BackgroundPrevention of infection due to multi-drug resistant organisms is particularly challenging because of the spread of resistant bacteria beyond hospitals into the community, including nursing homes. This study aimed to identify risk factors for the acquisition of a multidrug resistant (MDR) Escherichia coli in a local outbreak.MethodsStudy participants were all aged over 65 years. Cases had the MDR E. coli isolated from a routine urine sample, and controls had a urine sample submitted to the laboratory in the same time period but the MDR E. coli was not isolated. Information from clinical records was used to identify risk factors both in the hospital and the community setting for acquisition of the MDR E. coli.Results76 cases and 156 controls were identified and included in the study. In a multivariate analysis, risk factors statistically significantly associated with acquisition of the MDR E. coli were female gender (adjusted OR 3.2; 95 % confidence interval 1.5–6.9), level of care (high dependency OR 7.5; 2.2–25.7) compared with living independently), and in hospital prescription of antimicrobials to which the MDR E. coli was resistant (OR 5.6; 2.5-12.9).ConclusionsThe major risk factors for the acquisition of a MDR E. coli were found to be residence in a nursing home and in-hospital prescription of antimicrobials to which the MDR E. coli was resistant. This emphasises that prevention of transmission of MDROs within a community needs to involve both hospitals and also other healthcare organizations, in this case nursing homes.

Of the complex factors that contribute to risky sexual behavior and negative sexual health outcomes, heavy drinking appears to be important and is potentially modifiable. Addressing environmental determinants of hazardous drinking is likely to reduce negative sexual health outcomes among university students and other young people. Continuing promotion of condom use is also necessary, and further integration of health promotion activities in alcohol and sexual health is warranted.

Boiling is the most common method of disinfecting water in the home and the benchmark against which other point-of-use water treatment is measured. In a six-week study in peri-urban Zambia, we assessed the microbiological effectiveness and potential cost of boiling among 49 households without a water connection who reported "always" or "almost always" boiling their water before drinking it. Source and household drinking water samples were compared weekly for thermotolerant coliforms (TTC), an indicator of fecal contamination. Demographics, costs, and other information were collected through surveys and structured observations. Drinking water samples taken at the household (geometric mean 7.2 TTC/100 mL, 95% CI, 5.4À9.7) were actually worse in microbiological quality than source water (geometric mean 4.0 TTC/100 mL, 95% CI, 3.1À5.1) (p < 0.001), although both are relatively low levels of contamination. Only 60% of drinking water samples were reported to have actually been boiled at the time of collection from the home, suggesting over-reporting and inconsistent compliance. However, these samples were of no higher microbiological quality. Evidence suggests that water quality deteriorated after boiling due to lack of residual protection and unsafe storage and handling. The potential cost of fuel or electricity for boiling was estimated at 5% and 7% of income, respectively. In this setting where microbiological water quality was relatively good at the source, safe-storage practices that minimize recontamination may be more effective in managing the risk of disease from drinking water at a fraction of the cost of boiling.

A non-governmental organisation has distributed point-of-use water filtering units in the Western Division of Fiji. We sought to understand filter utilisation and water quality: both water flowing directly out of filters and stored water. We surveyed 270 households and 6 schools on filter use and performed hydrogen sulphide bacterial indicator testing on 24 water samples directly from filters and 37 stored water samples. Our response rate was 95%. Of these, only half (52%) reported consistently filtering their drinking water. Very few (8%) reported consistent use when preparing kava, a traditional drink. Factors associated with limited filter use included lost or broken filter parts (22%) (p &lt; 0.05) and perception of source water quality as 44% of respondents who believed their source water was safe to drink reported consistent filter use compared to 68% of respondents who did not (p &lt; 0.01). Bacterial indicator testing using hydrogen sulphide paper-strips showed that most water samples directly from the filter (71%) and from storage vessels (76%) were contaminated. Limited levels of use and high levels of contamination in both water directly from the filter and stored water raise serious questions as to the benefit of the filter even as an interim water quality solution in this setting.