tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Am J Infect Control. 2016 Mar 31. pii: S0196-6553(16)00151-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.02.002. [Epub ahead of print]
[h=1]Contacts between health care workers and patients in a short-stay geriatric unit during the peak of a seasonal influenza epidemic compared with a nonepidemic period.[/h] Oussaid N[SUP]1[/SUP], Voirin N[SUP]2[/SUP], R?gis C[SUP]3[/SUP], Khanafer N[SUP]1[/SUP], Martin-Gaujard G[SUP]4[/SUP], Vincent A[SUP]4[/SUP], Comte B[SUP]4[/SUP], B?net T[SUP]5[/SUP], Vanhems P[SUP]6[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] [h=4]BACKGROUND:[/h] Patterns of contacts between health care workers and patients during seasonal epidemics are unknown. Our study objective was to compare the number and duration of contacts between health care workers and patients during a nonepidemic period versus a community influenza epidemic, and to identify supercontactors.
[h=4]METHODS:[/h] Our observational study was conducted in a short-stay geriatric unit of a university hospital. Contacts between individuals were recorded by active radio frequency identification devices. Contact patterns were compared between 2 periods according to contact number and duration. Each care period lasted 5 days in the nonepidemic and influenza epidemic periods.
[h=4]RESULTS:[/h] The study included 21 medical doctors, 43 nurses, and 56 patients. In total, 3,200 contacts (61.4%; 152,700 seconds) were recorded during the nonepidemic period, with 2,013 contacts (38.6%; 92,740 seconds) in the epidemic period (P = .007). More cumulative contacts occurred during the nonepidemic period between nurses and patients (n = 2,638 [82%] vs n = 1,599 [79%]), but not between patients (n = 56 [18%] vs n = 414 [21%]). Contact duration between nurses and patients lasted longer during the nonepidemic period (P = .04). During the epidemic period, 6 nurses (15%) considered to be supercontactors accounted for 44.3% of the total number of contacts with patients.
[h=4]CONCLUSION:[/h] The pattern of contacts between individuals differed according to the presence or not of the community influenza peak that might have influenced the risk of nosocomial influenza.
Copyright ? 2016 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] Contact networks; Elderly; Nosocomial influenza; Radio frequency identification device; Surveillance
PMID: 27040566 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
[h=1]Contacts between health care workers and patients in a short-stay geriatric unit during the peak of a seasonal influenza epidemic compared with a nonepidemic period.[/h] Oussaid N[SUP]1[/SUP], Voirin N[SUP]2[/SUP], R?gis C[SUP]3[/SUP], Khanafer N[SUP]1[/SUP], Martin-Gaujard G[SUP]4[/SUP], Vincent A[SUP]4[/SUP], Comte B[SUP]4[/SUP], B?net T[SUP]5[/SUP], Vanhems P[SUP]6[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] [h=4]BACKGROUND:[/h] Patterns of contacts between health care workers and patients during seasonal epidemics are unknown. Our study objective was to compare the number and duration of contacts between health care workers and patients during a nonepidemic period versus a community influenza epidemic, and to identify supercontactors.
[h=4]METHODS:[/h] Our observational study was conducted in a short-stay geriatric unit of a university hospital. Contacts between individuals were recorded by active radio frequency identification devices. Contact patterns were compared between 2 periods according to contact number and duration. Each care period lasted 5 days in the nonepidemic and influenza epidemic periods.
[h=4]RESULTS:[/h] The study included 21 medical doctors, 43 nurses, and 56 patients. In total, 3,200 contacts (61.4%; 152,700 seconds) were recorded during the nonepidemic period, with 2,013 contacts (38.6%; 92,740 seconds) in the epidemic period (P = .007). More cumulative contacts occurred during the nonepidemic period between nurses and patients (n = 2,638 [82%] vs n = 1,599 [79%]), but not between patients (n = 56 [18%] vs n = 414 [21%]). Contact duration between nurses and patients lasted longer during the nonepidemic period (P = .04). During the epidemic period, 6 nurses (15%) considered to be supercontactors accounted for 44.3% of the total number of contacts with patients.
[h=4]CONCLUSION:[/h] The pattern of contacts between individuals differed according to the presence or not of the community influenza peak that might have influenced the risk of nosocomial influenza.
Copyright ? 2016 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] Contact networks; Elderly; Nosocomial influenza; Radio frequency identification device; Surveillance
PMID: 27040566 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]