A randomized controlled trial of tea tree oil (5%) body wash versus standard body wash to prevent colonization with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in critically ill adults: research protocol

Background
Over the past ten years MRSA has become endemic in hospitals and is associated with increased healthcare costs. Critically ill patients are most at risk, in part because of the number of invasive therapies that they require in the intensive care unit (ICU). Washing with 5% tea tree oil (TTO) has been shown to be effective in removing MRSA on the skin. However, to date, no trials have evaluated the potential of TTO body wash to prevent MRSA colonization or infection. In addition, detecting MRSA by usual culture methods is slow. A faster method using a PCR assay has been developed in the laboratory, but requires evaluation in a large number of patients.

Methods/Design
This study protocol describes the design of a multicentre, phase II/III prospective open-label randomized controlled clinical trial to evaluate whether a concentration of 5% TTO is effective in preventing MRSA colonization in comparison with a standard body wash (Johnsons Baby Softwash) in the ICU. In addition we will evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TTO body wash and assess the effectiveness of the PCR assay in detecting MRSA in critically ill patients. On admission to intensive care, swabs from the nose and groin will be taken to screen for MRSA as per current practice. Patients will be randomly assigned to be washed with the standard body wash or TTO body wash. On discharge from the unit, swabs will be taken again to identify whether there is a difference in MRSA colonization between the two groups.

Discussion
If TTO body wash is found to be effective, widespread implementation of such a simple colonization prevention tool has the potential to impact on patient outcomes, healthcare resource use and patient confidence both nationally and internationally.

Trial Registration
[ISRCTN65190967]

Which patients with renal colic should be referred?

Around 1-2 people per thousand present with an acute episode of pain caused by renal stones each year. Renal colic is classically sudden in onset, unilateral, and radiates from loin to groin. Renal pelvic or upper ureteric stones usually cause more flank pain and tenderness while lower ureteric stones cause pain radiating towards the ipsilateral testicle or labia. Other common symptoms include nausea and vomiting, haematuria and irritative LUTS. A febrile patient with renal colic requires immediate hospital admission. Symptoms suggestive of renal colic along with a positive dipstick for haematuria have a reported sensitivity of 84% and specificity of 99% but it is important to consider other differential diagnoses. An NSAID is preferred over an opiate drug as an initial analgesic choice as the NSAID can help reduce ureteric spasm. Diclofenac has the best evidence base for this class of analgesic. About 90% of stones will pass spontaneously and thus it is often appropriate to manage renal colic at home. Patients with signs of peritonitis, systemic infection, septic shock as well as those whose diagnosis is unclear should be referred urgently to hospital. Patients who are systemically unwell with renal stones are more likely to have an infected and obstructed urinary tract system that needs urgent imaging and possible drainage. All patients who are managed at home should have renal tract imaging within a week by fast track referral to radiology or as an urgent urology outpatient referral as per local guidelines to rule out an obstructed urinary system. Patients with recurrent stones should be advised to maintain a copious fluid intake (>2 L/day) to reduce the concentration of the urine. A reduction in salt intake (ideally

Frequency and distribution of group I intron genotypes of Candida albicans colonising critically ill patients

A study is performed to examine the distribution and frequency of 25S rRNA intron genotypes of Candida albicans isolated from different anatomical sites of patients in an intensive care unit (ICU) setting. Germ-tube positive Candida isolates (n=65) from 65 patients are included and isolates are characterised by 25S intron genotyping, whereby all can be subdivided into four genotypes (A-D). Results demonstrated that there were no significant differences between the frequency and genotype distribution of the Candida isolates and the anatomical site of colonisation. Furthermore, analysis of the transposable intron region in the 25S rRNA gene demonstrated equal distribution, regardless of age and anatomical site of isolation (groin, throat, etc.). Therefore, there does not appear to be any selective pressure associated with any anatomical site, resulting in an ecological shift in the frequency of genotypes present. This suggests that C. albicans intron genotypes equally colonise those sites of the body examined in this study. Although such an ecological finding as this is interesting, it perpetuates the continued need to find a genotypic typing scheme that helps to identify the source (nosocomial or endogenous) and mode of entry of C. albicans into patients in the ICU setting, resulting in C. albicans bloodstream infection.