Re: [ozmidwifery] GBS and Staph

[brendamanning]

http://medic.med.uth.tmc.edu/path/00001456.htm STAPHYLOCOCCUS Clinically, the most important genus of the Micrococcaceae family is Staphylococcus. The Staphylococcus genus is classified into two major groups: aureus and non-aureus. S. aureus is a leading cause of soft tissue infections, as well as toxic shock syndrome (TSS) and scalded skin syndrome. It can be distinguished from other species of Staph by a positive result in a coagulase test(all other species are negative). The pathogenic effects of Staph are mainly asssociated with the toxins it produces. Most of these toxins are produced in the stationary phase of the bacterial growth curve. In fact, it is not uncommon for an infected site to contain no viable Staph cells. The S. aureus enterotoxin causes quick onset food poisoning which can lead to cramps and severe vomiting. Infection can be traced to contaminated meats which have not been fully cooked. These microbes also secrete leukocidin, a toxin which destroys white blood cells and leads to the formation of pus and acne. Particularly, S. aureus has been found to be the causative agent in such ailments as pneumonia, meningitis, boils, arthritis, and osteomyelitis (chronic bone infection). Most S. aureus are penicillin resistant, but vancomycin and nafcillin are known to be effective against most strains. Of the non-aureus species, S. epidermis is the most clinically significant. This bacterium is an opportunistic pathogen which is a normal resident of human skin. Those susceptible to infection by the bacterium are IV drug users, newborns, elderly, and those using catheters or other artificial appliances. Infection is easily treatable with vancomycin or rifampin. S.Epidermis: Babies often get pustules which when swabbed contain staph. It causes paronychia & 'sticky eyes' plus impetigo in infants/chidren. Highly contagious & passes quickly between children, good hand-washing is essential. I wouldn't agree that it's harmless babies can get qite sick esp if it affects their umbi& it requires antibiotic therapy. S. aureus  gets into wounds & can become really nasty. You have all heard of MRSA & Golden Staph (which can kill a baby due to septic shock as can Streptococcus). With kind regards Brenda Manning www.themidwife.com.au ----- Original Message ----- From: Susan Cudlipp To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 11:22 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GBS and Staph Yes Melissa - GBS is a different organism from Staph. Not so long ago we used to 'anti-staph' the babies post first bath and day 3 using chlorhexidine cream, it apparently no longer is required as the 'staph contamination' is not harmful. Group B Strep is treated by AB's in labour and screening/monitoring babies X48 hours, very few are colonised, and few of these become sick but those that do can be very sick indeed Sue   -- Original Message ----- From: Melissa Singer To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GBS and Staph I thought group b strep and staph aureaus are different organisms?  Staph infections on vaginal swab require no treatment or preventative abs in labour.  Staph seems to have no effects on baby (that they haven't found out yet!) and it is a normal colonisation of the skin only becoming a issue in the sick, and immunocompromised.  I not 100% sure and am getting ready for work so no time to look it up yet.    (p.s sharon, where i work we use benzpennicillin 1.2grams then 600mg every four hours.)   Regards Melissa ----- Original Message ----- From: sharon To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 6:35 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GBS and Staph That’s right gbs is group b streph which is found on vaginal swab at 36 weeks treated with benzpennicillin during labour every 4 hours commencing with a loading dose of 3 gms then 1.2 gm every four hours while in active labour. Regards  sharon   From: owner-ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au [mailto:owner-ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au] On Behalf Of Ceri & Katrina Sent: Friday, 6 October 2006 7:32 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GBS and Staph   Isn't GBS a staph infection??? Been awhile since I was at work, relishing in the time off work with little munchkin who is now 3 and bit months old. katrina On 06/10/2006, at 7:06 PM, Kelly @ BellyBelly wrote: One of the women on my site has just found out she has both of these things. She said she has googled for hours and can’t find anything on Staph specifically. Can someone pass on some knowledge on what this is going to mean? I have never heard of someone having both before . She’s almost 38wks   Best Regards,   Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Conception, Pregnancy, Birth and Baby BellyBelly Birth Support   No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.0/464 - Release Date: 5/10/2006