December 30, 2010 at 6:52 pm #2958HarrisonKeymaster2 pts
The following paper is detailed, wordy and thoughtful. It is clear that many credentialed people spent a great deal of time on this body of work. My question for the authors are:
– since the majority of hospital infections involve biofilms, why is their existence completely ignored from this paper?
– why are revised diagnostic guidelines not part of the solution?
– how does this help clinicians differentiate between acute and chronic infections?
– what educational services will be offered to clinicians to help them understand chronic bacterial infections? The treatment for each is very different!
– how many patients will NOT receive the proper diagnosis or treatment for their chronic bacterial infection in 2011?
– how are you learning from private industry and academia to study their progress in diagnosing and treating bacterial biofilms? How do advanced innovators get invited to the club?
We can and should do better than this — patients continue to be sickened, lose a limb or a life by ignoring chronic bacterial infections!
Moving toward elimination of healthcare-associated infections: A call to action
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.