OBJECTIVE: Identifying predictors of infection or colonization with resistant microorganisms. METHODS: A quantitative study of prospective cohort was carried out. A descriptive analysis was performed in order to know the population of the study and a discriminant analysis was performed to identify the predictors. RESULTS: In this study were included 85 patients with infections caused by resistant microorganisms: carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosas (24.7%); carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter (21.2%); methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (25.9%), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp (17.6%) and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumonia (10.6%). The discriminant analysis identified transfers from other hospitals and hospitalization in intensive care unit as predictors for the occurrence of infections by the following groups: S. aureus resistant to methicillin, Acinetobacter resistant to carbapenems and K. pneumoniae resistant to carbapenems. None of the studied variables was discriminant for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. and carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosas.

OBJETIVO: Identificar os fatores preditores de infecção ou colonização por micro-organismos resistentes. MÉTODOS: Foi realizado estudo quantitativo de coorte prospectivo. Foram realizadas a análise descritiva, para conhecimento da população do estudo, e a análise discriminante, para identificação dos fatores preditores. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos 85 pacientes com infecções por micro-organismos resistentes: Pseudomonas aeruginosas resistente aos carbapenêmicos (24,7%), Acinetobacter resistente aos carbapenêmicos (21,2%), Staphylococcus aureus resistente à meticilina (25,9%), Enterococcus spp. resistente à vancomicina (17,6%) e Klebsiella pneumoniae resistente aos carbapenêmicos (10,6%). A análise discriminante identificou transferências de outros hospitais e internação na Unidade de Terapia Intensiva como fatores preditores para ocorrência de infecção pelos grupos S. aureus resistente à meticilina, Acinetobacter resistente aos carbapenêmicos e K. pneumoniae resistente aos carbapenêmicos. Nenhuma das variáveis estudadas foi discriminante para Enterococcus spp. resistente à vancomicina e P. aeruginosas resistente aos carbapenêmico. CONCLUSÃO: Os fatores preditores encontrados foram: internação na UTI e a transferências de outros hospitais.

OBJETIVO: Identificar os fatores preditores de infecção ou colonização por micro-organismos resistentes. MÉTODOS: Foi realizado estudo quantitativo de coorte prospectivo. Foram realizadas a análise descritiva, para conhecimento da população do estudo, e a análise discriminante, para identificação dos fatores preditores. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos 85 pacientes com infecções por micro-organismos resistentes: Pseudomonas aeruginosas resistente aos carbapenêmicos (24,7%), Acinetobacter resistente aos carbapenêmicos (21,2%), Staphylococcus aureus resistente à meticilina (25,9%), Enterococcus spp. resistente à vancomicina (17,6%) e Klebsiella pneumoniae resistente aos carbapenêmicos (10,6%). A análise discriminante identificou transferências de outros hospitais e internação na Unidade de Terapia Intensiva como fatores preditores para ocorrência de infecção pelos grupos S. aureus resistente à meticilina, Acinetobacter resistente aos carbapenêmicos e K. pneumoniae resistente aos carbapenêmicos. Nenhuma das variáveis estudadas foi discriminante para Enterococcus spp. resistente à vancomicina e P. aeruginosas resistente aos carbapenêmico. CONCLUSÃO: Os fatores preditores encontrados foram: internação na UTI e a transferências de outros hospitais.

OBJECTIVE: Identifying predictors of infection or colonization with resistant microorganisms. METHODS: A quantitative study of prospective cohort was carried out. A descriptive analysis was performed in order to know the population of the study and a discriminant analysis was performed to identify the predictors. RESULTS: In this study were included 85 patients with infections caused by resistant microorganisms: carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosas (24.7%); carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter (21.2%); methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (25.9%), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp (17.6%) and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumonia (10.6%). The discriminant analysis identified transfers from other hospitals and hospitalization in intensive care unit as predictors for the occurrence of infections by the following groups: S. aureus resistant to methicillin, Acinetobacter resistant to carbapenems and K. pneumoniae resistant to carbapenems. None of the studied variables was discriminant for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. and carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosas.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the infection control measures actually implemented by dental surgeons during dental practice, as patients and professionals are exposed to high biological risk in dental care environments. METHOD: 614 questionnaires (90.69%) were answered by professionals registered in updating or in post-graduate courses in the Municipality of São Paulo. RESULTS: Out of surveyed professionals 30.62% admitted that surface protection barriers were not used, whereas 34.17% were using non ideal or outdated pre-disinfection practices. The autoclave was used by 69.38% of participants, although 33.80% were not monitoring control of the sterilization cycles. Chemical and biological indicators were not used simultaneously by 83.21% of respondents and were not employed on a daily or weekly basis by at least 81.75%. Dubious methods of sterilization were cited by 44.77%. Occupational accidents caused by cutting and piercing objects were reported by 47.88%; however, the biologic risk was underestimated by 74.15% of the professionals who suffered the accidents. Irritant solutions were used as an antiseptic agent by 18.55%. CONCLUSIONS: Infection control measures reported by dental surgeons during their practices are deficient. It is necessary to educate, raise awareness of professionals, and promote constant updating courses on procedures which aim at improving safety of dental care.

This study evaluates vancomycin prescribing patterns in a tertiary-care hospital, with high prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, comparing with the guidelines proposed by the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. The study was conducted in a 930-bed tertiary-care hospital, during 40 days (March 10 to April 30, 2003). Data were collected of all patients given vancomycin, using a standardized chart-extraction form designed. Inappropriate use was subdivided in five categories: empiric therapy without risk factors; continued empiric use for presumed infections in patients whose cultures were negative for beta-lactam-resistant Gram-positive microorganisms; treatment of infections caused by beta-lactam-sensitive Gram-positive microorganisms, without allergy history to beta-lactam antimicrobials; treatment in response to a single blood culture positive for coagulase-negative staphylococcus, if other blood cultures taken during the same time frame were negative; systemic or local prophylaxis for infection or colonization of indwelling central or peripheral intravascular catheters. Of 132 orders, 126 (95.4%) were considered to have been appropriate. Of these 126 prescriptions, 31 (24.6%) were administered for treatment of proven Gram-positive infections (78.1% of those were MRSA), 1 (0.8%) for beta-lactam allergy and 95 (75.4%) for empiric treatment of suspected Gram-positive infections. The majority of the patients (88.6%) have used antimicrobial recently (3 months). The mean pre-treatment hospitalization period was 14±15 days. Of the 132 treatments, 105 (79.5%) were nosocomial infections. In the institution analyzed, the vancomycin use was considered conscientious. Reduction in use of glycopeptide may be obtained by adaptations the CDC criteria, or by improvement of diagnostic criteria.