Beschreibung:
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Background</jats:title>
<jats:p>The Benefits of Universal Gloves and Gowns (BUGG) randomized trial found a decrease in MRSA acquisition, no effect on VRE acquisition and no increase in adverse events with the intervention of wearing gloves and gowns for all patient contact in the intensive care unit (ICU). The objective of the study was to assess whether wearing gloves and gowns for all patient contact in the ICU decreases the acquisition of antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Methods</jats:title>
<jats:p>Design: Secondary study of the BUGG cluster-randomized trial.</jats:p>
<jats:p>Participants: 20 medical and surgical ICUs in 20 US hospitals.</jats:p>
<jats:p>Intervention: Healthcare workers were required to wear gloves and gowns when entering any patient room compared with standard care. Main outcomes and measures: The primary composite outcome was acquisition of any antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria based on surveillance cultures collected on admission and discharge. Secondary outcomes were acquisition of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterobacteriaceae, or ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Results</jats:title>
<jats:p>For the primary outcome, the intervention had a RR of 0.90 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.12, P = 0.34). Effects on the secondary outcomes were: carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae [RR 0.86 (95% CI, 0.60 to 1.24), P = 0.43], carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter [RR 0.81 (95% CI, 0.52 to 1.27) P = 0.36], carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas [RR 0.88 (95% CI, 0.55 to 1.42) P = 0.62], ESBL producing bacteria [RR 0.94, (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.24) P = 0.67].</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title>
<jats:p>The association of universal glove and gown use in the ICU with acquisition of antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria was inconclusive. The observed rate ratios for all five outcomes suggest that the intervention was protective, however, none were statistically significant. The study was likely underpowered to detect statistical significance for the effect sizes found. Individual hospitals should consider implementing the intervention based on the importance of these organisms at their hospital, effect sizes, confidence intervals, and cost.</jats:p>
<jats:p />
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Disclosures</jats:title>
<jats:p>All authors: No reported disclosures.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>