| Add reply |
| On Oct 4 2006 11:43AM infectioncontrol wrote: |
Can I please have some general feeling on whether dying patients or MRSA positive patients should have priority for side rooms.
I believe that Infection Control should take priority - am I being too harsh?
Many thanks |
|
| On Oct 4 2006 11:55AM Deborahcontrol wrote: |
I think that would depend on where the patient had the MRSA and the type of ward that they were on with a view to risk assessment to decide on priorities.
Deb |
|
| On Oct 4 2006 12:28PM infectioncontrol wrote: |
| This would be within an acute general medicine ward, or an acute general surgical ward. |
|
| On Oct 4 2006 12:35PM tsexton wrote: |
Hi
I believe that your MRSA patient takes priority, there is no way of knowing how colonised the patient is at a given time. They pose a huge risk to vulnerable patients and their environment.
Teresa |
|
| On Oct 4 2006 1:20PM debbiecalver wrote: |
| This is such a tough one. I wouldn't want my mum dying in the middle of a busy noisy acute medical ward, everone deserves to die with dignity with those that they love around them. Equally, I wouldn't want my mum to be exposed to the obvious risks of patients not being source isolated appropriately. I guess it has to be on a risk assessment of the individual situation. |
|
| On Oct 5 2006 12:11AM Odawnobrien wrote: |
I am confronted with a similar situation fairly often as I work in a Cancer
hospital. There are times where the risk assessment indicates that the
infected patient should take priority. I was also informed once by a minister of
the church that a dying patient can do others no harm, but an infected
patient could.
Dawn
|
|
| On Oct 5 2006 10:21AM chrissie.lord wrote: |
Isolation Priority
I believe the Risk assessment should be a guide but the thought that a
patient who is to die with an infection is bad enough but to die in
"isolation" is very harsh unless absolutely necessary
Kind Regards
Chrissie
|
|
| Add reply |
