Abstract

BackgroundA multitude of definitions determining multidrug resistance (MDR) of Gram-negative organisms exist worldwide. The definitions differ depending on their purpose and on the issueing country or organization. The MDR definitions of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) were primarily chosen to harmonize epidemiological surveillance. The German Commission of Hospital Hygiene and Infection Prevention (KRINKO) issued a national guideline which is mainly used to guide infection prevention and control (IPC) measures. The Swiss University Hospital Zurich (UHZ) – in absentia of national guidelines – developed its own definition for IPC purposes. In this study we aimed to determine the effects of different definitions of multidrug-resistance on rates of Gram-negative multidrug-resistant organisms (GN-MDRO).MethodsMDR definitions of the ECDC, the German KRINKO and the Swiss University Hospital Zurich were applied on a dataset comprising isolates of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterobacter sp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter baumannii complex. Rates of GN-MDRO were compared and the percentage of patients with a GN-MDRO was calculated.ResultsIn total 11′407 isolates from a 35 month period were included. For Enterobacterales and P. aeruginosa, highest MDR-rates resulted from applying the ‘ECDC-MDR’ definition. ‘ECDC-MDR’ rates were up to four times higher compared to ‘KRINKO-3/4MRGN’ rates, and up to six times higher compared to UHZ rates. Lowest rates were observed when applying the ‘KRINKO-4MRGN’ definitions. Comparing the ‘KRINKO-3/4MRGN’ with the UHZ definitions did not show uniform trends, but yielded higher rates for E. coli and lower rates for P. aeruginosa. On the patient level, the percentages of GN-MDRO carriers were 2.1, 5.5, 6.6, and 18.2% when applying the ‘KRINKO-4MRGN’, ‘UHZ-MDR’, ‘KRINKO-3/4MRGN’, and the ‘ECDC-MDR’ definition, respectively.ConclusionsDifferent MDR-definitions lead to considerable variation in rates of GN-MDRO. Differences arise from the number of antibiotic categories required to be resistant, the categories and drugs considered relevant, and the antibiotic panel tested. MDR definitions should be chosen carefully depending on their purpose and local resistance rates, as definitions guiding isolation precautions have direct effects on costs and patient care.

Highlights

  • A multitude of definitions determining multidrug resistance (MDR) of Gram-negative organisms exist worldwide

  • It is well known that the definitions of multidrug resistance (MDR) are neither harmonized between countries, nor between hospitals in the same country, nor do guidelines on infection prevention and control (IPC) standards for patients with GNMDRO exist to date [6,7,8]

  • The primary aim of this study was to analyze the impact of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), KRINKO and University Hospital Zurich (UHZ) definitions on the rate of Gram-negative multidrug-resistant organisms (GN-MDRO) and the resulting number of patients characterized as GN-MDRO carriers

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A multitude of definitions determining multidrug resistance (MDR) of Gram-negative organisms exist worldwide. The MDR definitions of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) were primarily chosen to harmonize epidemiological surveillance. Besides standard infection prevention precautions, most hospitals apply additional transmission-based precautions to reduce the spread of gram-negative multidrug-resistant organisms (GN-MDRO) from colonized or infected patients to others. It is well known that the definitions of multidrug resistance (MDR) are neither harmonized between countries, nor between hospitals in the same country, nor do guidelines on infection prevention and control (IPC) standards for patients with GNMDRO exist to date [6,7,8]. In Europe, a multitude of definitions for GN-MDRO with varying purposes do exist: The MDR definitions of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), published in 2011, were primarily chosen to harmonize epidemiological surveillance data across healthcare settings and countries [9]. Categories were constructed with the intent of placing antimicrobial agents into therapeutically relevant groups and each category is considered relevant

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.