Evaluation of antimicrobial selective pressure using the multicenter semiautomatic surveillance system Japan surveillance for infection prevention and healthcare epidemiology.

BACKGROUND: Evaluating the selective pressure of antimicrobials on bacteria is important for promoting antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs). The aim of this study was to assess the selective pressure of antimicrobials by evaluating their use (carbapenem [CBP] and CBP-sparing therapy) over time and the detection status of CBP-resistant organisms using multicenter data. METHODS: Among the facilities whose data were registered in the Japan Surveillance for Infection Prevention and Healthcare Epidemiology from 2017 to 2020, those that had data on the use of CBP and CBP-sparing therapy (fluoroquinolones [FQs], cefmetazole [CMZ], piperacillin-tazobactam [PIP/TAZ], ampicillin-sulbactam [ABPC/SBT], ceftriaxone/cefotaxime [CTRX/CTX], CAZ (ceftazidime), cefepime [CFPM], and aminoglycosides [AGs]) as well as on CBP-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) and CBP-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA) detection were included. Alcohol-based hand rubbing (ABHR) usage was also analyzed. Regression analyses, including multivariable regression analysis, were performed to evaluate trends. The association of antimicrobial use density (AUD) with CRE and CRPA detection rates was evaluated. RESULTS: In 28 facilities nationwide, CBP, FQ, CAZ, AG, and PIP/TAZ use decreased over the 3-year period, whereas the use of CMZ, ABPC/SBT, CTRX/CTX, CFPM, and ABHR as well as the rates of CRE and CRPA detection increased. The average AUD did not significantly correlate with CRE and CRPA detection rates. The multivariable regression analysis did not reveal any significant correlation between each AUD or ABHR and CRE or CRPA detection. CONCLUSION: CBP and ABHR use showed a decreasing and an increasing trend, respectively, while CRPA and CRE detection rates exhibited a gradual increase. The considerably low CRE and CRPA detection rates suggest that slight differences in numbers may have been observed as excessive trend changes. Further investigation is warranted to evaluate selective pressure while considering the characteristics of ASP and the mechanisms underlying resistance.

The roles of bedside nurses in Japan in antimicrobial stewardship.

BACKGROUND: In the United States and the United Kingdom, the roles of nurses in antimicrobial stewardship (AS) have been described in guidelines. However, in Japan, no previous studies have clarified nurses' recognition of the role of AS. Moreover, how the AS roles were implemented among nurses in Japan has not been fully clarified. The objectives of this study were to determine the perceptions of infection control nurses (ICNs) in Japan regarding the AS role of nurses and the extent of nurses' practice. METHODS: A questionnaire survey of ICNs was conducted. RESULTS: Four hundred responses (response rate, 30.8%) were analyzed. Some of the items that have already gained consensus as the AS role of nurses were not recognized as the AS role of nurses by ICNs or had low implementation rates in Japan. Meanwhile, both recognition and implementation rates were high for the 5 types of care proposed. DISCUSSION: The reason the ICNs agreed that these 5 types of care are AS roles for nurses is that they know that such care can prevent infection and thereby obviate the need for antimicrobial administration. However, whether nurses themselves understand that these are roles for nurses in AS is unclear. To promote AS in Japan, communicating the fact that nurses already contribute to AS, strengthening nurse education, and improving staffing are desirable.

Environmental Sampling for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 During a COVID-19 Outbreak on the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship.

During a COVID-19 outbreak on the Diamond Princess cruise ship we sampled environmental surfaces after passengers and crew vacated cabins. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 58 of 601 samples (10%) from case cabins 1-17 days after cabins were vacated but not from noncase cabins. There was no difference in detection proportion between cabins of symptomatic (15%, 28/189; cycle quantification [Cq], 29.79-38.86) and asymptomatic cases (21%, 28/131; Cq, 26.21-38.99). No SARS-CoV-2 virus was isolated from any of the samples. Transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 from symptomatic and asymptomatic patients may be similar and surfaces could be involved in transmission.