Stopping Hospital Infections With Environmental Services (SHINE): A Cluster-randomized Trial of Intensive Monitoring Methods for Terminal Room Cleaning on Rates of Multidrug-resistant Organisms in the Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) frequently contaminate hospital environments. We performed a multicenter, cluster-randomized, crossover trial of 2 methods for monitoring of terminal cleaning effectiveness. METHODS: Six intensive care units (ICUs) at 3 medical centers received both interventions sequentially, in randomized order. Ten surfaces were surveyed each in 5 rooms weekly, after terminal cleaning, with adenosine triphosphate (ATP) monitoring or an ultraviolet fluorescent marker (UV/F). Results were delivered to environmental services staff in real time with failing surfaces recleaned. We measured monthly rates of MDRO infection or colonization, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Clostridioides difficile, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus, and MDR gram-negative bacilli (MDR-GNB) during a 12-month baseline period and sequential 6-month intervention periods, separated by a 2-month washout. Primary analysis compared only the randomized intervention periods, whereas secondary analysis included the baseline. RESULTS: The ATP method was associated with a reduction in incidence rate of MDRO infection or colonization compared with the UV/F period (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.876; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.807-0.951; P = .002). Including the baseline period, the ATP method was associated with reduced infection with MDROs (IRR 0.924; 95% CI, 0.855-0.998; P = .04), and MDR-GNB infection or colonization (IRR 0.856; 95% CI, 0.825-0.887; P < .001). The UV/F intervention was not associated with a statistically significant impact on these outcomes. Room turnaround time increased by a median of 1 minute with the ATP intervention and 4.5 minutes with UV/F compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive monitoring of ICU terminal room cleaning with an ATP modality is associated with a reduction of MDRO infection and colonization.

Hospital-acquired coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among patients of two acute-care hospitals: Implications for surveillance.

OBJECTIVES: We quantified hospital-acquired coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the early phases of the pandemic, and we evaluated solely temporal determinations of hospital acquisition. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study during early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, March 1-November 30, 2020. We identified laboratory-detected severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from 30 days before admission through discharge. All cases detected after hospital day 5 were categorized by chart review as community or unlikely hospital-acquired cases, or possible or probable hospital-acquired cases. SETTING: The study was conducted in 2 acute-care hospitals in Chicago, Illinois. PATIENTS: The study included all hospitalized patients including an inpatient rehabilitation unit. INTERVENTIONS: Each hospital implemented infection-control precautions soon after identifying COVID-19 cases, including patient and staff cohort protocols, universal masking, and restricted visitation policies. RESULTS: Among 2,667 patients with SARS-CoV-2, detection before hospital day 6 was most common (n = 2,612; 98%); detection during hospital days 6-14 was uncommon (n = 43; 1.6%); and detection after hospital day 14 was rare (n = 16; 0.6%). By chart review, most cases after day 5 were categorized as community acquired, usually because SARS-CoV-2 had been detected at a prior healthcare facility (68% of cases on days 6-14 and 53% of cases after day 14). The incidence rates of possible and probable hospital-acquired cases per 10,000 patient days were similar for ICU- and non-ICU patients at hospital A (1.2 vs 1.3 difference, 0.1; 95% CI, -2.8 to 3.0) and hospital B (2.8 vs 1.2 difference, 1.6; 95% CI, -0.1 to 4.0). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients were protected by early and sustained application of infection-control precautions modified to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Using solely temporal criteria to discriminate hospital versus community acquisition would have misclassified many "late onset" SARS-CoV-2-positive cases.