Hand hygiene noncompliance and the cost of hospital-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection.

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene noncompliance is a major cause of nosocomial infection. Nosocomial infection cost data exist, but the effect of hand hygiene noncompliance is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To estimate methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-related cost of an incident of hand hygiene noncompliance by a healthcare worker during patient care. DESIGN: Two models were created to simulate sequential patient contacts by a hand hygiene-noncompliant healthcare worker. Model 1 involved encounters with patients of unknown MRSA status. Model 2 involved an encounter with an MRSA-colonized patient followed by an encounter with a patient of unknown MRSA status. The probability of new MRSA infection for the second patient was calculated using published data. A simulation of 1 million noncompliant events was performed. Total costs of resulting infections were aggregated and amortized over all events. SETTING: Duke University Medical Center, a 750-bed tertiary medical center in Durham, North Carolina. RESULTS: Model 1 was associated with 42 MRSA infections (infection rate, 0.0042%). Mean infection cost was $47,092 (95% confidence interval [CI], $26,040-$68,146); mean cost per noncompliant event was $1.98 (95% CI, $0.91-$3.04). Model 2 was associated with 980 MRSA infections (0.098%). Mean infection cost was $53,598 (95% CI, $50,098-$57,097); mean cost per noncompliant event was $52.53 (95% CI, $47.73-$57.32). A 200-bed hospital incurs $1,779,283 in annual MRSA infection-related expenses attributable to hand hygiene noncompliance. A 1.0% increase in hand hygiene compliance resulted in annual savings of $39,650 to a 200-bed hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Hand hygiene noncompliance is associated with significant attributable hospital costs. Minimal improvements in compliance lead to substantial savings.

Integrated analysis of CANVAS 1 and 2: phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind studies to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ceftaroline versus vancomycin plus aztreonam in complicated skin and skin-structure infection.

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a common cause of complicated skin and skin-structure infection (cSSSI). Increasing antimicrobial resistance in cSSSI has led to a need for new safe and effective therapies. Ceftaroline was evaluated as treatment for cSSSI in 2 identical phase 3 clinical trials, the pooled analysis of which is presented here. The primary objective of each trial was to determine the noninferiority of the clinical cure rate achieved with ceftaroline monotherapy, compared with that achieved with vancomycin plus aztreonam combination therapy, in the clinically evaluable (CE) and modified intent-to-treat (MITT) patient populations. METHODS: Adult patients with cSSSI requiring intravenous therapy received ceftaroline (600 mg every 12 h) or vancomycin plus aztreonam (1 g each every 12 h) for 5-14 days. RESULTS: Of 1378 patients enrolled in both trials, 693 received ceftaroline and 685 received vancomycin plus aztreonam. Baseline characteristics of the treatment groups were comparable. Clinical cure rates were similar for ceftaroline and vancomycin plus aztreonam in the CE (91.6% vs 92.7%) and MITT (85.9% vs 85.5%) populations, respectively, as well as in patients infected with MRSA (93.4% vs 94.3%). The rates of adverse events, discontinuations because of an adverse event, serious adverse events, and death also were similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftaroline achieved high clinical cure rates, was efficacious against cSSSI caused by MRSA and other common cSSSI pathogens, and was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with the cephalosporin class. Ceftaroline has the potential to provide a monotherapy alternative for the treatment of cSSSI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00424190 for CANVAS 1 and NCT00423657 for CANVAS 2.