Adverse events associated with patient isolation: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
Adverse events
Contact precautions
Hygiene
Infection control
Multidrug-resistant organisms
Patient isolation
Journal
The Journal of hospital infection
ISSN: 1532-2939
Titre abrégé: J Hosp Infect
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8007166
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2022
Jan 2022
Historique:
received:
16
07
2021
revised:
26
09
2021
accepted:
26
09
2021
pubmed:
20
10
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
entrez:
19
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Patient isolation is widely recommended and used in healthcare institutions to prevent transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). However, its risk: benefit ratio is debated. To assess, based on newly published studies, whether or not there are physical and psychological adverse events associated with patient isolation. Systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were systematically searched from PubMed, from May 1 After screening titles of 15,921 articles and abstracts of 196, and reviewing full texts of 50 studies, 19 studies were included. Studies were divided into three groups: four qualitative studies, seven observational studies suitable for meta-analysis, and eight other observational studies. Meta-analysis shows no adverse events related to clinical care or patients' experience associated with patient isolation. More studies with correct methodology, including a control group and standardized inclusion criteria, must be conducted to confirm our results.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Patient isolation is widely recommended and used in healthcare institutions to prevent transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). However, its risk: benefit ratio is debated.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To assess, based on newly published studies, whether or not there are physical and psychological adverse events associated with patient isolation.
METHODS
METHODS
Systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were systematically searched from PubMed, from May 1
FINDINGS
RESULTS
After screening titles of 15,921 articles and abstracts of 196, and reviewing full texts of 50 studies, 19 studies were included. Studies were divided into three groups: four qualitative studies, seven observational studies suitable for meta-analysis, and eight other observational studies. Meta-analysis shows no adverse events related to clinical care or patients' experience associated with patient isolation.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
More studies with correct methodology, including a control group and standardized inclusion criteria, must be conducted to confirm our results.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34666116
pii: S0195-6701(21)00361-3
doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.09.023
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
54-63Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.