Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae - once positive always positive?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides an overview of gastrointestinal tract colonization with carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE), including risk factors for colonization, determinants for duration of colonization, and whether patients can decolonize, either spontaneously or via targeted interventions. RECENT FINDINGS: CPE colonization is disseminating globally with increasing numbers of carbapenemases being identified in increasing patient cohorts. Numerous risk factors including repeated healthcare contact, patient co-morbidities and international travel have all been linked to increased rates of colonization. Duration of colonization has been investigated in various healthcare settings and ranges many months or even years. Although new methods for expediting decolonization are being investigated, including faecal microbiota transplantation, high quality evidence of impact is lacking. SUMMARY: Current evidence indicates that CPE colonization usually persists throughout the duration of most hospital admissions, although the majority of patients will subsequently spontaneously decolonize. Difficulties remain in determining the point at which patients can be considered decolonized because of the lack acceptable criteria for defining eradication. This has significance implications for infection prevention and control measures during the initial and subsequent hospital admissions. Strategies to reduce the healthcare burden of CPE colonization continue to rely predominantly on preventing acquisition, whereas decolonization efforts remain a focus of research.

Designing an optimal infection prevention service: Part 2.

Background: The importance of infection prevention and control (IPC) services to prevent threats from healthcare-associated infections and improve the quality of healthcare delivery is undeniable. However, IPC services across the UK and Ireland have substantial variability in terms of team structures and delivery models. Aim: The aim of this study was to define an optimal IPC service in different contexts and settings within the United Kingdom and Ireland. Methods: This mixed methods study adopted discussion huddles with IPC teams to explore various components of IPC programmes and services. A Nominal Group technique was then undertaken to achieve a group consensus of what an optimal infection prevention service should look like. Results: Five discussion huddles were conducted which included 53 participants in total. Key themes arising were IPC Service Priorities, IPC Service Enablers for Success, and Necessary Skills and Expertise Required for Delivering an Effective IPC Service. For the nominal technique, 45 responses were identified which were determining the key priorities for an effective IPC service and 69 responses for establishing key enablers for success. Discussion: These findings supported the development of a conceptual model for designing an optimal infection prevention service, which can be used to develop IPC services at an international, national, regional and local level. A focus is required around implementation of these highlighted enablers, so are effectively embedded into infection prevention and control services, and wider healthcare settings.