well as increased healthcare costs are the major downsides of CI [3]. In view of the divergent opinions in the literature, infection control practices in ICU vary considerably. In this narrative review, we will focus on the most relevant studies, with messages in line with the principle “less is more” (Table 1). In the present manuscript, we considered “less CI” as surrogate to “not universal" or “targeted” CI (and evidently not “no CI”). However, we also discuss studies in which CI seems less important or less effective compared to other pivotal infection control measures, therefore, less desirable.Show less >
Language :
Anglais
Audience :
Internationale
Popular science :
Non
Administrative institution(s) :
Université de Lille
CNRS
CNRS
Research team(s) :
Glycobiology in fungal Pathogenesis and Clinical Applications
Submission date :
2021-07-15T08:54:34Z
2021-08-25T09:50:08Z
2021-08-25T09:50:08Z