Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Skip to main content
Study
Classic

Safety of patients isolated for infection control.

Stelfox HT, Bates DW, Redelmeier DA. Safety of patients isolated for infection control. JAMA. 2003;290(14):1899-1905.

Save
Print
March 27, 2005
Stelfox HT, Bates DW, Redelmeier DA. JAMA. 2003;290(14):1899-1905.
View more articles from the same authors.

This study discovered that patients isolated for colonization or infection with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus suffered more preventable adverse events, less satisfaction with care, and less documentation for their care, but no difference in mortality compared to a control group. Examples of the reported differences in care quality included absence of accurately recorded vital signs, missing daily physician progress notes, and less delivery of disease-specific standards for heart failure management. While safety precautions and isolation of selected patients certainly reduce the transmission of communicable infections, a potential patient safety issue results from the care these patients receive once isolated—an unintended adverse consequence.

Save
Print
Cite
Citation

Stelfox HT, Bates DW, Redelmeier DA. Safety of patients isolated for infection control. JAMA. 2003;290(14):1899-1905.

Related Resources From the Same Author(s)
Related Resources