tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8066238290370557389.post7397961527408466110..comments2024-03-20T04:44:15.540-05:00Comments on Controversies in Hospital Infection Prevention: More Chlorhexidine LoveDan Diekemahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10231929371552334184noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8066238290370557389.post-6244013508061574142011-02-16T09:32:16.452-06:002011-02-16T09:32:16.452-06:00CHG cloths may not work as "source control&qu...CHG cloths may not work as "source control" outside of the hospital. .Herlick et al (ICHE 2010:31:1207-16) randomized over 1300 military recruits to use CHG-impregnated cloths three-times per week and compared their outcomes with approximately 1300 recruits who used a placebo-control cloth. The intervention failed to work. Roughly 1 out of 100 recruits in both the treatment and the control group developed a skin infection during the 10-week study period. However it was interesting that 3x/week use of CHG cloths slightly reduced the risk of colonization with MSSA and MRSA during this 10- week study But the overall prevalence of colonization of recruits with MRSA and MSSA was amazingly high. Note: the overall prevalence of colonization with MSSA doubled (from 40-80%) and the prevalence of MRSA colonization increased from 3-10% over the 10 weeks these recruits trained together. <br /><br /> These data obviously don't directly relate to situations in hospitals but they do point out that CHG cloths won't likely work if hand-person transmission of S aureus occurs frequently on hospital wards. (due to bad hygiene and suboptimal IC practices). Also I have a hard time understanding how a cloth impregnated with CHG can eradicate S auueus carriage--at best it can reduce the density of S. aureus on cutaneous but not mucosal surfaces. <br />D SextonDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06297595946922777930noreply@blogger.com