Comparison of Daily Versus Admission and Discharge Surveillance Cultures for Multidrug-Resistant Organism Detection in an Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Admission and discharge screening of patients for asymptomatic gut colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) is a common approach to active surveillance, but its sensitivity for detecting colonization is uncertain. METHODS: Daily rectal or fecal swab samples and associated clinical data were collected over 12 months from patients in one 25-bed medical intensive care unit (ICU) in Chicago, IL and tested for the following MDROs: vancomycin-resistant enterococci; third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales, including extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales; and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales. MDRO detection by (1) admission and discharge surveillance cultures or (2) clinical cultures were compared to daily surveillance cultures. Samples underwent 16S rRNA gene sequencing to measure the relative abundance of operational taxonomic units (OTUs) corresponding to each MDRO. RESULTS: Compared with daily surveillance cultures, admission/discharge cultures detected 91% of prevalent MDRO colonization and 63% of MDRO acquisitions among medical ICU patients. Few (7%) MDRO carriers were identified by clinical cultures alone. Higher relative abundance of MDRO-associated OTUs and specific antibiotic exposures were independently associated with higher probability of MDRO detection by culture. CONCLUSIONS: Admission and discharge surveillance cultures underestimated MDRO acquisitions in an ICU. These limitations should be considered when designing sampling strategies for epidemiologic studies that use culture-based surveillance.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Serologic Testing.

BACKGROUND: The role of serologic testing for SARS-CoV-2 has evolved during the pandemic as seroprevalence in global populations has increased. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) serology literature and construct updated best practice guidance related to SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing. This guideline is an update to the fourth in a series of rapid, frequently updated COVID-19 guidelines developed by IDSA. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations and identify unmet research needs pertaining to the use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for diagnosis, decisions related to vaccination and administration of monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma in immunocompromised patients, and identification of a serologic correlate of immunity. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists and experts in systematic literature reviewed, identified, and prioritized clinical questions related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel recommends against serologic testing to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first two weeks after symptom onset (strong recommendations, low certainty of evidence). Serologic testing should not be used to provide evidence of COVID-19 in symptomatic patients with a high clinical suspicion and repeatedly negative nucleic acid amplification test results (strong recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). Serologic testing may assist with the diagnosis of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (strong recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). To seek evidence for prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, the panel suggests testing for IgG, IgG/IgM, or total antibodies to nucleocapsid protein three to five weeks after symptom onset (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence). In individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination, we suggest against routine serologic testing given no demonstrated benefit to improving patient outcomes (conditional recommendation, very low certainty of evidence.) The panel acknowledges further that a negative spike antibody test may be a useful metric to identify immunocompromised patients who are candidates for immune therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The high seroprevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 worldwide limits the utility of detecting anti-SARS CoV-2 antibody. The certainty of available evidence supporting the use of serology for diagnosis was graded as very low to low. Future studies should use serologic assays calibrated to a common reference standard.

The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Molecular Diagnostic Testing (December 2023).

Accurate molecular diagnostic tests are necessary for confirming a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and for identifying asymptomatic carriage of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The number of available SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection tests continues to increase as does the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. Thus, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) developed an evidence-based diagnostic guideline to assist clinicians, clinical laboratorians, patients, and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests. In addition, we provide a conceptual framework for understanding molecular diagnostic test performance, discuss nuances of test result interpretation in a variety of practice settings, and highlight important unmet research needs related to COVID-19 diagnostic testing. IDSA convened a multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists, and experts in systematic literature review to identify and prioritize clinical questions and outcomes related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostics. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. The panel agreed on 12 diagnostic recommendations. Access to accurate SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing is critical for patient care, hospital infection prevention, and the public health response to COVID-19 infection. Information on the clinical performance of available tests continues to grow, but the quality of evidence of the current literature to support this updated molecular diagnostic guideline remains moderate to very low. Recognizing these limitations, the IDSA panel weighed available diagnostic evidence and recommends nucleic acid testing for all symptomatic individuals suspected of having COVID-19. In addition, testing is suggested for asymptomatic individuals with known or suspected contact with a COVID-19 case when the results will impact isolation/quarantine/personal protective equipment (PPE) usage decisions. Evidence in support of rapid testing and testing of upper respiratory specimens other than nasopharyngeal swabs, which offer logistical advantages, is sufficient to warrant conditional recommendations in favor of these approaches.

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections: Diagnostic Imaging of Suspected Acute Diverticulitis in Adults and Pregnant People.

This paper is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this paper, the panel provides recommendations for diagnostic imaging of suspected acute diverticulitis. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections: Risk Assessment in Adults and Children.

This paper is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this paper, the panel provides a recommendation for risk stratification according to severity of illness score. The panel's recommendation is based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adheres to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections: Diagnostic Imaging of Suspected Acute Intra-abdominal Abscess in Adults, Children, and Pregnant People.

This article is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this article, the panel provides recommendations for diagnostic imaging of suspected acute intra-abdominal abscess. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections: Utility of Intra-abdominal Fluid Cultures in Adults, Children, and Pregnant People.

This paper is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this paper, the panel provides recommendations for obtaining cultures of intra-abdominal fluid in patients with known or suspected intra-abdominal infection. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections: Utility of Blood Cultures in Adults, Children, and Pregnant People.

This article is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this guideline, the panel provides recommendations for obtaining blood cultures in patients with known or suspected intra-abdominal infection. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections: Diagnostic Imaging of Suspected Acute Appendicitis in Adults, Children, and Pregnant People.

This paper is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). In this paper, the panel provides recommendations for diagnostic imaging of suspected acute appendicitis. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on Complicated Intraabdominal Infections: Diagnostic Imaging of Suspected Acute Cholecystitis and Acute Cholangitis in Adults, Children, and Pregnant People.

This article is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intraabdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this article, the panel provides recommendations for diagnostic imaging of suspected acute cholecystitis and acute cholangitis. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections: Risk Assessment, Diagnostic Imaging, and Microbiological Evaluation in Adults, Children, and Pregnant People.

As the first part of an update to the clinical practice guideline on the diagnosis and management of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the panel presents 21 updated recommendations. These recommendations span risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

Bayesian modeling of the impact of antibiotic resistance on the efficiency of MRSA decolonization.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Colonization by MRSA increases the risk of infection and transmission, underscoring the importance of decolonization efforts. However, success of these decolonization protocols varies, raising the possibility that some MRSA strains may be more persistent than others. Here, we studied how the persistence of MRSA colonization correlates with genomic presence of antibiotic resistance genes. Our analysis using a Bayesian mixed effects survival model found that genetic determinants of high-level resistance to mupirocin was strongly associated with failure of the decolonization protocol. However, we did not see a similar effect with genetic resistance to chlorhexidine or other antibiotics. Including strain-specific random effects improved the predictive performance, indicating that some strain characteristics other than resistance also contributed to persistence. Study subject-specific random effects did not improve the model. Our results highlight the need to consider the properties of the colonizing MRSA strain when deciding which treatments to include in the decolonization protocol.

A response playbook for early detection and population surveillance of new SARS-CoV-2 variants in a regional public health laboratory.

BACKGROUND: Timely genomic surveillance is required to inform public health responses to new SARS-CoV-2 variants. However, the processes involved in local genomic surveillance introduce inherent time constraints. The Regional Innovative Public Health Laboratory in Chicago developed and employed a genomic surveillance response playbook for the early detection and surveillance of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. METHODS: The playbook outlines modifications to sampling strategies, laboratory workflows, and communication processes based on the emerging variant's predicted viral characteristics, observed public health impact in other jurisdictions and local community risk level. The playbook outlines procedures for implementing and reporting enhanced and accelerated genomic surveillance, including supplementing whole genome sequencing (WGS) with variant screening by quantitative PCR (qPCR). RESULTS: The ability of the playbook to improve the response to an emerging variant was tested for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1. Increased submission of clinical remnant samples from local hospital laboratories enabled detection of a new variant at an average of 1.4% prevalence with 95% confidence rather than 3.5% at baseline. Genotyping qPCR concurred with WGS lineage assignments in 99.9% of 1541 samples with results by both methods, and was more sensitive, providing lineage results in 90.4% of 1833 samples rather than 85.1% for WGS, while significantly reducing the time to lineage result. CONCLUSIONS: The genomic surveillance response playbook provides a structured, stepwise, and data-driven approach to responding to emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. These pre-defined processes can serve as a template for other genomic surveillance programs to streamline workflows and expedite the detection and public health response to emerging variants. Based on the processes piloted during the Omicron BA.1 response, this method has been applied to subsequent Omicron subvariants and can be readily applied to future SARS-CoV-2 emerging variants and other public health surveillance activities.

Reducing Hospitalizations and Multidrug-Resistant Organisms via Regional Decolonization in Hospitals and Nursing Homes.

Importance: Infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, length of hospitalization, and health care costs. Regional interventions may be advantageous in mitigating MDROs and associated infections. Objective: To evaluate whether implementation of a decolonization collaborative is associated with reduced regional MDRO prevalence, incident clinical cultures, infection-related hospitalizations, costs, and deaths. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted from July 1, 2017, to July 31, 2019, across 35 health care facilities in Orange County, California. Exposures: Chlorhexidine bathing and nasal iodophor antisepsis for residents in long-term care and hospitalized patients in contact precautions (CP). Main Outcomes and Measures: Baseline and end of intervention MDRO point prevalence among participating facilities; incident MDRO (nonscreening) clinical cultures among participating and nonparticipating facilities; and infection-related hospitalizations and associated costs and deaths among residents in participating and nonparticipating nursing homes (NHs). Results: Thirty-five facilities (16 hospitals, 16 NHs, 3 long-term acute care hospitals [LTACHs]) adopted the intervention. Comparing decolonization with baseline periods among participating facilities, the mean (SD) MDRO prevalence decreased from 63.9% (12.2%) to 49.9% (11.3%) among NHs, from 80.0% (7.2%) to 53.3% (13.3%) among LTACHs (odds ratio [OR] for NHs and LTACHs, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40-0.57), and from 64.1% (8.5%) to 55.4% (13.8%) (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.93) among hospitalized patients in CP. When comparing decolonization with baseline among NHs, the mean (SD) monthly incident MDRO clinical cultures changed from 2.7 (1.9) to 1.7 (1.1) among participating NHs, from 1.7 (1.4) to 1.5 (1.1) among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 30.4%; 95% CI, 16.4%-42.1%), from 25.5 (18.6) to 25.0 (15.9) among participating hospitals, from 12.5 (10.1) to 14.3 (10.2) among nonparticipating hospitals (group × period interaction reduction, 12.9%; 95% CI, 3.3%-21.5%), and from 14.8 (8.6) to 8.2 (6.1) among LTACHs (all facilities participating; 22.5% reduction; 95% CI, 4.4%-37.1%). For NHs, the rate of infection-related hospitalizations per 1000 resident-days changed from 2.31 during baseline to 1.94 during intervention among participating NHs, and from 1.90 to 2.03 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.7%; 95% CI, 19.0%-34.5%). Associated hospitalization costs per 1000 resident-days changed from $64 651 to $55 149 among participating NHs and from $55 151 to $59 327 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.8%; 95% CI, 26.7%-26.9%). Associated hospitalization deaths per 1000 resident-days changed from 0.29 to 0.25 among participating NHs and from 0.23 to 0.24 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 23.7%; 95% CI, 4.5%-43.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: A regional collaborative involving universal decolonization in long-term care facilities and targeted decolonization among hospital patients in CP was associated with lower MDRO carriage, infections, hospitalizations, costs, and deaths.

Stewardship Prompts to Improve Antibiotic Selection for Urinary Tract Infection: The INSPIRE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the second most common infection leading to hospitalization and is often associated with gram-negative multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Clinicians overuse extended-spectrum antibiotics although most patients are at low risk for MDRO infection. Safe strategies to limit overuse of empiric antibiotics are needed. Objective: To evaluate whether computerized provider order entry (CPOE) prompts providing patient- and pathogen-specific MDRO risk estimates could reduce use of empiric extended-spectrum antibiotics for treatment of UTI. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster-randomized trial in 59 US community hospitals comparing the effect of a CPOE stewardship bundle (education, feedback, and real-time and risk-based CPOE prompts; 29 hospitals) vs routine stewardship (n = 30 hospitals) on antibiotic selection during the first 3 hospital days (empiric period) in noncritically ill adults (≥18 years) hospitalized with UTI with an 18-month baseline (April 1, 2017-September 30, 2018) and 15-month intervention period (April 1, 2019-June 30, 2020). Interventions: CPOE prompts recommending empiric standard-spectrum antibiotics in patients ordered to receive extended-spectrum antibiotics who have low estimated absolute risk (<10%) of MDRO UTI, coupled with feedback and education. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was empiric (first 3 days of hospitalization) extended-spectrum antibiotic days of therapy. Secondary outcomes included empiric vancomycin and antipseudomonal days of therapy. Safety outcomes included days to intensive care unit (ICU) transfer and hospital length of stay. Outcomes were assessed using generalized linear mixed-effect models to assess differences between the baseline and intervention periods. Results: Among 127 403 adult patients (71 991 baseline and 55 412 intervention period) admitted with UTI in 59 hospitals, the mean (SD) age was 69.4 (17.9) years, 30.5% were male, and the median Elixhauser Comorbidity Index count was 4 (IQR, 2-5). Compared with routine stewardship, the group using CPOE prompts had a 17.4% (95% CI, 11.2%-23.2%) reduction in empiric extended-spectrum days of therapy (rate ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.77-0.89]; P < .001). The safety outcomes of mean days to ICU transfer (6.6 vs 7.0 days) and hospital length of stay (6.3 vs 6.5 days) did not differ significantly between the routine and intervention groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with routine stewardship, CPOE prompts providing real-time recommendations for standard-spectrum antibiotics for patients with low MDRO risk coupled with feedback and education significantly reduced empiric extended-spectrum antibiotic use among noncritically ill adults admitted with UTI without changing hospital length of stay or days to ICU transfers. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03697096.

Stewardship Prompts to Improve Antibiotic Selection for Pneumonia: The INSPIRE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Pneumonia is the most common infection requiring hospitalization and is a major reason for overuse of extended-spectrum antibiotics. Despite low risk of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) infection, clinical uncertainty often drives initial antibiotic selection. Strategies to limit empiric antibiotic overuse for patients with pneumonia are needed. Objective: To evaluate whether computerized provider order entry (CPOE) prompts providing patient- and pathogen-specific MDRO infection risk estimates could reduce empiric extended-spectrum antibiotics for non-critically ill patients admitted with pneumonia. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster-randomized trial in 59 US community hospitals comparing the effect of a CPOE stewardship bundle (education, feedback, and real-time MDRO risk-based CPOE prompts; n = 29 hospitals) vs routine stewardship (n = 30 hospitals) on antibiotic selection during the first 3 hospital days (empiric period) in non-critically ill adults (≥18 years) hospitalized with pneumonia. There was an 18-month baseline period from April 1, 2017, to September 30, 2018, and a 15-month intervention period from April 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020. Intervention: CPOE prompts recommending standard-spectrum antibiotics in patients ordered to receive extended-spectrum antibiotics during the empiric period who have low estimated absolute risk (<10%) of MDRO pneumonia, coupled with feedback and education. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was empiric (first 3 days of hospitalization) extended-spectrum antibiotic days of therapy. Secondary outcomes included empiric vancomycin and antipseudomonal days of therapy and safety outcomes included days to intensive care unit (ICU) transfer and hospital length of stay. Outcomes compared differences between baseline and intervention periods across strategies. Results: Among 59 hospitals with 96 451 (51 671 in the baseline period and 44 780 in the intervention period) adult patients admitted with pneumonia, the mean (SD) age of patients was 68.1 (17.0) years, 48.1% were men, and the median (IQR) Elixhauser comorbidity count was 4 (2-6). Compared with routine stewardship, the group using CPOE prompts had a 28.4% reduction in empiric extended-spectrum days of therapy (rate ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.66-0.78]; P < .001). Safety outcomes of mean days to ICU transfer (6.5 vs 7.1 days) and hospital length of stay (6.8 vs 7.1 days) did not differ significantly between the routine and CPOE intervention groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Empiric extended-spectrum antibiotic use was significantly lower among adults admitted with pneumonia to non-ICU settings in hospitals using education, feedback, and CPOE prompts recommending standard-spectrum antibiotics for patients at low risk of MDRO infection, compared with routine stewardship practices. Hospital length of stay and days to ICU transfer were unchanged. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03697070.

Impact of Mandatory Infectious Disease Specialist Approval on Hospital-Onset Clostridioides difficile Infection Rates and Testing Appropriateness.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate Clostridioides difficile testing is common in the hospital setting, leading to potential overdiagnosis of infection when single-step nucleic acid amplification testing is used. The potential role of infectious diseases (ID) specialists in enforcing appropriate C. difficile testing is unclear. METHODS: At a single 697-bed academic hospital, we performed a retrospective study from 1 March 2012 to 31 December 2019 comparing hospital-onset C. difficile infection (HO-CDI) rates during 3 consecutive time periods: baseline 1 (37 months, no decision support), baseline 2 (32 months, computer decision support), and intervention period (25 months, mandatory ID specialist approval for all C. difficile testing on hospital day 4 or later). We used a discontinuous growth model to assess the impact of the intervention on HO-CDI rates. RESULTS: During the study period, we evaluated C. difficile infections across 331 180 admission and 1 172 015 patient-days. During the intervention period, a median of 1 HO-CDI test approval request per day (range, 0-6 alerts/day) was observed; adherence by providers with obtaining approval was 85%. The HO-CDI rate was 10.2, 10.4, and 4.3 events per 10 000 patient-days for each consecutive time period, respectively. In adjusted analysis, the HO-CDI rate did not differ significantly between the 2 baseline periods (P = .14) but did differ between the baseline 2 period and intervention period (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: An ID-led C. difficile testing approval process was feasible and was associated with a >50% decrease in HO-CDI rates, due to enforcement of appropriate testing.

Duration of Replication-Competent Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Shedding Among Patients With Severe or Critical Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

BACKGROUND: Patterns of shedding replication-competent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in severe or critical COVID-19 are not well characterized. We investigated the duration of replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 shedding in upper and lower airway specimens from patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We enrolled patients with active or recent severe or critical COVID-19 who were admitted to a tertiary care hospital intensive care unit (ICU) or long-term acute care hospital (LTACH) because of COVID-19. Respiratory specimens were collected at predefined intervals and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using viral culture and reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Clinical and epidemiologic metadata were reviewed. RESULTS: We collected 529 respiratory specimens from 78 patients. Replication-competent virus was detected in 4 of 11 (36.3%) immunocompromised patients up to 45 days after symptom onset and in 1 of 67 (1.5%) immunocompetent patients 10 days after symptom onset (P = .001). All culture-positive patients were in the ICU cohort and had persistent or recurrent symptoms of COVID-19. Median time from symptom onset to first specimen collection was 15 days (range, 6-45) for ICU patients and 58.5 days (range, 34-139) for LTACH patients. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 40 of 50 (80%) ICU patients and 7 of 28 (25%) LTACH patients. CONCLUSIONS: Immunocompromise and persistent or recurrent symptoms were associated with shedding of replication-competent SARS-CoV-2, supporting the need for improving respiratory symptoms in addition to time as criteria for discontinuation of transmission-based precautions. Our results suggest that the period of potential infectiousness among immunocompetent patients with severe or critical COVID-19 may be similar to that reported for patients with milder disease.

The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Antigen Testing.

BACKGROUND: Immunoassays designed to detect SARS-CoV-2 protein antigens (Ag) are commonly used to diagnose COVID-19. The most widely used tests are lateral flow assays that generate results in approximately 15 minutes for diagnosis at the point-of-care. Higher throughput, laboratory-based SARS-CoV-2 Ag assays have also been developed. The number of commercially available SARS-CoV-2 Ag detection tests has increased rapidly, as has the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the literature and develop best practice guidance related to SARS-CoV-2 Ag testing. This guideline is an update to the third in a series of frequently updated COVID-19 diagnostic guidelines developed by the IDSA. OBJECTIVE: The IDSA's goal was to develop evidence-based recommendations or suggestions that assist clinicians, clinical laboratories, patients, public health authorities, administrators and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests in both medical and non-medical settings. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists and experts in systematic literature review identified and prioritized clinical questions related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests. A review of relevant, peer-reviewed published literature was conducted through April 1, 2022. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel made ten diagnostic recommendations. These recommendations address Ag testing in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals and assess single versus repeat testing strategies. CONCLUSIONS: U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests with Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) have high specificity and low to moderate sensitivity compared to nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT). Ag test sensitivity is dependent on the presence or absence of symptoms, and in symptomatic patients, on timing of testing after symptom onset. In contrast, Ag tests have high specificity, and, in most cases, positive Ag results can be acted upon without confirmation. Results of point-of-care testing are comparable to those of laboratory-based testing, and observed or unobserved self-collection of specimens for testing yields similar results. Modeling suggests that repeat Ag testing increases sensitivity compared to testing once, but no empirical data were available to inform this question. Based on these observations, rapid RT-PCR or laboratory-based NAAT remains the testing method of choice for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, when timely molecular testing is not readily available or is logistically infeasible, Ag testing helps identify individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were insufficient to make a recommendation about the utility of Ag testing to guide release of patients with COVID-19 from isolation. The overall quality of available evidence supporting use of Ag testing was graded as very low to moderate.

Rapid Environmental Contamination with Candida auris and Multidrug-Resistant Bacterial Pathogens Near Colonized Patients.

BACKGROUND: Environmental contamination is suspected to play an important role in Candida auris transmission. Understanding speed and risks of contamination after room disinfection could inform environmental cleaning recommendations. METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicenter study of environmental contamination associated with C. auris colonization at six ventilator-capable skilled nursing facilities and one acute-care hospital in Illinois and California. Known C. auris carriers were sampled at five body-sites followed by sampling of nearby room surfaces before disinfection and at 0, 4, 8, and 12-hours post-disinfection. Samples were cultured for C. auris and bacterial multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Odds of surface contamination after disinfection were analyzed using multilevel generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 41 known C. auris carriers, colonization was detected most frequently on palms/fingertips (76%) and nares (71%). C. auris contamination was detected on 32.2% (66/205) of room surfaces pre-disinfection and 20.5% (39/190) of room surfaces by 4-hours post-disinfection. A higher number of C. auris-colonized body sites was associated with higher odds of environmental contamination at every time point following disinfection, adjusting for facility of residence. In the rooms of 38 (93%) C. auris carriers co-colonized with a bacterial MDRO, 2%-24% of surfaces were additionally contaminated with the same MDRO by 4-hours post-disinfection. CONCLUSIONS: C. auris can contaminate the healthcare environment rapidly after disinfection, highlighting the challenges associated with environmental disinfection. Future research should investigate long-acting disinfectants, antimicrobial surfaces, and more effective patient skin antisepsis to reduce the environmental reservoir of C. auris and bacterial MDROs in healthcare settings.