Evaluation of hospital-onset bacteraemia and fungaemia in the USA as a potential healthcare quality measure: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-onset bacteraemia and fungaemia (HOB) is being explored as a surveillance and quality metric. The objectives of the current study were to determine sources and preventability of HOB in hospitalised patients in the USA and to identify factors associated with perceived preventability. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of HOB events at 10 academic and three community hospitals using structured chart review. HOB was defined as a blood culture on or after hospital day 4 with growth of one or more bacterial or fungal organisms. HOB events were stratified by commensal and non-commensal organisms. Medical resident physicians, infectious disease fellows or infection preventionists reviewed charts to determine HOB source, and infectious disease physicians with training in infection prevention/hospital epidemiology rated preventability from 1 to 6 (1=definitely preventable to 6=definitely not preventable) using a structured guide. Ratings of 1-3 were collectively considered 'potentially preventable' and 4-6 'potentially not preventable'. RESULTS: Among 1789 HOB events with non-commensal organisms, gastrointestinal (including neutropenic translocation) (35%) and endovascular (32%) were the most common sources. Overall, 636/1789 (36%) non-commensal and 238/320 (74%) commensal HOB events were rated potentially preventable. In logistic regression analysis among non-commensal HOB events, events attributed to intravascular catheter-related infection, indwelling urinary catheter-related infection and surgical site infection had higher odds of being rated preventable while events with neutropenia, immunosuppression, gastrointestinal sources, polymicrobial cultures and previous positive blood culture in the same admission had lower odds of being rated preventable, compared with events without those attributes. Of 636 potentially preventable non-commensal HOB events, 47% were endovascular in origin, followed by gastrointestinal, respiratory and urinary sources; approximately 40% of those events would not be captured through existing healthcare-associated infection surveillance. DISCUSSION: Factors identified as associated with higher or lower preventability should be used to guide inclusion, exclusion and risk adjustment for an HOB-related quality metric.

Evaluation of an antigen-test-based strategy to reduce duration of transmission-based precautions for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in hospitalized patients.

An academic hospital implemented a severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antigen-test-based strategy to facilitate discontinuation of precautions for patients admitted with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Of 171 patients that underwent antigen testing, 68% had an initial negative test performed a median of 5 days after admission. Antigen testing reduced isolation time by 144 hours.

Comparison of Adjuvant Clindamycin vs Linezolid for Severe Invasive Group A Streptococcus Skin and Soft Tissue Infections.

Background: Linezolid may be an option for severe group A Streptococcus (GAS) infections based on its potent in vitro activity and antitoxin effects, but clinical data supporting its use over clindamycin are limited. This study evaluated treatment outcomes in patients with severe GAS skin and soft tissue infections who received either linezolid or clindamycin. Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study examined patients with GAS isolated from blood and/or tissue cultures with invasive soft tissue infection or necrotizing fasciitis who underwent surgical debridement and received linezolid or clindamycin for at least 48 hours. The primary outcome was percentage change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score from baseline through 72 hours of hospitalization. Results: After adjustment for time to first surgical intervention among patients with a baseline SOFA score >0 (n = 23 per group), there was no difference in reduction of SOFA score over the first 72 hours in patients receiving clindamycin vs linezolid. In the entire cohort (n = 26, clindamycin; n = 29, linezolid), there was no difference in inpatient mortality (2% vs 1%) or any secondary outcomes, including duration of vasopressor therapy, intensive care unit length of stay, and antibiotic-associated adverse drug events. Conclusions: There was no difference in reduction of critical illness as measured by SOFA score between baseline and 72 hours among patients treated with clindamycin vs linezolid. Given its more favorable side effect profile, linezolid may be a viable option for the treatment of serious GAS infections and should be further studied.

Hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia: examining healthcare-associated infections prevention through a wider lens.

A hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia (HOB) metric will expand hospital surveillance of bloodstream infections beyond current state and provide an opportunity to re-evaluate infection prevention strategies. Here we consider the added value and potential pitfalls of HOB surveillance and present a framework for the standardized assessment of HOB events.

Overlapping Physiologic Signs of Sepsis and Paroxysmal Sympathetic Hyperactivity After Traumatic Brain Injury: Exploring A Clinical Conundrum.

BACKGROUND: Paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity (PSH) occurs in a subset of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and is associated with worse outcomes. Sepsis is also associated with worse outcomes after TBI and shares several physiologic features with PSH, potentially creating diagnostic confusion and suboptimal management of each. This is the first study to directly investigate the interaction between PSH and infection using robust diagnostic criteria. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with TBI admitted to a level I trauma center intensive care unit with hospital length of stay of at least 2 weeks. From January 2016 to July 2018, 77 patients diagnosed with PSH were 1:1 matched by age and Glasgow Coma Scale to 77 patients without PSH. Trauma infectious diseases subspecialists prospectively documented assessments corroborating diagnoses of infection. Extracted data including incidence, timing, classification, and anatomical source of infections were compared according to PSH diagnosis. We also evaluated daily PSH clinical feature severity scores and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria and compared values for patients with and without confirmed infection, stratified by PSH diagnosis. RESULTS: During the first 2 weeks of hospitalization, there were no differences in rates of suspected (62%) nor confirmed (48%) infection between patients with PSH and controls. Specific treatments for PSH were initiated on median hospital day 7 and for confirmed infections on median hospital day 8. SIRS criteria could identify infection only in patients who were not diagnosed with PSH. CONCLUSIONS: In the presence of brain injury-induced autonomic nervous system dysregulation, the initiation and continuation of antimicrobial therapy is a challenging clinical decision, as standard physiologic markers of sepsis do not distinguish infected from noninfected patients with PSH, and these entities often present around the same time. Clinicians should be aware that PSH is a potential driver of SIRS, and familiarity with its diagnostic criteria as proposed by the PSH assessment measure is important. Management by a multidisciplinary team attentive to these issues may reduce rates of inappropriate antibiotic usage and misdiagnoses.

Perceptions of Health Care-Associated Infection Metrics by Infection Control Experts.

This survey study examines the perceptions of US infection control experts on commonly reported measures of health care­associated infections.

Development and evaluation of a structured guide to assess the preventability of hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess preventability of hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia (HOB), we developed and evaluated a structured rating guide accounting for intrinsic patient and extrinsic healthcare-related risks. DESIGN: HOB preventability rating guide was compared against a reference standard expert panel. PARTICIPANTS: A 10-member panel of clinical experts was assembled as the standard of preventability assessment, and 2 physician reviewers applied the rating guide for comparison. METHODS: The expert panel independently rated 82 hypothetical HOB scenarios using a 6-point Likert scale collapsed into 3 categories: preventable, uncertain, or not preventable. Consensus was defined as concurrence on the same category among ≥70% experts. Scenarios without consensus were deliberated and followed by a second round of rating.Two reviewers independently applied the rating guide to adjudicate the same 82 scenarios in 2 rounds, with interim revisions. Interrater reliability was evaluated using the κ (kappa) statistic. RESULTS: Expert panel consensus criteria were met for 52 scenarios (63%) after 2 rounds.After 2 rounds, guide-based rating matched expert panel consensus in 40 of 52 (77%) and 39 of 52 (75%) cases for reviewers 1 and 2, respectively. Agreement rates between the 2 reviewers were 84% overall (κ, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-0.88]) and 87% (κ, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.94) for the 52 scenarios with expert consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Preventability ratings of HOB scenarios by 2 reviewers using a rating guide matched expert consensus in most cases with moderately high interreviewer reliability. Although diversity of expert opinions and uncertainty of preventability merit further exploration, this is a step toward standardized assessment of HOB preventability.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms, patient contacts, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity and seropositivity among healthcare personnel in a Maryland healthcare system.

In a large, system-wide, healthcare personnel (HCP) testing experience using severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and serologic testing early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we did not find increased infection risk related to COVID-19 patient contact. Our findings support workplace policies for HCP protection and underscore the role of community exposure and asymptomatic infection.

Risk Factors Associated With SARS-CoV-2 Seropositivity Among US Health Care Personnel.

Importance: Risks for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among health care personnel (HCP) are unclear. Objective: To evaluate the risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among HCP with the a priori hypothesis that community exposure but not health care exposure was associated with seropositivity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study was conducted among volunteer HCP at 4 large health care systems in 3 US states. Sites shared deidentified data sets, including previously collected serology results, questionnaire results on community and workplace exposures at the time of serology, and 3-digit residential zip code prefix of HCP. Site-specific responses were mapped to a common metadata set. Residential weekly coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cumulative incidence was calculated from state-based COVID-19 case and census data. Exposures: Model variables included demographic (age, race, sex, ethnicity), community (known COVID-19 contact, COVID-19 cumulative incidence by 3-digit zip code prefix), and health care (workplace, job role, COVID-19 patient contact) factors. Main Outcome and Measures: The main outcome was SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Risk factors for seropositivity were estimated using a mixed-effects logistic regression model with a random intercept to account for clustering by site. Results: Among 24 749 HCP, most were younger than 50 years (17 233 [69.6%]), were women (19 361 [78.2%]), were White individuals (15 157 [61.2%]), and reported workplace contact with patients with COVID-19 (12 413 [50.2%]). Many HCP worked in the inpatient setting (8893 [35.9%]) and were nurses (7830 [31.6%]). Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 per 10 000 in the community up to 1 week prior to serology testing ranged from 8.2 to 275.6; 20 072 HCP (81.1%) reported no COVID-19 contact in the community. Seropositivity was 4.4% (95% CI, 4.1%-4.6%; 1080 HCP) overall. In multivariable analysis, community COVID-19 contact and community COVID-19 cumulative incidence were associated with seropositivity (community contact: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.5; 95% CI, 2.9-4.1; community cumulative incidence: aOR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.6). No assessed workplace factors were associated with seropositivity, including nurse job role (aOR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.3), working in the emergency department (aOR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.8-1.3), or workplace contact with patients with COVID-19 (aOR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.3). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of US HCP in 3 states, community exposures were associated with seropositivity to SARS-CoV-2, but workplace factors, including workplace role, environment, or contact with patients with known COVID-19, were not. These findings provide reassurance that current infection prevention practices in diverse health care settings are effective in preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from patients to HCP.

The discontinuation of contact precautions for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus: Impact upon patient adverse events and hospital operations.

BACKGROUND: Contact precautions for endemic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) are a resource-intensive intervention to reduce healthcare-associated infections, potentially impeding patient throughput and limiting bed availability to isolate other contagious pathogens. We investigated the impact of the discontinuation of contact precautions (DcCP) for endemic MRSA and VRE on patient outcomes and operations metrics in an acute care setting. METHODS: This is a retrospective, quasi-experimental analysis of the 12 months before and after DcCP for MRSA and VRE at an academic medical centre. The frequency for bed closures due to contact isolation was measured, and personal protective equipment (PPE) expenditures and patient satisfaction survey results were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Using an interrupted time series design, emergency department (ED) admission wait times and rates of patient falls, pressure ulcers and nosocomial MRSA and VRE clinical isolates were compared using GEEs. RESULTS: Prior to DcCP, bed closures for MRSA and/or VRE isolation were associated with estimated lost hospital charges of $9383 per 100 bed days (95% CI: 8447 to 10 318). No change in ED wait times or change in trend was observed following DcCP. There were significant reductions in monthly expenditures on gowns (-61.0%) and gloves (-16.3%). Patient satisfaction survey results remained stable. No significant changes in rates or trends were observed for patient falls or pressure ulcers. Incidence rates of nosocomial MRSA (1.58 (95% CI: 0.82 to 3.04)) and VRE (1.02 (95% CI: 0.82 to 1.27)) did not significantly change. CONCLUSIONS: DcCP was associated with an increase in bed availability and revenue recovery, and a reduction in PPE expenditures. Benefits for other hospital operations metrics and patient outcomes were not identified.

Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: Diagnostic Test Stewardship and Relevance of Culturing Practices.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is one of the most common infections in the ICU. Prompt diagnosis is vital as mortality increases with delayed antibiotic therapy. However, accurate diagnosis is challenging due to non-specific clinical features in a complicated patient cohort. Microbiological culture data remains a crucial aspect in confirming diagnosis. RECENT FINDINGS: Literature data comparing the benefit of invasive respiratory sampling to non-invasive is inconclusive. Differences in culturing practices translate in overidentification of organisms of unclear significance. Positive culture data in a low pre-test probability does not differentiate between true infection and colonization resulting in overtreatment. Furthermore, there are also opportunities for modifying the reporting of respiratory tract cultures that can better guide antimicrobial therapy. Under the umbrella of antimicrobial stewardship, diagnostic stewardship can be incorporated to create a systematic approach that would target culturing practices to match the right pre-test probability. Ideal outcome will be targeting cultures to the right patient population and minimizing unnecessary treatment.

A retrospective analysis of adverse events among patients receiving daptomycin versus vancomycin during outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is a safe and effective alternative to prolonged inpatient stays for patients requiring long-term intravenous antimicrobials, but antimicrobial-associated adverse events remain a significant challenge. Thus, we sought to measure the association between choice of antimicrobial agent (vancomycin vs daptomycin) and incidence of adverse drug events (ADEs). METHODS: Patients receiving OPAT treatment with vancomycin or daptomycin for skin and soft-tissue infections, bone and joint infections, endocarditis, and bacteremia or endovascular infections during the period from July 1, 2013, through September 30, 2016, were included. Demographic and clinical data were abstracted from the medical record. Logistic regression was used to compare ADEs requiring a change in or early discontinuation of therapy, hospital readmission, and emergency room visits between groups. Time from OPAT enrollment to ADE was compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: In total, 417 patients were included: 312 (74·8%) received vancomycin and 105 (25·2%) received daptomycin. After adjusting for age, Charlson comorbidity index, location of OPAT treatment, receipt of combination therapy with either ß-lactam or fluoroquinolone, renal function, and availability of safety labs, patients receiving vancomycin had significantly higher incidence of ADEs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3·71; 95% CI, 1·64-8·40). ADEs occurred later in the treatment course for patients treated with daptomycin (P<·01). Rates of readmission and emergency room visits were similar. CONCLUSIONS: In the OPAT setting, vancomycin use was associated with higher incidence of ADEs than daptomycin use. This finding is an important policy consideration for programs aiming to optimize outcomes and minimize cost. Careful selection of gram-positive agents for prolonged treatment is necessary to limit toxicity.