Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology最新文献

{"title":"Comparing multiple infection control measures in a nursing home setting: a simulation study.","authors":"Haomin Li, Daniel K Sewell, Ted Herman, Sriram V Pemmeraju, Alberto M Segre, Aaron C Miller, Philip M Polgreen","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.43","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2024.43","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Compare the effectiveness of multiple mitigation measures designed to protect nursing home residents from infectious disease outbreaks.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Agent-based simulation study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Simulation environment of a small nursing home.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected temporally detailed and spatially fine-grained location information from nursing home healthcare workers (HCWs) using sensor motes. We used these data to power an agent-based simulation of a COVID-19 outbreak using realistic time-varying estimates of infectivity and diagnostic sensitivity. Under varying community prevalence and transmissibility, we compared the mitigating effects of (i) regular screening and isolation, (ii) inter-resident contact restrictions, (iii) reduced HCW presenteeism, and (iv) modified HCW scheduling.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across all configurations tested, screening every other day and isolating positive cases decreased the attack rate by an average of 27% to 0.501 on average, while contact restrictions decreased the attack rate by an average of 35%, resulting in an attack rate of only 0.240, approximately half that of screening/isolation. Combining both interventions impressively produced an attack rate of only 0.029. Halving the observed presenteeism rate led to an 18% decrease in the attack rate, but if combined with screening every 6 days, the effect of reducing presenteeism was negligible. Altering work schedules had negligible effects on the attack rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Universal contact restrictions are highly effective for protecting vulnerable nursing home residents, yet adversely affect physical and mental health. In high transmission and/or high community prevalence situations, restricting inter-resident contact to groups of 4 was effective and made highly effective when paired with weekly testing.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11439596/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140131313","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Environmental cleaning and disinfection in the operating room: a systematic scoping review through a human factors and systems engineering lens.","authors":"Anping Xie, Hugo Sax, Oluseyi Daodu, Lamia Alam, Marium Sultan, Clare Rock, C Matthew Stewart, Shawna J Perry, Ayse P Gurses","doi":"10.1017/ice.2023.280","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2023.280","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To synthesize evidence and identify gaps in the literature on environmental cleaning and disinfection in the operating room based on a human factors and systems engineering approach guided by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic scoping review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched 4 databases (ie, PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, CINAHL) for empirical studies on operating-room cleaning and disinfection. Studies were categorized based on their objectives and designs and were coded using the SEIPS model. The quality of randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies with a nonequivalent groups design was assessed using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 40 studies were reviewed and categorized into 3 groups: observational studies examining the effectiveness of operating-room cleaning and disinfections (11 studies), observational study assessing compliance with operating-room cleaning and disinfection (1 study), and interventional studies to improve operating-room cleaning and disinfection (28 studies). The SEIPS-based analysis only identified 3 observational studies examining individual work-system components influencing the effectiveness of operating-room cleaning and disinfection. Furthermore, most interventional studies addressed single work-system components, including tools and technologies (20 studies), tasks (3 studies), and organization (3 studies). Only 2 studies implemented interventions targeting multiple work-system components.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The existing literature shows suboptimal compliance and inconsistent effectiveness of operating-room cleaning and disinfection. Improvement efforts have been largely focused on cleaning and disinfection tools and technologies and staff monitoring and training. Future research is needed (1) to systematically examine work-system factors influencing operating-room cleaning and disinfection and (2) to redesign the entire work system to optimize operating-room cleaning and disinfection.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11439593/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140109962","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Susceptibility of healthcare personnel with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) hybrid immunity to XBB lineage reinfection.","authors":"Karissa A Whiting, Rebecca Guest, Venkatraman E Seshan, Mini Kamboj","doi":"10.1017/ice.2023.282","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2023.282","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Among 8,678 vaccinated healthcare personnel (HCP) with previous coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), by August 28, 2023, 909 (10%) had an infection of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) omicron XBB variant. Reinfection risk was comparable irrespective of previous infection type except for the omicron BQ.1 variant. Bivalent vaccination had a protective effect. COVID-19 vaccines remain vital to protect HCP, including those with hybrid immunity.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139905590","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"<i>Candida auris</i> screening practices at healthcare facilities in the United States: An Emerging Infections Network survey.","authors":"Ian P Hennessee, Kaitlin Forsberg, Susan E Beekmann, Philip M Polgreen, Jeremy A W Gold, Meghan Lyman","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.5","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2024.5","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We surveyed members of the Emerging Infections Network about <i>Candida auris</i> screening practices at US healthcare facilities. Only 37% of respondents reported conducting screening; among these, 75% reported detection of at least 1 <i>C. auris</i> case in the last year. Increased screening could improve <i>C. auris</i> detection and prevent spread.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11234895/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140049402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing and isolation strategies in nursing homes.","authors":"Sarah M Bartsch, Colleen Weatherwax, Marie F Martinez, Kevin L Chin, Michael R Wasserman, Raveena D Singh, Jessie L Heneghan, Gabrielle M Gussin, Sheryl A Scannell, Cameron White, Bruce Leff, Susan S Huang, Bruce Y Lee","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.9","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2024.9","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Nursing home residents may be particularly vulnerable to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, a question is when and how often nursing homes should test staff for COVID-19 and how this may change as severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) evolves.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>We developed an agent-based model representing a typical nursing home, COVID-19 spread, and its health and economic outcomes to determine the clinical and economic value of various screening and isolation strategies and how it may change under various circumstances.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Under winter 2023-2024 SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant conditions, symptom-based antigen testing averted 4.5 COVID-19 cases compared to no testing, saving $191 in direct medical costs. Testing implementation costs far outweighed these savings, resulting in net costs of $990 from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services perspective, $1,545 from the third-party payer perspective, and $57,155 from the societal perspective. Testing did not return sufficient positive health effects to make it cost-effective [$50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) threshold], but it exceeded this threshold in ≥59% of simulation trials. Testing remained cost-ineffective when routinely testing staff and varying face mask compliance, vaccine efficacy, and booster coverage. However, all antigen testing strategies became cost-effective (≤$31,906 per QALY) or cost saving (saving ≤$18,372) when the severe outcome risk was ≥3 times higher than that of current omicron variants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SARS-CoV-2 testing costs outweighed benefits under winter 2023-2024 conditions; however, testing became cost-effective with increasingly severe clinical outcomes. Cost-effectiveness can change as the epidemic evolves because it depends on clinical severity and other intervention use. Thus, nursing home administrators and policy makers should monitor and evaluate viral virulence and other interventions over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11102288/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139735157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The diagnostic criteria for healthcare-associated infections in China should be urgently upgraded.","authors":"Xuexia Yang, Zhenguo Liu, Sainan Zeng, Pengcheng Zhou","doi":"10.1017/ice.2023.295","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2023.295","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139546159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Impact of infectious diseases consultation for hospitalized patients with <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection.","authors":"Mara Cranis, Azza Elamin, Brianna Hatch-Vallier, Curtis D Collins, Anurag N Malani","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.28","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2024.28","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection (CDI) is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. This study described outcomes associated with mandatory infectious diseases (ID) consultation in hospitalized patients with CDI. ID consultation was associated with increased appropriate concomitant antibiotic use, however longer courses of concomitant antibiotics were administered.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139735158","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Off-site facilities: Friend or foe of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT)?","authors":"Kelsey L Jensen, Amy Van Abel, Paul Frykman, Christina G Rivera","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.20","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2024.20","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139722316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Contact precautions as a barrier to hand hygiene: The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) framework to improve compliance with gloved hand hygiene.","authors":"Pamela Bailey, Kaila Cooper, Michael P Stevens, Gonzalo Bearman, Michelle Doll","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.24","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2024.24","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In an identified quality improvement effort, nurses were observed regarding their workflow while in contact precaution rooms. Multiple opportunities for hand hygiene were missed while nurses were in gloves, predominantly while moving between \"dirty\" and \"clean\" tasks. An education initiative afterward did not show improvement in hand hygiene rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139989939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Implementation of contact precautions for multidrug-resistant organisms in the post-COVID-19 pandemic era: An updated national Emerging Infections Network (EIN) survey.","authors":"Jessica R Howard-Anderson, Lindsey B Gottlieb, Susan E Beekmann, Philip M Polgreen, Jesse T Jacob, Daniel Z Uslan","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.11","DOIUrl":"10.1017/ice.2024.11","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To understand how healthcare facilities employ contact precautions for patients with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) era and explore changes since 2014.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional survey.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Emerging Infections Network (EIN) physicians involved in infection prevention or hospital epidemiology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In September 2022, we sent via email an 8-question survey on contact precautions and adjunctive measures to reduce MDRO transmission in inpatient facilities. We also asked about changes since the COVID-19 pandemic. We used descriptive statistics to summarize data and compared results to a similar survey administered in 2014.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 708 EIN members, 283 (40%) responded to the survey and 201 reported working in infection prevention. A majority of facilities (66% and 69%) routinely use contact precautions for methicillin-resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) respectively, compared to 93% and 92% in 2014. Nearly all (>90%) use contact precautions for <i>Candida auris</i>, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), and carbapenem-resistant <i>Acinetobacter baumannii</i>. More variability was reported for carbapenem-resistant <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> and extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing gram-negative organisms. Compared to 2014, fewer hospitals perform active surveillance for MRSA and VRE. Overall, 90% of facilities used chlorhexidine gluconate bathing in all or select inpatients, and 53% used ultraviolet light or hydrogen peroxide vapor disinfection at discharge. Many respondents (44%) reported changes to contact precautions since COVID-19 that remain in place.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Heterogeneity exists in the use of transmission-based precautions and adjunctive infection prevention measures aimed at reducing MDRO transmission. This variation reflects a need for updated and specific guidance, as well as further research on the use of contact precautions in healthcare facilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11102826/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139729609","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}