We describe a modification of the most probable number (MPN) method for rapid enumeration of antimicrobial-resistant Escherichia coli bacteria in aqueous environmental samples. E. coli (total and antimicrobial-resistant) bacteria were enumerated in effluent samples from a hospital ( n = 17) and municipal sewers upstream ( n = 5) and downstream ( n = 5) from the hospital, effluent samples from throughout the treatment process ( n = 4), and treated effluent samples ( n = 13). Effluent downstream from the hospital contained a higher proportion of antimicrobial-resistant E. coli than that upstream from the hospital. Wastewater treatment reduced the numbers of E. coli bacteria (total and antimicrobial resistant); however, antimicrobial-resistant E. coli was not eliminated, and E. coli resistant to cefotaxime (including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase [ESBL] producers), ciprofloxacin, and cefoxitin was present in treated effluent samples.

Objectives: To synthesize the literature describing compliance with World Health Organization hand hygiene guidelines in ICUs, to evaluate the quality of extant research, and to examine differences in compliance levels across geographical regions, ICU types, and healthcare worker groups, observation methods, and moments (indications) of hand hygiene. Data Sources: Electronic searches were conducted in August 2018 using Medline, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Embase, and Web of Science. Reference lists of included studies and related review articles were also screened. Study Selection: English-language, peer-reviewed studies measuring hand hygiene compliance by healthcare workers in an ICU setting using direct observation guided by the World Health Organization’s “Five Moments for Hand Hygiene,” published since 2009, were included. Data Extraction: Information was extracted on study location, research design, type of ICU, healthcare workers, measurement procedures, and compliance levels. Data Synthesis: Sixty-one studies were included. Most were conducted in high-income countries (60.7%) and in adult ICUs (85.2%). Mean hand hygiene compliance was 59.6%. Compliance levels appeared to differ by geographic region (high-income countries 64.5%, low-income countries 9.1%), type of ICU (neonatal 67.0%, pediatric 41.2%, adult 58.2%), and type of healthcare worker (nursing staff 43.4%, physicians 32.6%, other staff 53.8%). Conclusions: Mean hand hygiene compliance appears notably lower than international targets. The data collated may offer useful indicators for those evaluating, and seeking to improve, hand hygiene compliance in ICUs internationally.

Aims/hypothesis Accurate prevalence estimates for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) among pregnant women in Europe are lacking owing to the use of a multitude of diagnostic criteria and screening strategies in both high-risk women and the general pregnant population. Our aims were to report important risk factors for GDM development and calculate the prevalence of GDM in a cohort of women with BMI ≥29 kg/m² across 11 centres in Europe using the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG)/WHO 2013 diagnostic criteria. Methods Pregnant women (n = 1023, 86.3% European ethnicity) with a BMI ≥29.0 kg/m² enrolled into the Vitamin D and Lifestyle Intervention for GDM Prevention (DALI) pilot, lifestyle and vitamin D studies of this pan-European multicentre trial, attended for an OGTT during pregnancy. Demographic, anthropometric and metabolic data were collected at enrolment and throughout pregnancy. GDM was diagnosed using IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria. GDM treatment followed local policies. Results The number of women recruited per country ranged from 80 to 217, and the dropout rate was 7.1%. Overall, 39% of women developed GDM during pregnancy, with no significant differences in prevalence across countries. The prevalence of GDM was high (24%; 242/1023) in early pregnancy. Despite interventions used in the DALI study, a further 14% (94/672) had developed GDM when tested at mid gestation (24–28 weeks) and 13% (59/476) of the remaining cohort at late gestation (35–37 weeks). Demographics and lifestyle factors were similar at baseline between women with GDM and those who maintained normal glucose tolerance. Previous GDM (16.5% vs 7.9%, p = 0.002), congenital malformations (6.4% vs 3.3%, p = 0.045) and a baby with macrosomia (31.4% vs 17.9%, p = 0.001) were reported more frequently in those who developed GDM. Significant anthropometric and metabolic differences were already present in early pregnancy between women who developed GDM and those who did not. Conclusions/interpretation The prevalence of GDM diagnosed by the IADPSG/WHO 2013 GDM criteria in European pregnant women with a BMI ≥29.0 kg/m² is substantial, and poses a significant health burden to these pregnancies and to the future health of the mother and her offspring. Uniform criteria for GDM diagnosis, supported by robust evidence for the benefits of treatment, are urgently needed to guide modern GDM screening and treatment strategies.

PURPOSE Positive effects have been reported after mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) in diverse clinical and nonclinical populations. Primary care is a key health care setting for addressing common chronic conditions, and an effective MBI designed for this setting could benefit countless people worldwide. Meta-analyses of MBIs have become popular, but little is known about their efficacy in primary care. Our aim was to investigate the application and efficacy of MBIs that address primary care patients. METHODS We performed a meta-analytic review of randomized controlled trials addressing the effect of MBIs in adult patients recruited from primary care settings. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and Cochrane guidelines were followed. Effect sizes were calculated with the Hedges g in random effects models. RESULTS The meta-analyses were based on 6 trials having a total of 553 patients. The overall effect size of MBI compared with a control condition for improving general health was moderate (g = 0.48; P = .002), with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 59; P <.05). We found no indication of publication bias in the overall estimates. MBIs were efficacious for improving mental health (g = 0.56; P = .007), with a high heterogeneity (I² = 78; P <.01), and for improving quality of life (g = 0.29; P = .002), with a low heterogeneity (I² = 0; P >.05). CONCLUSIONS Although the number of randomized controlled trials applying MBIs in primary care is still limited, our results suggest that these interventions are promising for the mental health and quality of life of primary care patients. We discuss innovative approaches for implementing MBIs, such as complex intervention and stepped care.