Comparison of two MALDI-TOF MS systems for the identification of clinically relevant anaerobic bacteria in Argentina.

The aim of this study was to compare the performance of two MALDI-TOF MS systems in the identification of clinically relevant strict anaerobic bacteria. The 16S rRNA gene sequencing was the gold standard method when discrepancies or inconsistencies were observed between platforms. A total of 333 isolates were recovered from clinical samples of different centers in Buenos Aires City between 2016 and 2021. The isolates were identified in duplicate using two MALDI-TOF MS systems, BD Bruker Biotyper (Bruker Daltonics, Bremen, Germany) and Vitek MS (bioMèrieux, Marcy-l'Etoile, France). Using the Vitek MS system, the identification of anaerobic isolates yielded the following percentages: 65.5% (n: 218) at the species or species-complex level, 71.2% (n: 237) at the genus level, 29.4% (n: 98) with no identification and 5.1% (n: 17) with misidentification. Using the Bruker Biotyper system, the identification rates were as follows: 85.3% (n: 284) at the species or species-complex level, 89.7% (n: 299) at the genus level, 14.1% (n: 47) with no identification and 0.6% (n: 2) with misidentification. Differences in the performance of both methods were statistically significant (p-values <0.0001). In conclusion, MALDI-TOF MS systems speed up microbial identification and are particularly effective for slow-growing microorganisms, such as anaerobic bacteria, which are difficult to identify by traditional methods. In this study, the Bruker system showed greater accuracy than the Vitek system. In order to be truly effective, it is essential to update the databases of both systems by increasing the number of each main spectrum profile within the platforms.

Impact of INICC Multidimensional Hand Hygiene Approach in ICUs in Four Cities in Argentina.

We evaluated the impact of the International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium multidimensional approach to hand hygiene in 11 intensive care units in 4 cities in Argentina and analyzed predictors of poor hand hygiene compliance. We had a baseline period and a follow-up period. We observed 21 100 hand hygiene opportunities. Hand hygiene compliance increased from 28.3% to 64.8% (P = .0001). Males versus females (56.8% vs 66.4%; P < .001) and physicians versus nurses (46.6% vs 67.8%; P < .001) were significantly associated with poor hand hygiene compliance.