Search

The aim of this study was to evaluate the epidemiology and characteristics and to identify modifiable risk factors for community-associated (CA) MRSA colonisation in a region with high prevalence. A large patient population (n=2280) from two tertiary care centres in Athens (Greece) was evaluated. Demographics and potential risk factors for CA-MRSA colonisation were recorded prospectively. Presence of the Panton-Valentine Leukocidin (PVL) toxin and mecA gene was determined in all MRSA isolates. Two definitions for CA-MRSA were applied. Univariate and multivariate analyses to identify predictors of previously unknown CA-MRSA colonisation were performed. In total, 120 (5.3%) MRSA carriers were identified; in 67 the isolates were classified as CA-MRSA using criteria based on the CDC definition, compared with 35 based on a definition including PVL toxin positivity. Factors significantly associated with previously unknown CA-MRSA carriage (CDC definition) included being a child or adolescent (OR=3.6, 95% CI 1.5-8.6), belonging to the family of an index case (OR=2.4, 95% CI 1.2-4.8), and presence of any co-morbidity (OR=1.7, 95% CI 1.04-2.8) or chronic skin disease (OR=3.6, 95% CI=2.2-6.1). In multivariate analysis, presence of any co-morbidity was the only significant predictor (OR=4.9, 95% CI 1.07-22.5; P=0.04). No easily modifiable risk factor for previously unknown CA-MRSA colonisation was identified. The CDC-based epidemiological definition for CA-MRSA appears to be more sensitive in detection of CA-MRSA colonisation than a purely molecular definition based on presence of the PVL gene.

Background: The quality improvement effort in clinical practice has focused mostly on ‘performance quality’, i.e. on the development of comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines. This study aimed to assess the ‘conformance quality’, i.e. the extent to which guidelines once developed are correctly and consistently applied. It also aimed to assess the existence of quality gaps in the treatment of certain patient segments as defined by age or gender and to investigate methods to improve overall conformance quality. Methods: A retrospective audit of clinical practice in a well-defined oncology setting was undertaken and the results compared to those obtained from prospectively applying an internally developed clinical protocol in the same setting and using specific tools to increase conformance quality. Results: All indicators showed improvement after the implementation of the protocol that in many cases reached statistical significance, while in the entire cohort advanced age was associated (although not significantly) with sub-optimal delivery of care. A ‘learning curve’ phenomenon in the implementation of quality initiatives was detected, with all indicators improving substantially in the second part of the prospective study. Conclusions: Clinicians should pay separate attention to the implementation of chosen protocols and employ specific tools to increase conformance quality in patient care.