MRSA Colonization in Healthcare workers and patients

Four percent of healthcare workers MRSA-positive reveals results of a study of MRSA prevalence in healthcare workers. Very few studies have been done regarding this subject. Nurses Announcements Archive Article

Every nurse I spoke with at the recent Maine State Nurses Association convention said "all of us probably have MRSA colonization". One nurse in particular was very upset at the prospect of ever being screened for MRSA, because of her constant exposure to it and because if she turned up positive, it might cost her the job that she needs to support her family.

I was surprised that only 4% of healthcare workers, both direct caregivers and remote workers were infected. That is much lower than I expected. But, at the same time it is encouraging. My concern is what recommendation comes from this fact.

As a potential Healthcare consumer , I would not want a nurse who is actively colonized with MRSA caring for me, or for a vulnerable loved one......not unless a special precautions are taken. Were the HC workers who tested positive in this study decolonized or not? The article does not tell it all. Even if they were decolonized, we know that MRSA is transient and many of these employees may turn up positive again 3 months after decolonization. Maybe more than Standard and Universal precautions are necessary when a HC worker is colonized with MRSA. Education is paramount. The colonized HCW should be educated about not only using meticulous Standard and Universal precautions, but also using reverse precautions at all times. They should be told not to work when they are actively infected with a respiratory illness, especially while actively coughing, sneezing and blowing their nose. MRSA can be coughed about 4 feet into the environment. Also, a known colonized HC worker should always wear a mask while doing invasive sterile procedures, like dressing changes and catheterizations. So, is the answer to this dilemma to use decolonization and education about extra precautions? I don't really know, but I do know SOMETHING definitive needs to be done and the things I have suggested here would be a start.

Now as a nurse, I have to wonder if my job is jeopardized if I am diagnosed. Is it? If my employer finds that I am colonized, will it affect my job. Will I be put out of work? Will it affect job promotions or transfers into other departments? These are legitimate and serious concerns. MRSA now becomes not only a threat to my health, but it is also a threat to my livelihood! As a member of MSNA and the NNU and a long time supporter of Nurses Unions, I am proud to say that nurses represented by a union will have some protections in place regarding employment. My friend, who I have written about a few months ago on my webpage, is a non represented nurse and since her MRSA pneumonia and sepsis, followed by a lengthy recovery and lingering disability, she has been unable to find work as an ICU nurse. She feels that the places who will not hire her discriminate because they know her MRSA status. Another nurse I know tested positive in an investigation for an outbreak in her hospital. Her employment was not affected, but the records of her MRSA colonization and her decolonization treatment for it were buried...........she was told there was no record of it. Healthcare facilities get the right to ignore the elephant in the room regarding the risk of infectious disease to employees. They get to decide on policy that is either good and effective or lax and ineffective. Unfortunately, very few come to the plate with the safety of their nurses in mind.

I see many problems at many levels with all of the above. Nobody is recognizing the fact that Healthcare workers in hospitals become colonized with MRSA. The problem is not acknowledged or addressed. If someone is discovered to be colonized, the records are "unavailable". This may be because of fear on the part of the hospitals. They fear liability for their employees, because they have become colonized (and sometimes actively infected) on the job. And they fear liability from patients who become infected while hospitalized. So, the usual reaction to that fear is to keep it all a secret??? News alert...these problems are not going away unless the hospitals get on board with prevention. These problems, if left unsolved feed on each other! We cannot fix what we do not acknowledge and measure.

I believe MRSA needs to be put out there, as an issue and a problem within healthcare facilities, for both patients and employees. Preventing spread of MRSA by screening and Isolating patients is the first step to "getting to ZERO" with MRSA infections. Addressing employees concerns by recognizing MRSA as a work related infection and doing appropriate and timely testing, treatment and education for it is the best approach.

Trying to hide/bury the problem, or ignoring the huge population of patients who come in the door colonized, who subsequently become infected is no longer acceptable. Too many times, it takes days or weeks to diagnose an active MRSA infection in a patient. Most of the time, the causative problem, MRSA colonization, is never even detected because there has been no screening. By the time active infection is diagnosed dozens of HC workers and family members are all exposed. Active Detection and Isolation (ADI) will prevent this from happening.

Early detection of colonization or infection, isolation of affected patients, decolonization when appropriate and education are all necessary steps toward stopping MRSA.

NO NURSE should feel that their job is jeopardized by MRSA colonization. It is job related and should be addressed as such. And NO PATIENT should have the worry that proper MRSA detection and prevention of MRSA is not being used in their hospitals or that their HC giver may spread MRSA to them.

References

https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/healthcare/four-percent-healthcare-workers-mrsa-positive

Specializes in ER, Trauma.

Uhhhm, how many did they test? 4%?

Specializes in ER, Urgent care, industrial, phone triag.

the question is MRSA colonization the same as having TB. if it is, then no nurse can be fired:

ADA Who's Disabled, 11/92 NRPA Law Review

this link explains that, a communicable disease is covered under the ADA and the nurse must be offered an equal job since an RN can fill other roles than direct patient care, the hospital is likely to be obligated to offer another postion:

"As noted by the Court, "[a] person who poses a significant risk of communicating an infectious disease to others in the workplace will not be otherwise qualified for his or her job if reasonable accommodation will not eliminate that risk." Accordingly, the Court acknowledged that "the Act would not require a school board to place a teacher with active, contagious tuberculosis in a classroom with elementary school children."

"An otherwise qualified person is one who is able to meet all of a program's requirements in spite of his handicap." In the employment context, an otherwise qualified person is one who can perform "the essential functions" of the job in question. 45 CFR 84.3(k) (1985).
When a handicapped person is not able to perform the essential functions of the job, the court must also consider whether any "reasonable accommodation" by the employer would enable the handicapped person to perform those functions.
Accommodation is not reasonable if it either imposes "undue financial and administrative burdens" on a grantee, or requires "a fundamental alteration in the nature of the program."

Where reasonable accommodation does not overcome the effects of a person's handicap, or where reasonable accommodation causes undue hardship to the employer, failure to hire or promote the handicapped person will not be considered discrimination".

Given the "paucity of factual findings by the District Court", the Court found itself "unable at this stage of the proceedings to resolve whether Arline is 'otherwise qualified' for her job."

Employers have an affirmative obligation to make a reasonable accommodation for a handicapped employee.
Although they are not required to find another job for an employee who is not qualified for the job he or she was doing, they
cannot deny an employee alternative employment opportunities reasonably available under the employer's existing policies."

Not only would the hospitals have to pay for tx and swabbing, but think of the money, workers comp would have to pay out.

Specializes in ER, Urgent care, industrial, phone triag.

Yes, think of the money they would have to pay. But, why shouldn't they? Nurses are willing to put their lives on the line for patients. Hospitals fail to enact effective preventative measures (in the case of MRSA, ADI)....so they are liable for their HCWs exposures and subsequent colonization and or active infections.

The answer to it all is to prevent the infections in the first place. Safer and infection free patients make for safer and infection free HCWs....fewer exposures to infection.

My family (3 of 5 members) have been battling CA-MRSA infections for 9 months. We have been advised by the doctor in charge of infectious disease to undergo a decolonization regime. (We have already tried the Mupirocin and Hibiclens thing more than once.) What this consists of is what he referred to as 'chemical warfare', including a course of Rifampin for all affected family members. This is a TB drug that can cause liver failure. My daughter just turned 13 & she is one of the people who is presumably colonized. Considering the chemical warfare is only 70% effective and we can go out in the community the day after and pick up CA-MRSA again, I do not consider it worth the risk. I do wish public awareness was higher. (People, it is NOT a spider bite. See your doctor today, not a week later when it's out of control.) First line of Tx is Bactrim. Not a 'sexy' drug, but there's a reason for using it first: MRSA does not develop resistance against it. By the time we knew what ailed my son last summer--the classic 'ingrown hair'--it was too late for oral antibiotics and he had to go with the Vancomycin, which is notorious for encouraging MRSA resistance. (Unfortunately an allergic reaction to Bactrim (sulpha) is not unusual, which is why I have to use Clindamycin now.) BTW, when I was hospitalized for my allergic reaction to the Bactrim, I was in isolation (my husband & child had to gown up to visit me), but the healthcare workers were not routinely tested. Huh?

P.S. The average length of time for colonization is six months. Yes, your file will be marked for life, but it doesn't mean a darn thing, because other people who haven't ever been tested might unknowingly have it & acquire an infection post op or spread it to their hospital roommates. Hopefully the day will come in ALL states that everyone is tested pre-op, but so far this isn't the case...

So...if everyone went on the decolonization regime consisting of the Rifampin course, wouldn't MRSA become resistant to Rifampin? This I don't understand.

An ENT I saw recently, who's fearful of contracting MRSA (understandably), swabs his nostrils with Mupirocin on a regular basis. Don't do it! MRSA has been known to develop resistance against Mupirocin, too--in Australia, if I remember correctly.