Prevention and treatment of nosocomial sepsis in the NICU

被引：32

作者：

Clark R. ^{[1
,2
]}

Powers R. ^{[3
]}

White R. ^{[4
]}

Bloom B. ^{[5
]}

Sanchez P. ^{[6
]}

Benjamin Jr. D.K. ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Pediatrics Medical Group Inc., Sunrise, FL 33323-2825

[2] Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC

[3] Children's Mercy Hospital, Oakland, CA

[4] Memorial Hospital of South Bend, South Bend, ID

[5] Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, KS

[6] University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX

来源：

Journal of Perinatology | 2004年 / 24卷 / 7期

关键词：

D O I：

10.1038/sj.jp.7211125

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Nosocomial sepsis a serious problem for neonates who are admitted for intensive care. It is associated with an increase in mortality, and prolonged lenght of hospital stay. Thus, both the human and fiscal costs of these infections are high. Although the rate of nosocomial sepsis increases with the degree of both prematurity and low birth weight, no specific lab test has been shown to be very useful in improving our ability to predict who has a "real" blood-steam infected and, therefore, who needs to be treated with a full course of antibiotics. As a result, antibiotic use is double the rate of "proven" sepsis and we are facilitating the growth of resistant organisms in the neonatal intensive care unit. The purpose of this article is to describe simple changes in process, which when implemented, can reduce nosocomial infection rates in neonates outcomes. © 2004 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved.

引用

页码：446 / 453

页数：7

共 139 条

[1]

Adams-Chapman I., Stoll B.J., Prevention of nosocomial infections in the neonatal intensive care unit, Curr. Opin. Pediatr., 14, 2, pp. 157-164, (2002)

[2]

Boyce J.M., Rotter M.L., Hospital hygiene procedures: Areas of consensus and ongoing controversies. Proceeding of the 6th International BODE Hygiene Day 7-10 September 2000, Vienna, Austria, J. Hosp. Infect., 48, SUPPL. A, (2001)

[3]

Boyce J.M., Consequences of inaction: Importance of infection control practices, Clin. Infect. Dis., 33, SUPPL. 3, (2001)

[4]

Boyce J.M., Antiseptic technology: Access, affordability, and acceptance, Emerg. Infect. Dis., 7, 2, pp. 231-233, (2001)

[5]

Boyce J.M., Using alcohol for hand antisepsis: Dispelling old myths, Infect. Control. Hosp. Epidemiol., 21, 7, pp. 438-441, (2000)

[6]

Boyce J.M., It is time for action: Improving hand hygiene in hospitals, Ann. Intern. Med., 130, 2, pp. 153-155, (1999)

[7]

Ehrenkranz N.J., Sanders C.C., Eckert-Schollenberger D., Et al., Lack of evidence of efficacy of cohorting nursing personnel in a neonatal intensive care unit to prevent contact spread of bacteria: An experimental study, Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J., 11, 2, pp. 105-113, (1992)

[8]

Ehrenkranz N.J., Bland soap handwash or hand antisepis? The pressing need for clarity, Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol., 13, 5, pp. 299-301, (1992)

[9]

Gould D., Infection control. Making sense of hand hygiene, Nurs. Times, 90, 30, pp. 63-64, (1994)

[10]

Perraud M., Amazian K., Girard R., Tissot G.F., The use of hand hygiene products could reduce colonization on the hands, J. Hosp. Infect., 47, 4, pp. 336-337, (2001)

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 →