Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support

Selective Use of Intranasal Mupirocin and Chlorhexidine Bathing and the Incidence of Methicillin‐Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Colonization and Infection Among Intensive Care Unit Patients

Glenn Ridenour , MD, Russell Lampen , DO, Jeff Federspiel , DO, Steve Kritchevsky , PhD, Edward Wong , MD and Michael Climo , MD
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
Vol. 28, No. 10 (October 2007), pp. 1155-1161
DOI: 10.1086/520102
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/520102
Page Count: 7
  • Get Access
  • Cite this Item
Item Type
Article
References
If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support
Selective Use of Intranasal Mupirocin and Chlorhexidine Bathing and the Incidence of Methicillin‐Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Colonization and Infection Among Intensive Care Unit Patients
Preview not available

Abstract

Objective.  To determine whether the use of chlorhexidine bathing and intranasal mupirocin therapy among patients colonized with methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) would decrease the incidence of MRSA colonization and infection among intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods.  After a 9‐month baseline period (January 13, 2003, through October 12, 2003) during which all incident cases of MRSA colonization or infection were identified through the use of active‐surveillance cultures in a combined medical‐coronary ICU, all patients colonized with MRSA were treated with intranasal mupirocin and underwent daily chlorhexidine bathing. Results.  After the intervention, incident cases of MRSA colonization or infection decreased 52% (incidence density, 8.45 vs 4.05 cases per 1,000 patient‐days; \documentclass{aastex} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{bm} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{pifont} \usepackage{stmaryrd} \usepackage{textcomp} \usepackage{portland,xspace} \usepackage{amsmath,amsxtra} \usepackage[OT2,OT1]{fontenc} \newcommand\cyr{ \renewcommand\rmdefault{wncyr} \renewcommand\sfdefault{wncyss} \renewcommand\encodingdefault{OT2} \normalfont \selectfont} \DeclareTextFontCommand{\textcyr}{\cyr} \pagestyle{empty} \DeclareMathSizes{10}{9}{7}{6} \begin{document} \landscape $P=.048$ \end{document} ). All MRSA isolates remained susceptible to chlorhexidine; the overall rate of mupirocin resistance was low (4.4%) among isolates identified by surveillance cultures and did not increase during the intervention period. Conclusions.  We conclude that the selective use of intranasal mupirocin and daily chlorhexidine bathing for patients colonized with MRSA reduced the incidence of MRSA colonization and infection and contributed to reductions identified by active‐surveillance cultures. This finding suggests that additional strategies to reduce the incidence of MRSA infection and colonization—beyond expanded surveillance—may be needed.

Page Thumbnails