PVL MRSA kills two in Stoke

#2
Keep washing your hands ( not in an O.C.D. way....)! However, when the TA AMS recruitment adverts show NHS nurses sitting in the pub ( in nursing uniform ) it doesnt help pass on the Infection control message.....
 
#3
snornin said:
However, when the TA AMS recruitment adverts show NHS nurses sitting in the pub ( in nursing uniform ) it doesnt help pass on the Infection control message.....
Some artistic licence has clearly been allowed in the advertisement. On the one hand, both the women are absurdly rank-conscious, condescending, improperly dressed and unattractive; on the unrealistic side both are <size 18.
 
#4
How big a problem is MRSA as a whole?

It is a significant problem for all hospitals.

There are 1,000 deaths a year are associated with different strains of MRSA.

The government has set a target to halve MRSA infections by 2008.




WOW, the gov are really going overboard on this. :x Perhaps bringing back matrons would ensure the cleaniless of the hospitals. 8O
 
#5
My mother was in and out of there for years. Every time she went in she got an infection, including towards the end, MRSA. It's a filthy hole and the staff couldn't care less.

They would do the rounds with a blood pressure cuff for example. I saw one nurse/nurse assistant put this cuff on my mother's arm where she had a shunt fitted. There was blood around the shunt because it had been knocked so it's reasonable to think there was scope for transmission into the wound or onto the cuff. She then proceeds to the next patient, didn't even wipe the cuff. When I mentioned it to the Matron I was told it wasn't important and they knew all about infection control!

You would regularly see staff throw bloody swabs or caps off syringes etc. on to the floor. Idle sods. I've seen clinics in refugee camps that were cleaner.

Fortunately my mother was at home at the end but she spent a lot longer in Norths Staffs than she would have done in somewhere with a decent standard of hygiene.

(Edit - remembered it was Matron not Sister - so much for Matrons...)
 
#6
My sister went in there twice last year for tests. She was ill for a few weeks after each stay. Her GP stated she had picked up an infection on each occasion but she did not push him for details, ignorance is bliss may come into it. The first time she was in there for five days each day I pointed out to the staff blood spray staining the wall next to her bed. It was still there when she was discharged. Also a friend who was unfortunate enough to have a severe motorbike accident was treated there he caught MRSA and was told he had recovered from it. He was then transfered to Oswestry for treatment and rehabilitation due to his very severe injuries where he was diagnosed immediately with MRSA.
again. He is currently still being treated for MRSA which is delaying his rehabilitation.
 
#7
Matrons got brought back - sort of - but that means very little
But it's not up to one person
It's up to everyone to keep themselves right, to wash, to check notes and to ask if they're not sure
 
#8
Why am I not surprised? This is the same hospital that hired foreign nurses without doing any screens on them first! They now have a load of them on permanent sick leave (at tax payers expense), who are HIV positive. It's good management like this that made the Potteries and the Health service what it is today 8O
 
#9
Staphylococcus aureus is and always has been a significant pathogen in hospitals and the community. In the pre-antibiotic era infections acquired in hospitals had significant morbidity and mortality. The introduction of penicillin in 1948 brought improvements but the associated optimism was short lived, by the mid 1950's many strains of S. aureus in hospital were resistant to penicillin and these strains spread to the community where they remain. If you go to your GP today with an infection that may be caused by S. aureus it won’t be penicillin you get for it. In 1959 the Ministry of Health published a report into the problem which I have and it makes fascinating reading. Methicillin (the "M" in MRSA) was introduced in 1960 and resistance was reported after only 2 years. Methicillin is no longer used to treat infections (because of its toxicity) and was replaced by a similar but safer version called flucloxacillin. When a strain of S. aureus is termed MRSA it is resistant to flucloxacillin (and some other antibiotics). The incidence has been rising since the early 1990's in this country (where 44% of S. aureus from blood cultures in hospital patients is now MRSA) and many others including America (38%) and Japan (80%). The evidence suggests that MRSA strains are displacing Methicillin Sensitive Staphylococcus Aureus (MSSA) and (by selective advantage) becoming more prevelant or dominant. I believe what we are seeing is an ecological and evolutionary process as a result of our abuse of antibiotics.
Despite the concerns about "superbugs" and hospital infections the evidence suggests there has been no increase in infections and even a recent small decrease. The prevalence of hospital acquired infection was researched in 1980 and found to be 9%, this survey was repeated in 1994 and again found to be 9%. The survey was repeated again this year in 190 hospitals and over 75,000 beds and the figure was 7.9%.
With regards to this outbreak in Stoke the PVL MRSA strain is not normally associated with hospitals and of the two fatalities one was a hospital worker, I understand another 9 or 10 staff are also affected. This suggests the strain was brought into hospital by a healthcare worker from the community where it spread mainly to colleagues and only one patient. The PVL strain is highly aggressive and stopping that getting any further will be a top priority.
Bringing back Matrons happened a few years ago and has made little difference, why should it, they had matrons in the 1940s and 50s but that didn’t stopped penicillin resistant S.aureus in hospitals. We need to take the politics and hype out of the debate and start putting the science back in. When John Reid was Secretary of State for Health he decreed MRSA bloodstream infections would be cut by 60% by 2008, he has set the NHS up to fail because no one in microbiology or infection control thinks a 60% reduction is possible, if he had bothered to ask we could have told him. To date there has been a reduction of only 8% and just recently the govt has dropped the 60% target and used 50% instead. My boss wrote to them asking why and had no response, hey that’s spin for you.
 
#10
Jacques_Bustard said:
Staphylococcus aureus is and always has been a significant pathogen in hospitals and the community. In the pre-antibiotic era infections acquired in hospitals had significant morbidity and mortality. The introduction of penicillin in 1948 brought improvements but the associated optimism was short lived, by the mid 1950's many strains of S. aureus in hospital were resistant to penicillin and these strains spread to the community where they remain. If you go to your GP today with an infection that may be caused by S. aureus it won’t be penicillin you get for it. In 1959 the Ministry of Health published a report into the problem which I have and it makes fascinating reading. Methicillin (the "M" in MRSA) was introduced in 1960 and resistance was reported after only 2 years. Methicillin is no longer used to treat infections (because of its toxicity) and was replaced by a similar but safer version called flucloxacillin. When a strain of S. aureus is termed MRSA it is resistant to flucloxacillin (and some other antibiotics). The incidence has been rising since the early 1990's in this country (where 44% of S. aureus from blood cultures in hospital patients is now MRSA) and many others including America (38%) and Japan (80%). The evidence suggests that MRSA strains are displacing Methicillin Sensitive Staphylococcus Aureus (MSSA) and (by selective advantage) becoming more prevelant or dominant. I believe what we are seeing is an ecological and evolutionary process as a result of our abuse of antibiotics.
Despite the concerns about "superbugs" and hospital infections the evidence suggests there has been no increase in infections and even a recent small decrease. The prevalence of hospital acquired infection was researched in 1980 and found to be 9%, this survey was repeated in 1994 and again found to be 9%. The survey was repeated again this year in 190 hospitals and over 75,000 beds and the figure was 7.9%.
With regards to this outbreak in Stoke the PVL MRSA strain is not normally associated with hospitals and of the two fatalities one was a hospital worker, I understand another 9 or 10 staff are also affected. This suggests the strain was brought into hospital by a healthcare worker from the community where it spread mainly to colleagues and only one patient. The PVL strain is highly aggressive and stopping that getting any further will be a top priority.
Bringing back Matrons happened a few years ago and has made little difference, why should it, they had matrons in the 1940s and 50s but that didn’t stopped penicillin resistant S.aureus in hospitals. We need to take the politics and hype out of the debate and start putting the science back in. When John Reid was Secretary of State for Health he decreed MRSA bloodstream infections would be cut by 60% by 2008, he has set the NHS up to fail because no one in microbiology or infection control thinks a 60% reduction is possible, if he had bothered to ask we could have told him. To date there has been a reduction of only 8% and just recently the govt has dropped the 60% target and used 50% instead. My boss wrote to them asking why and had no response, hey that’s spin for you.
And wide awake your back in the room
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#11
Jacques_Bustard said:
When John Reid was Secretary of State for Health he decreed MRSA bloodstream infections would be cut by 60% by 2008, he has set the NHS up to fail because no one in microbiology or infection control thinks a 60% reduction is possible, if he had bothered to ask we could have told him. To date there has been a reduction of only 8% and just recently the govt has dropped the 60% target and used 50% instead. My boss wrote to them asking why and had no response, hey that’s spin for you.
Cor! - thanks for a top post Jaques...I count myself better informed.

( funny how things are never as simple as the Press would have us believe innit :) )

Don Cabra
 
#12
I am dedsperately trying to remain interested, but it's alot harder than you think. When the subject matter is as enlightening as this, you think it would be easy. :yawnstretch:
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#14
Touch_it said:
I am dedsperately trying to remain interested, but it's alot harder than you think. When the subject matter is as enlightening as this, you think it would be easy. :yawnstretch:
Your thirst for professional knowledge is a credit to you, and your Corps :D ....it gets desparately interesting when you have a relative going into your local NHS hospital for an op, I can assure you. Ask Gerry Fitt.

Friend of mine's elderly father (ex Glosters) went into Hants Gen and came away with an ulcer he had till he died , due to MRSA.

My daughter has just had an orthopaedic op and we are watching her vivid fresh scar intently.

I guess the thrust of the informed dit from microbiology enthusiast Jaques above is that catching a nasty disease from other sick people in hospital is nothing new.

(Sadly, for those of us who enjoy hating the Celestial Navigator and his vile cohorts, it slightly punctures the happy myth that increasing MRSA is due to yet more Neue Arbeit deviltry.)

Moral: keep away from hospitals (and clinicians with their REVOLTING ties and oh so casually toted stethoscopes,harbouring untold multitudes of eagerly reproducing bugs) as long as possible: they are both full of diseases that'll kill ya !


Lee Shaver - ( medically certified lazaretophobe)
 
#15
Thank you Goatman for your interest.

The incidence of hospital acquired infection (HAI) and MRSA has had little to do with which party is in power. The causes of all HAI is complex and muti-factorial and there will never be an infection free healthcare system, its just not possible. It is possible to reduce risks as far as possible and there is a reasonable amount of clinical evidence around how achieve this. It is not as simple as just saying clean the hospitals all this will go away. Indeed I recently had a paper published in the Journal of Hospital Infection which examined cleanliness scores for individual hospitals (as published by the Department of Health) and MRSA bacteraemia rates (again using DH data) and found no correlation between the two. Indeed whilst cleanliness has apparently improved there was no statistically significant decrease in MRSA bacteraemia rates. Hospitals should be clean but preventing MRSA, Clostridium difficile and many other HAIs requires much more science and a lot less politics and media hype. Both MRSA and Clostridium difficile have been rising since the early 1990s and have continued since, i.e. both under the Tories and Labour.
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#16
hmmm.....

Birmingham Post article here:
Copper could be answer to MRSA Mar 14 2007


Chrome-plated and stainless steel fittings at a Birmingham hospital are being replaced with copper to see if the metal can kill MRSA bacteria.

Selly Oak Hospital has been chosen for an 18-month trial to begin next month, it was revealed yesterday.


The European Copper Institute made the announcement after scientists at Southampton University and Aston University, in Birmingham, found copper's "antimicrobial" properties can kill the superbug within 90 minutes.

It chose Selly Oak, run by University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, because it is a specialist trauma centre with an advanced microbiology unit.

About 80 per cent of MRSA transmission is through surface contact, with people unwittingly picking up the infection from doors, railings, or taps.

If the trial is successful, a wholesale switch to copper in thousands of hospitals across Europe is on the cards.

All fittings on medical ward B4 at Selly Oak will be replaced with copper, produced and donated free by Midland firms.
Professor Tom Elliot, the trust's deputy medical director, said existing fitments were brass, which contains copper, but had been covered in chrome "to make them look nice".

He added: "This negates any properties in the copper alloy which could kill bugs.

"Everything from door handles, push-plates, bath taps and even doctors' pens will be fashioned out of copper.

"The number of MRSA contacts will be measured alongside another unmodified wards here.

"Potentially, it is very, very exciting if we find that copper actually works in a clinical environment, following the laboratory tests in Southampton and here in Birmingham."

Health Protection Agency figures published in January revealed the trust had reduced the number of new MRSA cases by nearly a third (31.5 per cent) last year.

Prof Elliot added: "While we can never be complacent when it comes to dealing with micro-organisms like MRSA and Clostridium Difficile, if this trial works it could be extended throughout the hospital and beyond.

"Copper is an intelligent metal and it can also be used in fabrics, so we could also see MRSA-resistant uniforms and blankets being developed in future."n Screening people for MRSA before they have a hospital operation would make a "significant difference" to the numbers dying from the superbug, according to an expert.

Professor Richard James, director of the Centre for Healthcare Associated Infections at the University of Nottingham, said screening people and then isolating them until their MRSA status was known would have a dramatic effect on infection rates.

At present, about 40 per cent of staphylococcus infections in blood are MRSA, meaning they are resistant to the antibiotic methicillin. But with screening and then isolation, that figure would drop to less than one per cent within six years, he said

Le Chevre
 
#17
Quote - 'The European Copper Institute made the announcement after scientists at Southampton University and Aston University, in Birmingham, found copper's "antimicrobial" properties can kill the superbug within 90 minutes'.

Time to buy into the copper market me thinks, hope it works though.
 
#18
1I_Willy said:
Quote - 'The European Copper Institute made the announcement after scientists at Southampton University and Aston University, in Birmingham, found copper's "antimicrobial" properties can kill the superbug within 90 minutes'.

Time to buy into the copper market me thinks, hope it works though.
Soap found to kill super bugs including MRSA. Time to invest in soap.

Willy not a dig a you mate but sometimes I get fed up with the media's obession with reporting the latest holy grail in the fight against MRSA etc. OK so copper is anti-microbial but how will this be used in practice?
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#19
Jaques,

I agree that the media quite often jump the gun...I know that UHB have pushed out a Press Release on this particular TRIAL and will see if I can get hold of a copy.

Given that it was based on research at Southampton University I'll see what I can glean from down there too.

Notwithstanding 'soap and water works' I guess any small measure which will add effect should be rigorously explored....I don't think anyone is claiming a 'silver bullet' for copper.


Lee Shaver
 
#20
Holland has NO MRSA problem

vastly superior system to ours - if one patient is found with MRSA, the system goes into overdrive to clean patient and sideroom - if two patients are found with MRSA, the ward gets closed and deep cleaned (Fukc , that would mean closing half the NHS wards)

Denmark - just as fussy over cleanliness - when a patient leaves a hospital - the bed goes into a giant cleaning machine (like a huge dishwasher)

Screen foreign health care workers? the NHS wouldnt dare swab any worker regardless of their ethnic background, because their would be no staff available to look after the patients
 

Latest Threads