請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/52333
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 方啟泰 | |
dc.contributor.author | Cheng-Yu Lin | en |
dc.contributor.author | 林政由 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T16:12:06Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-09-14 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2015-09-14 | |
dc.date.issued | 2015 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2015-08-18 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1. Lowy FD. Staphylococcus aureus infections. New England Journal of Medicine 1998; 339(8): 520-32. 2. Taiwan Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System (TNIS) 2014 Q2 Monitoring Report. 3. Su CH, Chang SC, Yan JJ, Tseng SH, Chien LJ, Fang CT. Excess mortality and long-term disability from healthcare-associated Staphylococcus aureus infections: a population-based matched cohort study. PloS one 2013; 8(8). 4. Kluytmans J, Van Belkum A, Verbrugh H. Nasal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus: epidemiology, underlying mechanisms, and associated risks. Clinical microbiology reviews 1997; 10(3): 505-20. 5. Wertheim HF, Vos MC, Ott A, et al. Risk and outcome of nosocomial Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia in nasal carriers versus non-carriers. The Lancet 2004; 364(9435): 703-5. 6. Levy PY, Ollivier M, Drancourt M, Raoult D, Argenson JN. Relation between nasal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus and surgical site infection in orthopedic surgery: the role of nasal contamination. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Orthopaedics traumatology, surgery research : OTSR 2013; 99(6): 645-51. 7. Zervou FN, Zacharioudakis IM, Ziakas PD, Mylonakis E. MRSA colonization and risk of infection in the neonatal and pediatric ICU: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics 2014; 133(4): e1015-e23. 8. Wertheim HF, Melles DC, Vos MC, et al. The role of nasal carriage in Staphylococcus aureus infections. The Lancet infectious diseases 2005; 5(12): 751-62. 9. Wang JT, Lauderdale TL, Lee WS, Huang JH, Wang TH, Chang SC. Impact of active surveillance and contact isolation on transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in intensive care units in an area with high prevalence. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association 2010; 109(4): 258-68. 10. Huang SS, Septimus E, Kleinman K, et al. Targeted versus universal decolonization to prevent ICU infection. New England Journal of Medicine 2013; 368(24): 2255-65. 11. Lee YJ, Chen JZ, Lin HC, et al. Impact of active screening for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and decolonization on MRSA infections, mortality and medical cost: a quasi-experimental study in surgical intensive care unit. Critical Care 2015; 19(1): 143. 12. Patel JB, Gorwitz RJ, Jernigan JA. Mupirocin resistance. Clinical infectious diseases 2009; 49(6): 935-41. 13. Annigeri R, Conly J, Vas S, et al. Emergence of mupirocin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in chronic peritoneal dialysis patients using mupirocin prophylaxis to prevent exit-site infection. Peritoneal Dialysis International 2001; 21(6): 554-9. 14. Paule S. Three Years of Universal Surveillance and Decolonization: The Affect on Mupirocin Resistance. 46th Annual Meeting; 2008: Idsa; 2008. 15. Pérez-Fontán M, Rosales M, Rodríguez-Carmona A, Falcón TG, Valdés F. Mupirocin resistance after long-term use for Staphylococcus aureus colonization in patients undergoing chronic peritoneal dialysis. American journal of kidney diseases 2002; 39(2): 337-41. 16. Simor AE, Stuart TL, Louie L, et al. Mupirocin-resistant, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains in Canadian hospitals. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy 2007; 51(11): 3880-6. 17. Lee AS, Macedo-Vinas M, François P, et al. Impact of combined low-level mupirocin and genotypic chlorhexidine resistance on persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriage after decolonization therapy: a case-control study. Clinical infectious diseases 2011; 52(12): 1422-30. 18. Walker ES, Vasquez JE, Dula R, Bullock H, Sarubbi FA. Mupirocin-resistant, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: does mupirocin remain effective? Infection control and hospital epidemiology 2003; 24(5): 342-6. 19. Cespedes C, Saïd-Salim B, Miller M, et al. The clonality of Staphylococcus aureus nasal carriage. Journal of Infectious Diseases 2005; 191(3): 444-52. 20. Grundmann H, Hori S, Winter B, Tami A, Austin DJ. Risk factors for the transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an adult intensive care unit: fitting a model to the data. Journal of Infectious Diseases 2002; 185(4): 481-8. 21. Johnson PD, Martin R, Burrell LJ, et al. Efficacy of an alcohol/chlorhexidine hand hygiene program in a hospital with high rates of nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection. The Medical journal of Australia 2005; 183(10): 509-14. 22. Plipat N, Spicknall IH, Koopman JS, Eisenberg JN. The dynamics of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus exposure in a hospital model and the potential for environmental intervention. BMC infectious diseases 2013; 13(1): 595. 23. Robicsek A, Beaumont JL, Peterson LR. Duration of colonization with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2009; 48(7): 910-3. 24. Wang JT, Liao CH, Fang CT, et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for colonization by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among adults in community settings in Taiwan. Journal of clinical microbiology 2009; 47(9): 2957-63. 25. Chen WT, Wang JT, Lee WS, et al. Performance of the BD GeneOhm Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) PCR Assay for Detecting MRSA Nasal Colonization in Taiwanese Adults. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection 2010; 43(5): 372-7. 26. Cooper B, Medley G, Scott G. Preliminary analysis of the transmission dynamics of nosocomial infections: stochastic and management effects. Journal of Hospital Infection 1999; 43(2): 131-47. 27. Kalmeijer M, Coertjens H, van Nieuwland-Bollen P, et al. Surgical site infections in orthopedic surgery: the effect of mupirocin nasal ointment in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2002; 35(4): 353-8. 28. Perl TM, Cullen JJ, Wenzel RP, et al. Intranasal mupirocin to prevent postoperative Staphylococcus aureus infections. New England Journal of Medicine 2002; 346(24): 1871-7. 29. Robotham JV, Graves N, Cookson BD, et al. Screening, isolation, and decolonisation strategies in the control of meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus in intensive care units: cost effectiveness evaluation. Bmj 2011; 343: d5694. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/52333 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 背景:金黃色葡萄球菌 (Staphylococcus aureus) 是院內感染中常見的致病菌。即使使用抗生素治療,一旦感染就會造成額外的死亡風險、住院日數、及醫療花費。使用含Mupirocin成分的鼻內軟膏對帶菌者做去移生治療已被證實可降低病人後續的感染風險,但去移生介入政策最大的顧慮在於:Mupirocin抗藥性S. aureus比例上升的問題。然而,不同去移生政策對醫院內S. aureus感染率及S. aureus Mupirocin抗藥性的影響尚未被釐清。
方法:這是一個數理模式研究,我們先建構一個考慮Mupirocin抗藥性的院內傳染動態模型,使不同mupirocin抗藥性的S. aureus可以在醫院內經由病人及醫護人員傳播。然後模擬去移生介入政策對S. aureus感染率及Mupirocin抗藥性的影響,並利用實證研究的資料來校正模型,最後評估不同介入政策對降低S. aureus感染率和提高Mupirocin抗藥性S. aureus比例的影響。 結果:相較於未介入期,Targeted decolonization與Universal decolonization皆能降低28.1%及29.4%的S. aureus感染率,但Universal decolonization會伴隨較大的Mupirocin抗藥性比例上升 (3.0% vs. 1.4%)。相較於Targeted decolonization,只做篩檢隔離對降低S. aureus感染率的效果大幅地降低 (10.4% vs. 28.1%)。同時推動Targeted decolonization搭配最佳的洗手運動及隔離照護能帶來更顯著的降低S. aureus感染率效果 (67.6% vs. 19.3%)。 結論:Targeted decolonization是一個能有效降低S. aureus感染率的介入政策,並且伴隨著較小的Mupirocin抗藥性比例上升。若能同時推動Targeted decolonization和最佳的洗手運動及隔離照護,將有最好的介入效果。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Staphylococcus aureus is a leading cause of life-threatening nosocomial infection. Even with antibiotics treatment, nosocomial S. aureus infections are associated with an excess mortality, medical cost and hospital stay. Decolonization with mupirocin can effectively reduce infection rate and negative consequences. The major concern for nationwide decolonization policy is the increase of mupirocin-resistant S. aureus. However, the impact of different nationwide policies on S. aureus infection rate and mupirocin resistance within hospitals has not yet been evaluated. Methods: This is a mathematical modeling study. We first construct a dynamic model of nosocomial S. aureus infection in which mupirocin-susceptible and mupirocin-resistant S. aureus can be transmitted between patients and healthcare workers, then simulate the effect of nationwide decolonization policies on S. aureus infections and mupirocin resistance. Model was calibrated to simulate real world scenario. We compared the impact of different decolonization polices on the reduction of S. aureus infections and increase of mupirocin-resistant S. aureus in hospitals. Results: Compared with baseline situation, 90% coverage rate of both targeted and universal decolonization decreased S. aureus infection rate (28.1% 29.4%), but universal decolonization is associated with larger increase in mupirocin resistance rate (3.0% vs 1.4%). The efficacy of screening and isolation alone on S. aureus infection rate is much less than targeted decolonization (10.4% vs. 28.1%). A 70% coverage rate of targeted decolonization with optimal handwashing and cohorting will lead to a markedly decrease in S. aureus infection rate when compared with targeted decolonization alone (67.6% vs 19.3%). Conclusions: Our results support the targeted decolonization as an effective policy to reduce nosocomial S. aureus infection rate with a minimal increase in mupirocin resistance rate, especially when combined with handwashing campaign and stricter cohorting. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T16:12:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-104-R02849028-1.pdf: 2746374 bytes, checksum: e5600e428d5754bc93418c0ae21e6dd5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Introduction………………………………………………………………...…1
Methods………………………………………………………………...……...3 Study design……………………..….…………….……………….............3 Basic model……………………..………………………..………………..3 Modeling decolonization policies.…………………….…………………..4 Parameterization..………………………………………………….………5 Results………………………………………...……………………………......7 Universal decolonization vs. Targeted decolonization…………….....……7 Targeted decolonization vs. Screening and isolation alone….…………….7 Targeted decolonization combined with strengthened infection control practice vs. Targeted decolonization…………………..…………………...7 Discussion……………………………………………………………………....8 References……………………………………………………………………..11 Appendix………………………………………………………………………28 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 比較不同去移生介入政策對醫院內金黃色葡萄球菌感染率及Mupirocin抗藥性的影響: 數理模式研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Effect of Different Decolonization Policies on Nosocomial Staphylococcus aureus Infection Rate and Mupirocin Resistance: A Modeling Study | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 103-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 簡麗蓉,王振泰,林先和 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 金黃色葡萄球菌,院內感染,Mupirocin抗藥性,感染控制,去移生,篩檢,隔離,數理模式, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Staphylococcus aureus,hospital-acquired infection,mupirocin resistance,infection control,decolonization,screening,isolation,mathematical modelling, | en |
dc.relation.page | 37 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2015-08-18 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 公共衛生學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 流行病學與預防醫學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 流行病學與預防醫學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-104-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.68 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。