Posted on 02/06/2006 5:33:23 PM PST by Stoat
|
|||||||
MRSA in 96,000 patients | |||||||
|
|||||||
By MICHAEL LEA LEVELS of the MRSA superbug are 13 times higher than the Government states, new figures reveal. Shock findings from 63 NHS Trusts show 34,432 inpatients carrying the killer bacteria in 2004. That is an average of 547 cases which would mean a total for all 175 Trusts of nearly 96,000. But the Department of Health has recorded just 7,212 cases because it only publishes instances of MRSA found in inpatients blood. The bacteria can also occur on skin or in the throat and be spread via an open wound or intravenous drip. Many NHS Trusts, but not all, keep data on these cases now obtained under Freedom of Information laws. The findings will embarrass the Government, which today publishes its latest six-monthly MRSA rates. Experts believe all inpatients should be swabbed on admission to hospital. Carriers could then be isolated and precautions taken. But only a quarter of NHS Trusts have isolation facilities. Many do not even test new arrivals for the bug. Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley said: We have to start testing patients when they arrive. Then you can be much clearer about where theres a real risk. Most MRSA detections were in Guys and St Thomas NHS Trust in London, with 1,596 recorded episodes. At East Kent Hospitals NHS Trust there were 1,551. Deaths linked to MRSA almost doubled from 487 in 1999 to 955 in 2003. Experts claim patients are 40 TIMES more likely to catch the superbug in the UK than on the continent. The Health Department said it was committed to reducing all instances of MRSA.
CAMPAIGNERS hope to establish the first accurate data on MRSA deaths with a book dedicated to victims. MRSA Support wants relatives to send in details and photos of those killed by the bug. Chairman Tony Field said: If they hadnt got MRSA they wouldnt have died. The book is the idea of Marie Archer, whose hubby Ken died after treatment at Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge. She said: His life was cut short by a filthy hospital. I want people to realise the scale of this problem.
|
Methycillin resistant Staphylococcus aureas is a bacteria, not a virus. There are other treatment options available. It is a not uncommon infection in any hospital environment, even in the US.
Staph? It's significant, but is it any different than it has been?
Only in the fact that antibiotic resistant strains have developed in areas of high antibiotic usage, i.e., hospitals.
AFAIK, the problem is that overuse of antibiotics has killed off
enough of the weaker stains...thus the Staph aureus that's circulating
is now enriched in the version that is resistant to all but the strongest
antibiotics.
The story made it onto ABC Evening News this Saturday, highlighted
as a risk for athletes and those working out in gyms:
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Health/story?id=1580657
(I had a similar experience to that of the Washington Redskin player
about 10 years ago...and barely kept my leg/life.)
A few months ago I heard another TV news report on a college football
player that was KILLED by this stuff. He tried to tough out the fever
and pain until it was too late.
Sooooo; we're not all gonna die?
Not a golden bullet.
"But their use must be tempered by their cost, toxicity, and concerns about further development of resistant strains.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.