Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Cross Infection”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1989

[Latent risk and precautions against cross infection at the respiratory disease unit].

To investigate the contamination of respiratory pathogens in the ward of respiratory disease, bacterial count was conducted in air of different rooms of the ward. It was found that the air total bacterial count was much higher in the nursing room and ICU than that in the rooms with good ventilation (P less than 0.01). Pathogens were examined in the saliva of the medical staff. No significant difference was found in the pathogens of the saliva between the COPD patients and medical staff, who were considered as bacteria-carriers. 155 times of bacteriologic examinations were made in 68 humidified bottles for oxygen supplement. All bottles had a mixed contamination, with Pseudomonas aeruginosa being one of common pathogens.

Bacterial Infections↗
PubMed1992

A national survey of physicians' and nurses' attitudes toward endoscope cleaning and the potential for cross-infection.

To elicit information on endoscope cleaning practices and the perceived risk of cross-infection, questionnaires were mailed to 500 physicians and 1,000 gastroenterology nurses and associates in November and December 1991. The survey results indicated that while the majority (83% of nurse/associates and 82% of physicians) expressed satisfaction with current cleaning methods, levels of confidence in endoscope reprocessing varied in several key areas. Concern about the potential for device-borne human immunodeficiency virus transmission was expressed by 82% of nurses and 87% of physicians, while 75% of nurses and 53% of physicians feared being liable should cross-infection occur. While most respondents (86% of physicians and 30% of nurses) were unaware of cross-infection incidents, 6% of nurses reported outbreaks in their institutions. According to survey responses, the risk of cross-infection may be attributable to variable cleaning practices--failure to clean scopes before placing them in disinfectant, abbreviated overall cleaning times, and inconsistent disinfectant immersion times--that may be compounded by unreliable automatic disinfectors. At least once a year endoscopes were blocked by debris according to 74% of nurses and 72% of physicians. Reactions to glutaraldehyde had been experienced by 87% of nurses and 65% of physicians. Gastroenterology professionals may be unaware of the actual incidence of cross-infection, but recognize its potential. Lapses in cleaning practices and the difficulty in monitoring postendoscopy nosocomial infections add to their uncertainty.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1994

Factors affecting the role of dental surgery assistants in cross-infection control in dental practice.

A study of cross-infection control in general dental practices in the North Western Health Region of England suggested that much of its quality might lie in the hands of dental surgery assistants (S. Doohan, 1991, personal communication). The present paper describes part of a programme of work intended to improve cross-infection control in general dental practices and to discover any factors which might affect this control. A qualitative study of dental surgery assistants' behaviour was used to devise an interview schedule for making quantitative assessments; these were made in visits to 82 general dental practices. A high proportion of DSAs were aware that they are failing to carry out cross-infection control procedures and were worried by this.

Cross Infection↗
PubMed1962

Cross-infection with Serratia marcescens.

Cross-infection in a urological unit due to Serratia marcescens is reported. The bacteriology of the organism and its mode of spread are described. It is suggested that Serratia marcescens may be a more virulent organism than is generally believed, especially in situations in which there is an excess of mucus.

Cross Infection↗
PubMed1995

Cross-infection control in dental laboratories.

The attitudes to cross-infection control of 800 dental laboratories registered with the Dental Laboratories Association have been surveyed. Considering the topicality of the subject material and the need for careful cross-infection control within and beyond the dental surgery, the response rate of 22% (175) was disappointingly low. As a result of the low response rate, the results should be seen as a guide only. Forty-nine percent of respondents had a cross-infection policy and of those with no policy 64% intended to implement one in the future. Thirty percent of laboratories receive known undisinfected work from the dental surgery. Of those items disinfected on arrival at the laboratory, those most frequently disinfected are dental impressions (77%) and dentures (51%). The most popular chemicals used for disinfection are household bleach, chlorhexidine and glutaraldehyde. Forty-four percent of the respondents generally (90% or more of the time) wear gloves when handling dental work received and opened in the laboratory. Seventy-four percent wear protective eye spectacles when trimming or polishing prostheses. Sixty-one percent used no disinfectant in the pumice and 93% did not disinfect the polishing instruments, eg wheels and mops. Forty-six percent had a policy for immunisation of staff against Hepatitis B.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2004

[Hand disinfection and cross-infection countermeasures].

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) causes droplet infection and contact infection, and therefore when taking measures against cross-infection it is preferable to take even stricter action than for other bacteria. The basic policies for preventing cross-infection require measures that assume the presence of MRSA until the results of bacterial testing are reported if discharge from the patient is noted. To prevent cross-infection, it is not sufficient simply to enforce strict disinfecting of the hands. It is necessary to establish a manual of measures to deal with situations at different posts.

Cross Infection↗
PubMed2003

Identification of airborne dissemination of epidemic multiresistant strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa at a CF centre during a cross infection outbreak.

BACKGROUND: Chronic Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection is a major cause of morbidity and mortality for individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF). P aeruginosa cross infection outbreaks have recently been reported at CF holiday camps and specialist centres. The mechanism of cross infection is unknown. A study was performed to look for the presence of epidemic strains of P aeruginosa in the environment of a CF centre during a cross infection outbreak and to examine their potential modes of spread between patients. METHODS: Microbiological sampling of the environment of the CF facility was performed, including room air sampling. Individual P aeruginosa strains were identified by bacterial fingerprinting. The typing patterns were compared with those of epidemic strains responsible for cross infection among the patients. RESULTS: Epidemic P aeruginosa strains were isolated from room air when patients performed spirometric tests, nebulisation, and airway clearance, but were not present in other areas of the inanimate environment of the CF centre. CONCLUSIONS: Aerosol dissemination may be the most important factor in patient-to-patient spread of epidemic strains of P aeruginosa during recent cross infection outbreaks at adult CF centres.

Air Microbiology↗
PubMed1997

Public perception of cross-infection control in dentistry.

Since the advent of HIV/AIDS at the beginning of the 1980s, concern has generated considerable impetus for change in cross-infection control procedures in dentistry. This process has been hastened partly by media coverage which, in tending to favour sensation over rational discourse, has played a not inconsiderable role in shaping public understanding and expectations. This study aimed to investigate public perceptions of cross-infection control in dentistry in Australia using a postal follow-up to the 1995 National Dental Telephone Interview Survey. The postal survey response rate was 85.2 per cent. Concerns about the procedures used by their dentist to sterilize instruments were reported by 13.3 per cent of respondents overall, and this was greater among non-health-card-holders, individuals who mainly spoke a language other than English in the home, and those who reported a non-routine dental visiting pattern. Avoidance or delaying of dental visits due to the perceived cross-infection risk was reported by an overall 3.6 per cent of people, and this was higher among females and those who expressed concern about cross-infection control. The profession has a responsibility to ensure that information on the measures which have been taken to reduce the risk of cross-infection in dentistry is disseminated as widely and as clearly as possible so that undue public concern and avoidance of dental care are minimized.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗