Letters
Infectious diseases
Volume 188 - Issue 1

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in hospitals: time for a culture change

Authors:  Luke F Chen, Deverick J Anderson, Keith S Kaye and Daniel J Sexton

Med J Aust 2008; 188 (1): 61-64. || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2008.tb01517.x
Published online: 7 January 2008
Download PDF (327 KB)
Share: Share on Blue Sky Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share by email

To the Editor: The recent editorial by Collignon and colleagues challenged Australian physicians and health care leaders to confront the rising burden of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).1 Compared with Australia, the United States has a bigger problem with MRSA; more than 60% of all hospital-acquired S. aureus infections are now caused by MRSA.2

Appropriately, the medical community has made an urgent call for action. For example, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (a not-for-profit organisation based in the US that aims to improve health care throughout the world) incorporated specific MRSA prevention measures into its recent 5 Million Lives Campaign (see http://www.ihi.org/ihi). One of these prevention measures, a recommendation for active surveillance, has generated controversy. Specifically, the cost-effectiveness of this strategy is still vigorously debated in the infection control literature.3 At present, it is unclear what surveillance testing method should be used in the laboratory, and whether testing should be done for all patients or just those identified as high risk.

The cry for help from community activists in the US and the United Kingdom has reached the ears of their legislative representatives. In two northern US states, lawmakers are considering bills that require universal active surveillance in their hospitals. Mandating resource-stretched health systems to implement obligatory active screening is not a prudent use of resources. The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America and the US Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology recently published a joint position paper opposing this legislative activity, noting that data in support of active surveillance have been restricted to high-risk populations.4 We support this position and remind readers that active surveillance does not obviate the need for adherence to basic and consistent hand-hygiene practices.

Complacency and lack of clinical leadership remain the greatest challenges in the efforts to reduce the transmission of MRSA. Why do we accept this epidemic as a fact of life as our health care workers complacently contribute to the nosocomial transmission of MRSA? By implementing simple prevention policies, feedback of data on nosocomial transmission of MRSA, and increased infection-control education, we have achieved a 22% reduction in MRSA infections in our network of community hospitals.5 Still, we acknowledge the absence of a zero-tolerance approach to failures in hand-hygiene practices. More needs to be done. We challenge our clinical leaders to demand higher standards for hand hygiene. Most cases of nosocomial MRSA transmission represent failures of basic hygiene practices. The problem is surmountable. Infection control is not a skill of a few, but the responsibility of every team member. The onus is on all of us.

Authors

  • Luke F Chen1
  • Deverick J Anderson1
  • Keith S Kaye1
  • Daniel J Sexton1
  • 1. Division of Infectious Diseases, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.

Correspondence: luke.chen@duke.edu

Competing interests

Deverick Anderson sits on the Regional Advisory Panel for Pfizer and Schering–Plough.

References

View this article on Wiley Online Library