ABSTRACT
During the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 outbreak, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Oregon used several surveillance methods to detect associated deaths. Surveillance using unexplained death and medical examiner data allowed for detection of 34 (18%) pandemic (H1N1) 2009-associated deaths that were not detected by hospital-based surveillance.
Subject(s)
Coroners and Medical Examiners , Death, Sudden/epidemiology , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype/isolation & purification , Influenza, Human/mortality , Pandemics , Population Surveillance/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Aged , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype/genetics , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype/immunology , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Minnesota/epidemiology , New Mexico/epidemiology , Oregon/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to determine the costs per hospital admission of screening intensive care unit patients for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and isolating those who are colonized. METHODS: Data on the costs of the intervention come from the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, a 279-bed teaching hospital and outpatient facility. A microcosting approach is used to determine the intervention costs for 3 different laboratory testing protocols. The costs of caring for MRSA-infected patients come from the experience of 241 Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center patients with MRSA infections in 2004 through 2006. The effectiveness of the intervention comes from the extant literature. To capture the effect of screening on reducing transmission of MRSA to other patients and its effect on costs, a Markov simulation model was employed. RESULTS: The intervention was cost saving compared with no intervention for all 3 laboratory processes evaluated and for all of the 1-way sensitivity analyses considered. CONCLUSION: Because of the high cost of caring for a MRSA patient, interventions that reduce the spread of infections-such as screening intensive care unit patients upon admission studied here-are likely to pay for themselves.
Subject(s)
Bacteriological Techniques/economics , Carrier State/diagnosis , Mass Screening/economics , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus/isolation & purification , Staphylococcal Infections/diagnosis , Hospitals , Humans , Intensive Care UnitsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine differences in healthcare costs between cases of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infection and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) infection in adults. DESIGN: Retrospective study of all cases of S. aureus infection. SETTING: Department of Veterans Affairs hospital and associated clinics. PATIENTS: There were 390 patients with MSSA infections and 335 patients with MRSA infections. METHODS: We used medical records, accounting systems, and interviews to identify services rendered and costs for Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center patients with S. aureus infection with onset during the period from January 1, 2004, through June 30, 2006. We used regression analysis to adjust for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Median 6-month unadjusted costs for patients infected with MRSA were $34,657, compared with $15,923 for patients infected with MSSA. Patients with MRSA infection had more comorbidities than patients with MSSA infection (mean Charlson index 4.3 vs 3.2; P < .001). For patients with Charlson indices of 3 or less, mean adjusted 6-month costs derived from multivariate analysis were $51,252 (95% CI, $46,041-$56,464) for MRSA infection and $30,158 (95% CI, $27,092-$33,225) for MSSA infection. For patients with Charlson indices of 4 or more, mean adjusted costs were $84,436 (95% CI, $79,843-$89,029) for MRSA infection and $59,245 (95% CI, $56,016-$62,473) for MSSA infection. Patients with MRSA infection were also more likely to die than were patients with MSSA infection (23.6% vs 11.5%; P < .001). MRSA infection was more likely to involve the lungs, bloodstream, and urinary tract, while MSSA infection was more likely to involve bones or joints; eyes, ears, nose, or throat; surgical sites; and skin or soft tissue (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Resistance to methicillin in S. aureus was independently associated with increased costs. Effective antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention programs are needed to prevent these costly infections.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Cross Infection/economics , Health Care Costs , Hospitals, Veterans/economics , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus/drug effects , Staphylococcal Infections/economics , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross Infection/drug therapy , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/microbiology , Female , Humans , Male , Methicillin/pharmacology , Methicillin Resistance , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Staphylococcal Infections/drug therapy , Staphylococcal Infections/epidemiology , Staphylococcal Infections/microbiology , Staphylococcus aureus/drug effects , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In October 2007, a cluster of patients experiencing a novel polyradiculoneuropathy was identified at a pork abattoir (Plant A). Patients worked in the primary carcass processing area (warm room); the majority processed severed heads (head-table). An investigation was initiated to determine risk factors for illness. METHODS AND RESULTS: Symptoms of the reported patients were unlike previously described occupational associated illnesses. A case-control study was conducted at Plant A. A case was defined as evidence of symptoms of peripheral neuropathy and compatible electrodiagnostic testing in a pork abattoir worker. Two control groups were used - randomly selected non-ill warm-room workers (n = 49), and all non-ill head-table workers (n = 56). Consenting cases and controls were interviewed and blood and throat swabs were collected. The 26 largest U.S. pork abattoirs were surveyed to identify additional cases. Fifteen cases were identified at Plant A; illness onsets occurred during May 2004-November 2007. Median age was 32 years (range, 21-55 years). Cases were more likely than warm-room controls to have ever worked at the head-table (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 6.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-26.7), removed brains or removed muscle from the backs of heads (AOR, 10.3; 95% CI, 1.5-68.5), and worked within 0-10 feet of the brain removal operation (AOR, 9.9; 95% CI, 1.2-80.0). Associations remained when comparing head-table cases and head-table controls. Workers removed brains by using compressed air that liquefied brain and generated aerosolized droplets, exposing themselves and nearby workers. Eight additional cases were identified in the only two other abattoirs using this technique. The three abattoirs that used this technique have stopped brain removal, and no new cases have been reported after 24 months of follow up. Cases compared to controls had higher median interferon-gamma (IFNgamma) levels (21.7 pg/ml; vs 14.8 pg/ml, P<0.001). DISCUSSION: This novel polyradiculoneuropathy was associated with removing porcine brains with compressed air. An autoimmune mechanism is supported by higher levels of IFNgamma in cases than in controls consistent with other immune mediated illnesses occurring in association with neural tissue exposure. Abattoirs should not use compressed air to remove brains and should avoid procedures that aerosolize CNS tissue. This outbreak highlights the potential for respiratory or mucosal exposure to cause an immune-mediated illness in an occupational setting.