A psitacose, também conhecida como ornitose, é causada pela Chlamydia psittaci; caracteriza-se por doença de início insidioso, sintomas brandos e inespecíficos, lembrando infecção de vias aéreas superiores. Acomete principalmente o pulmão, sendo raramente doença sistêmica e fatal. Descreve-se um caso raro de pneumonia por Chlamydia psittaci que evoluiu para insuficiência respiratória aguda, necessitando de ventilação mecânica. Destaca-se a importância em considerar o diagnóstico, especialmente em casos de pneumonia comunitária que evolui de modo insatisfatório, que não responde à terapia antimicrobiana e cuja epidemiologia é positiva para exposição às aves. O diagnóstico precoce é fundamental devido à excelente resposta terapêutica. O diagnóstico tardio pode levar a curso grave e fatal da doença. (J Pneumol 2001;27(4):219-222) Severe pneumonia due to Chlamydia psittaci Psittacosis, also known as ornithosis, is a disease caused by Chlamydia psittaci. The most common clinical presentation is insidious onset, mild symptoms resembling a nonspecific viral illness and preference for the lungs. It is rarely a systemic and fatal disease. It is described a rare case of pneumonia due to Chlamydia psittaci that progressively developed into respiratory failure, requiring mechanical ventilation. It is very important to consider psittacosis in cases of

BackgroundThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) proposed standard definitions for acquired resistance in bacterias. Resistant bacteria were categorized as multidrug-resistant (MDR), extensively drug-resistant (XDR) and pandrug-resistant (PDR). This study describes the incidence of Gram-negative MDR, XDR and PDR in 12 private and adult intensive care units (ICU’s) from Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, the sixth most populated city in Brazil, with approximately 3 million inhabitants.MethodsData were collected between January/2013 to December/2017 from 12 ICU’s. The hospitals used prospective healthcare-associated infections (HAI) surveillance protocols, in accordance to the CDC. Antimicrobial resistance from six Gram-negatives, causing nosocomial infections, were evaluated: Acinetobacter sp., Klebsiella sp., Proteus sp., Enterobacter sp., Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas sp.. We computed the three categories of drug-resistance (MDR+XDR+PDR) to define benchmarks for the resistance rate of each Gram-negative evaluated. Benchmarks were defined as the superior limits of 95% confidence interval for the resistance rate.ResultsAfter a 5 year surveillance, 6,242 HAI strains were tested: no pandrug-resistant bacteria (PDR) was found. Acinetobacter sp. was the most resistant Gram-negative: 206 strains from 1,858 were XDR (11%), and 1,638 were MDR (88%). Pseudomonas sp.: 41/1,159 = 3.53% XDR; 180/1,159 = 15.53% MDR. Klebsiella sp.: 2/1,566 = 0,1% XDR; 813/1,566 = 52% MDR. Proteus sp.: 0/507 = 0% XDR; 163/507 = 32% MDR. Enterobacter sp.: 0/471 = 0% XDR; 148/471 = 31% MDR. Escherichia coli: 0/681 = 0% XDR; 157/681 = 23% MDR. Benchmarks for the global resistance rate of each Gram-negative (MDR+XDR+PDR): Acinetobacter sp. = 92%; Klebsiella sp. = 62%; Proteus sp. = 40%; Enterobacter sp. = 48%; Escherichia coli = 33%; Pseudomonas sp. = 30%.ConclusionThis study has calculated the incidence of Gram-negative MDR, XDR and PDR, and found a higher incidence of MDR Acinetobacter sp., with an 88% multiresistance rate. Henceforth, developing countries healthcare institutions must be aware of an increased risk of infection by Acinetobacter sp.. Benchmarks have been defined, and can be used as indicators for healthcare assessment. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Introdução: infecções hospitalares adquiridas na Unidade de Terapia Intensiva (UTI) têm custo elevado e podem representar uma deficiência da qualidade da assistência. Entre as infecções na UTI, as mais frequentes são: pneumonia associada à ventilação mecânica; infecção primária da corrente sanguínea associada a cateter venoso central; e infecção do trato urinário associada à sonda vesical de demora. Objetivos: avaliar o efeito de intervenções da equipe multidisciplinar na diminuição da incidência de infecções em UTI de um hospital terciário em Belo Horizonte. Métodos: realizou-se uma coorte histórica, analisando dados de vigilância em infecção associada a procedimentos invasivos em UTI de um hospital terciário ao longo de cinco anos, entre julho de 2007 e junho de 2012, comparando as densidades de incidência de infecção nesses períodos. Resultados: observou-se que as densidades de incidência de infecção associada a procedimentos invasivos no início do estudo estavam elevadas nos três sítios e sofreram redução significativa (p<0,05) com as intervenções realizadas. Conclusões: houve melhoria dos indicadores de qualidade na UTI a partir de intervenções da equipe multidisciplinar do hospital em estudo, com significativa redução das taxas de infecção.

Background Surgical site infections (SSIs) can account for 25% of all nosocomial infections and contribute significantly to the economic burden resulting from infectious complications. To control this problem, an active surveillance program with the feedback of SSI rates to surgeons can reduce subsequent rates by up to 40%, since 19% to 65% of these infections are diagnosed after patient discharge. However, there is no standard method for conducting surveillance outside the hospital and the best methodology is still unknown. For many hospitals, SSI surveillance has three main objectives: to feedback surgeons with their SSI rates; to evaluate SSI rates over time, identifying outbreaks; and to compare data among different institutions. This study aims to answer the crucial question: is surveillance after patient discharge worthwhile? Methods Prospective surveillance according to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) protocol of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) at Hospital Lifecenter, Hospital Madre Teresa and Hospital Universitário Ciências Médicas, tertiary care centers, which serve the metropolitan area of Belo Horizonte, Brazil. The data were collected between Jan/2017 and Dec/2019. Results In almost three years of study, the infection rate data were calculated with and without surveillance. The monthly analysis by clinic showed that the inclusion of post-discharge patients in the computed rates increases its value, but not significantly. Of 22.009 patients analyzed, in Lifecenter Hospital, 229(1%) had SSI. This percentage refers to the infection rate with the post-discharge survey, while the rate of surgical infection without vigilance corresponds to 202(0,9%) (Table 1). The surveillance for Madre Teresa, those numbers were: 29.770, 382(1,3%) and 351(1,2%), respectively (Table 2). In Hospital Universitário Ciências Médicas: 20.286, 447 (2,2%) and 215(1,1%) (Table 3). Table 1 - Surgical site infection: data with and without post-discharge surveillance. Hospital Lifecenter (Jan/ 2017 to Jul/2019): month-by-month analysis. Table 2 - Surgical site infection: data with and without post-discharge surveillance. Hospital Madre Teresa (Jan/ 2017 to Dec/2019): month-by-month analysis. Table 3 - Surgical site infection: data with and without post-discharge surveillance. Hospital Universitário Ciências Médicas (Jan/ 2017 to Dec/2019): month-by-month analysis. Conclusion SSI post-discharge surveillance is indicated only for specific procedures. However, once the endemic curve with the infection rate did not change with the inclusion of post-discharge SSI, the study strongly suggests that surveillance after the discharge of the surgical patient is not necessary. Graph 1 - Surgical site infection: rates with and without post-discharge surveillance. Hospital Lifecenter (Jan/2017 to Jul/2019): endemic curve. Graph 2 - Surgical site infection: rates with and without post-discharge surveillance. Hospital Madre Teresa (Jan/2017 to Jul/2019): endemic curve. Graph 3 - Surgical site infection: rate with and without post-discharge surveillance. Hospital Universitário Ciências Médicas (Jan/2017 to Jul/2019): endemic curve. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

No abstract