Incidence of coagulase-negative staphylococcal bacteremia among ICU patients: decontamination studies as a natural experiment
- 7 Downloads
The epidemiology of coagulase-negative staphylococcal (CNS) bacteremia among adult ICU patients remains unclear. Decontamination studies among ICU patients provide a unique opportunity to study the impacts of different diagnostic criteria, exposure to various decontamination interventions, and various other factors, on its incidence over three decades. Decontamination studies among ICU patients reporting CNS bacteremia incidence data were obtained mostly from recent systematic reviews. The CNS bacteremia incidence within component (control and intervention) groups of decontamination studies was benchmarked versus studies without intervention (observational groups). The impacts of antibiotic versus chlorhexidine decontamination interventions, control group concurrency, publication year, and diagnostic criteria were examined in meta-regression models. Among non-intervention (observational) studies which did versus did not specify stringent (≥ 2 positive blood cultures) diagnostic criteria, the mean CNS bacteremia incidence per 100 patients (and 95% CI; n) is 1.3 (0.9–2.0; n = 23) versus 3.6 (1.8–6.9; n = 8), respectively, giving an overall benchmark of 1.8 (1.2–2.4; n = 31). Versus the benchmark incidence, the mean incidence is high among concurrent control (5.7; 3.6–9.1%) and intervention (5.2; 3.6–6.9%), but not non-concurrent control (1.0; 0.4–3.9%) groups of 21 antibiotic studies, nor among eleven component groups of chlorhexidine studies. This high incidence remained apparent (p < 0.01) in meta-regression models adjusting for group wide factors such as diagnostic criteria and publication year. The incidence of CNS bacteremia within both intervention and concurrent (but not non-concurrent) control groups of antibiotic-based decontamination studies are unusually high even accounting for variable diagnostic criteria and other factors.
KeywordsCoagulase-negative staphylococci Bacteremia Intensive care unit Decontamination
This research has been supported by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing through the Rural Clinical Training and Support (RCTS) program.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
- 10.Van der Bij AK, Frentz D, Bonten MJ, Stuart JC, van Hees BC, Vijfhuizen J, Wintermans RG, der Kuil WA, Alblas J, van der Bij AK, ISIS-AR Study Group (2015) Gram-positive cocci in Dutch ICUs with and without selective decontamination of the oropharyngeal and digestive tract: a retrospective database analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother 71:816–820PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Silvestri L, Weir WI, Gregori D, Taylor N, Zandstra DF, van Saene JJ, van Saene HK (2017) Impact of oral chlorhexidine on bloodstream infection in critically ill patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 31(6):2236–2244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Hurley JC (2019) Studies of Selective digestive decontamination as a natural experiment to evaluate topical antibiotic prophylaxis and cephalosporin use as population-level risk factors for enterococcal bacteremia among ICU patients J Antimicrob Chemother (in press)Google Scholar
- 18.Hurley JC (2019) How the cluster randomized trial ‘works’. Clin Infect Dis (in press)Google Scholar
- 19.Vandenbroucke-Grauls CM (2014) Antimicrobial resistance in the Netherlands: a natural experiment? Frontiers in Pub Health 2:5Google Scholar
- 24.Oostdijk EA, Kesecioglu J, Schultz MJ, Visser CE, De Jonge E, van Essen EH, Bernards AT, Purmer I, Brimicombe R, Bergmans D, van Tiel F (2017) Notice of retraction and replacement: Effects of decontamination of the oropharynx and intestinal tract on antibiotic resistance in ICUs: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 312:1429–1437CrossRefGoogle Scholar