Nosocomial Outbreak of Infection With Pan-Drug-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in a Tertiary Care University Hospital

OBJECTIVE To describe what is, to our knowledge, the first nosocomial outbreak of infection with pan-drug-resistant (including colistin-resistant) Acinetobacter baumannii, to determine the risk factors associated with these types of infections, and to determine their clinical impact. DESIGN Nested case-control cohort study and a clinical-microbiological study. SETTING A 1,521-bed tertiary care university hospital in Seville, Spain. PATIENTS Case patients were inpatients who had a pan-drug-resistant A. baumannii isolate recovered from a clinical or surveillance sample obtained at least 48 hours after admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) during the time of the epidemic outbreak. Control patients were patients who were admitted to any of the "boxes" (ie, rooms that partition off a distinct area for a patient's bed and the equipment needed to care for the patient) of an ICU for at least 48 hours during the time of the epidemic outbreak. RESULTS All the clinical isolates had similar antibiotic susceptibility patterns (ie, they were resistant to all the antibiotics tested, including colistin), and, on the basis of repetitive extragenic palindromic-polymerase chain reaction, it was determined that all of them were of the same clone. The previous use of quinolones and glycopeptides and an ICU stay were associated with the acquisition of infection or colonization with pan-drug-resistant A. baumannii. To control this outbreak, we implemented the following multicomponent intervention program: the performance of environmental decontamination of the ICUs involved, an environmental survey, a revision of cleaning protocols, active surveillance for colonization with pan-drug-resistant A. baumannii, educational programs for the staff, and the display of posters that illustrate contact isolation measures and antimicrobial use recommendations. CONCLUSIONS We were not able to identify the common source for these cases of infection, but the adopted measures have proven to be effective at controlling the outbreak.

DAS-28-based EULAR response and HAQ improvement in rheumatoid arthritis patients switching between TNF antagonists

INTRODUCTION No definitive data are available regarding the value of switching to an alternative TNF antagonist in rheumatoid arthritis patients who fail to respond to the first one. The aim of this study was to evaluate treatment response in a clinical setting based on HAQ improvement and EULAR response criteria in RA patients who were switched to a second or a third TNF antagonist due to failure with the first one. METHODS This was an observational, prospective study of a cohort of 417 RA patients treated with TNF antagonists in three university hospitals in Spain between January 1999 and December 2005. A database was created at the participating centres, with well-defined operational instructions. The main outcome variables were analyzed using parametric or non-parametric tests depending on the level of measurement and distribution of each variable. RESULTS Mean (+/- SD) DAS-28 on starting the first, second and third TNF antagonist was 5.9 (+/- 2.0), 5.1 (+/- 1.5) and 6.1 (+/- 1.1). At the end of follow-up, it decreased to 3.3 (+/- 1.6; Delta = -2.6; p > 0.0001), 4.2 (+/- 1.5; Delta = -1.1; p = 0.0001) and 5.4 (+/- 1.7; Delta = -0.7; p = 0.06). For the first TNF antagonist, DAS-28-based EULAR response level was good in 42% and moderate in 33% of patients. The second TNF antagonist yielded a good response in 20% and no response in 53% of patients, while the third one yielded a good response in 28% and no response in 72%. Mean baseline HAQ on starting the first, second and third TNF antagonist was 1.61, 1.52 and 1.87, respectively. At the end of follow-up, it decreased to 1.12 (Delta = -0.49; p < 0.0001), 1.31 (Delta = -0.21, p = 0.004) and 1.75 (Delta = -0.12; p = 0.1), respectively. Sixty four percent of patients had a clinically important improvement in HAQ (defined as > or = -0.22) with the first TNF antagonist and 46% with the second. CONCLUSION A clinically significant effect size was seen in less than half of RA patients cycling to a second TNF antagonist.