I recently posted on the WHO CPE guidelines. A couple of people have alerted me to two other recently published guidelines, one from ECDC, and the other from Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Healthcare. So, we now have a wealth of guidelines to prevent and control CPE. But how to they compare?
I heard an interesting talk by Dr Michael Miller last week on the ethics of screening for MDROs. Whilst we need to think carefully about the ethics of all medical procedures (great and small), I think the benefits to the individual and the population generally outweigh downsides for MDRO screening programmes.
A brave study from the Palmore/Frank group at NIH has opened the Pandora’s Box that is screening staff for MDROs, and, I’m delighted to say, firmly closed it with their findings! Only 3% of staff carried ESBLs, one carried a CPE, and none carried VRE, and this despite extensive contact with MDRO patients for many of the staff sampled!
BMC Medicine have recently published a study from researchers in Oxford, PHE, and Manchester illuminating the importance of referral networks in the transmission of CPE. The bottom line is that regional referral networks seem to be the most important driver of CPE spread, such that a small CPE problem close to home is more of a threat than a larger CPE problem in a distant referral network!
What do you do to prevent VRE transmission?
…you are not alone, if the answer to this question is ‘nothing special’, based on survey published in ARIC! Dale Fisher’s team in Singapore put together a simple survey, asking the global IPC community what measures they have in place to prevent the transmission of VRE. There was a huge degree of variability, ranging from ‘nothing special’ to ‘the kitchen sink’!
I led a workshop at IPS today with my colleague Tracey Galletly on using PHE’s Toolkit to build a CPE policy. We based the session around a series of multiple choice questions that the audience voted on. I thought I’d share the results and key points raised! Continue reading