The application of contact isolation precautions can be disparate. Here is a previous blog related to contact isolation uncertainties.
Today I came across this manuscript reporting on the disparities in infection control practice for the control of multi-drug drug resistant gram negative rods (extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae [ESBL-E] and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae [CRE]). The study was a survey based across 15 hospitals in Toronto, Canada. There was wide variation in the use infection control practices including admission screening (53% and 53%), contact precautions (53% and 100%), and isolation (60% and 100%) for ESBL-E and CRE, respectively. For the hospitals performing admission screening, 75% used risk factor-based screening for ESBL-E and CRE.
Why? Most likely because high quality data and consensus guidelines are lacking on how best to detect and isolate patients colonized or infected with these pathogens. In addition, effective decolonization methods and evidence based protocols for discontinuing isolation are still undefined.
For our recent perspective on contact precautions, click here.
It is November 6 and the polls just opened. I am walking out to vote. Who will get my presidential vote? You will just have to guess.