Table 3.
Support for strategies in a regional carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infection prevention collaborative
Percentage of respondents |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Definitely or possibly will support |
Uncertain | Definitely or possibly will not support |
||
Isolation and precautions of patients with CRE infection | ||||
Single room isolation | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
Place in contact precautions | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
Active observation for hand hygiene and contact precautions adherence | 95 | 5 | 0 | |
Active intra- and interfacility communication | ||||
Communicate with treating registered nurse and physician, providing education on CRE and regional collaborative efforts | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
Communicate with facilities receiving hospital patients about CRE status and regional collaborative to institute bundle | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
Prevalence screening for CRE | ||||
Perform annual 1-d prevalence screen for CRE among all patients in 1 intensive care unit and 1 nonintensive care unit | 71 | 10 | 19 | |
Perform biannual 1-d prevalence screen for CRE among all patients in 1 intensive care unit and 1 nonintensive care unit | 43 | 38 | 19 | |
Screening nearby patients | ||||
Screen roommate of patient found to have CRE infection | 81 | 19 | 0 | |
Screen neighboring rooms of patient found to have CRE infection | 38 | 48 | 14 | |
CRE screening of patients from other facilities | ||||
Screen all admitted from nursing home | 48 | 38 | 14 | |
Screen all admitted from long-term acute care facilities | 48 | 38 | 14 | |
Screen all transfers from acute care hospitals | 57 | 29 | 14 | |
Daily chlorhexidine gluconate bathing for hospitalized patients with CRE infection | 86 | 14 | 0 |