Objectives: The authors had aimed to evaluate resources and organization necessary for applying guidelines issued 5 years earlier in various institutions: standard precautions, septic isolation, prevention against spread of multidrug-resistant bacteria.
Material and methods: Volunteer institutions were surveyed for hygiene product consumption, architectural requirements, inventory of protocols, description septic patients'management, and available personnel.
Results: One hundred and twenty-four institutions (40,784 beds) were included in the study. Eleven percent had no hygiene physician or nurse; the rates of personnel specialized in hygiene practice were 0.4 physicians per 800 beds and 0.8 registered nurses per 400 beds. Eighty-eight percent of the studied institutions had a protocol for standard precautionary measures, 77% had a septic isolation protocol. A multidrug-resistant bacteria identification sheet was attached to examination reports in 87% of cases. Multidrug-resistant bacteria screening was practiced by 18.1% of the institutions. Hygiene product consumption for 1000 days of hospitalization was 7861 disposable gloves, 2.3 1 of hydroalcoholic solution, and 63 disposable gowns. 28.9% of the wards lacked water hand washing points, 32.2% had no sinks, and 48.5% had no local equipment maintenance. In addition, 40.7% of the beds were in single rooms, 4.8% of the institutions had no single rooms. Differences were observed depending on specialties and institutions.
Conclusion: Analysis of consumption shows insufficient application of standard precautions, notably for hydroalcoholic solutions. The number of single rooms is acceptable, architectural requirements were not adequate in too many wards. These results can explain some problems encountered in applying the guidelines.