Michael Whitby

BACKGROUND: Existing severity assessment tools, such as the pneumonia severity index (PSI) and CURB-65 (tool based on confusion, urea level, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and age >or=65 years), predict 30-day mortality in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and have limited ability to predict which patients will require intensive respiratory or vasopressor support (IRVS). METHODS: The Australian CAP Study (ACAPS) was a prospective study of 882 episodes in which each patient had a detailed assessment of severity features, etiology, and treatment outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify features at initial assessment that were associated with receipt of IRVS. These results were converted into a simple points-based severity tool that was validated in 5 external databases, totaling 7464 patients. RESULTS: In ACAPS, 10.3% of patients received IRVS, and the 30-day mortality rate was 5.7%. The features statistically significantly associated with receipt of IRVS were low systolic blood pressure (2 points), multilobar chest radiography involvement (1 point), low albumin level (1 point), high respiratory rate (1 point), tachycardia (1 point), confusion (1 point), poor oxygenation (2 points), and low arterial pH (2 points): SMART-COP. A SMART-COP score of >or=3 points identified 92% of patients who received IRVS, including 84% of patients who did not need immediate admission to the intensive care unit. Accuracy was also high in the 5 validation databases. Sensitivities of PSI and CURB-65 for identifying the need for IRVS were 74% and 39%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SMART-COP is a simple, practical clinical tool for accurately predicting the need for IRVS that is likely to assist clinicians in determining CAP severity.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate behavioral determinants of handwashing among nurses. DESIGN: Statistical modeling using the Theory of Planned Behavior and relevant components to handwashing behavior by nurses that were derived from focus-group discussions and literature review. SETTING: The community and 3 tertiary care hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 9-10 years, mothers, and nurses. RESULTS: Responses from 754 nurses were analyzed using backward linear regression for handwashing intention. We reasoned that handwashing results in 2 distinct behavioral practices--inherent handwashing and elective handwashing--with our model explaining 64% and 76%, respectively, of the variance in behavioral intention. Translation of community handwashing behavior to healthcare settings is the predominant driver of all handwashing, both inherent (weighted beta =2.92) and elective (weighted beta =4.1). Intended elective in-hospital handwashing behavior is further significantly predicted by nurses' beliefs in the benefits of the activity (weighted beta =3.12), peer pressure of senior physicians (weighted beta =3.0) and administrators (weighted beta =2.2), and role modeling (weighted beta =3.0) but only to a minimal extent by reduction in effort (weighted beta =1.13). Inherent community behavior (weighted beta =2.92), attitudes (weighted beta =0.84), and peer behavior (weighted beta =1.08) were strongly predictive of inherent handwashing intent. CONCLUSIONS: A small increase in handwashing adherence may be seen after implementing the use of alcoholic hand rubs, to decrease the effort required to wash hands. However, the facilitation of compliance is not simply related to effort but is highly dependent on altering behavioral perceptions. Thus, introduction of hand rub alone without an associated behavioral modification program is unlikely to induce a sustained increase in hand hygiene compliance.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the risk of death from healthcare-associated (nosocomial) bacteraemia caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and compare it with that of nosocomial bacteraemia caused by methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA), by meta-analysis of selected studies. DATA SOURCES: Medline, EMBASE, Current Contents and Cochrane Library were searched for the period January 1978 (or earliest date of the database, if later than 1978) to December 2000. STUDY SELECTION: Studies which compared mortality of nosocomial MRSA and MSSA bacteraemia. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nine studies were analysed. All but one found an increased relative risk (RR) of death from MRSA bacteraemia, with RR ranging from 0.89 to 4.94. Meta-analysis showed that patients with MRSA bacteraemia have an RR of death, compared with patients with MSSA bacteraemia, of 2.12 (95% CI, 1.76-2.57) using the fixed-effect method, and 2.03 (95% CI, 1.55-2.65) using the random-effect method. CONCLUSION: MRSA bacteraemia is associated with a real increase in risk of death, further justifying ongoing MRSA surveillance and control in healthcare facilities.