Comparative antimicrobial use in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and non-COVID-19 inpatients from 2019 to 2020: A multicenter ecological study.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether increased antimicrobial use (AU) at the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was driven by greater AU in COVID-19 patients only, or whether AU also increased in non-COVID-19 patients. DESIGN: In this retrospective observational ecological study from 2019 to 2020, we stratified inpatients by COVID-19 status and determined relative percentage differences in median monthly AU in COVID-19 patients versus non-COVID-19 patients during the COVID-19 period (March-December 2020) and the pre-COVID-19 period (March-December 2019). We also determined relative percentage differences in median monthly AU in non-COVID-19 patients during the COVID-19 period versus the pre-COVID-19 period. Statistical significance was assessed using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. SETTING: The study was conducted in 3 acute-care hospitals in Chicago, Illinois. PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients. RESULTS: Facility-wide AU for broad-spectrum antibacterial agents predominantly used for hospital-onset infections was significantly greater in COVID-19 patients versus non-COVID-19 patients during the COVID-19 period (with relative increases of 73%, 66%, and 91% for hospitals A, B, and C, respectively), and during the pre-COVID-19 period (with relative increases of 52%, 64%, and 66% for hospitals A, B, and C, respectively). In contrast, facility-wide AU for all antibacterial agents was significantly lower in non-COVID-19 patients during the COVID-19 period versus the pre-COVID-19 period (with relative decreases of 8%, 7%, and 8% in hospitals A, B, and C, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: AU for broad-spectrum antimicrobials was greater in COVID-19 patients compared to non-COVID-19 patients at the onset of the pandemic. AU for all antibacterial agents in non-COVID-19 patients decreased in the COVID-19 period compared to the pre-COVID-19 period.

Evolving availability and standardization of patient attributes for matching.

Variation in availability, format, and standardization of patient attributes across health care organizations impacts patient-matching performance. We report on the changing nature of patient-matching features available from 2010-2020 across diverse care settings. We asked 38 health care provider organizations about their current patient attribute data-collection practices. All sites collected name, date of birth (DOB), address, and phone number. Name, DOB, current address, social security number (SSN), sex, and phone number were most commonly used for cross-provider patient matching. Electronic health record queries for a subset of 20 participating sites revealed that DOB, first name, last name, city, and postal codes were highly available (>90%) across health care organizations and time. SSN declined slightly in the last years of the study period. Birth sex, gender identity, language, country full name, country abbreviation, health insurance number, ethnicity, cell phone number, email address, and weight increased over 50% from 2010 to 2020. Understanding the wide variation in available patient attributes across care settings in the United States can guide selection and standardization efforts for improved patient matching in the United States.

Computing antimicrobial use/antimicrobial resistance ratios: A novel way to assess inpatient antimicrobial utilization using current National Healthcare Safety Network metrics.

BACKGROUND: Current methods for benchmarking inpatient antimicrobial use (AU) could benefit from combining AU with antimicrobial resistance (AR) information to provide metrics benchmarked to microbiological data; this may yield more instructive and better risk-adjusted measurements than AU and AR in isolation. METHODS: In this retrospective single-center study, we computed facility-wide AU/AR ratios from 2019 to 2020 for specific antimicrobial agents and corresponding AR events, and compared median monthly AU/AR ratios between March 2019 through December 2019 (pre-COVID period) and March 2020 through December 2020 (COVID period). Aggregate AU was expressed as a ratio to aggregate AR events for antimicrobials that typically have activity against the AR organism and are frequently used to treat the AR organism in clinical practice. We also computed AU/AR ratios in our surgical intensive care unit in the pre-COVID period. RESULTS: High-median facility-wide monthly AU/AR ratios were observed for intravenous vancomycin/methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, with 130.0 in the pre-COVID period and 121.3 in the COVID period (p =.520). Decreases in facility-wide median monthly AU/AR ratios were observed between periods for meropenem/ESBL Enterobacterales (20.9 vs. 7.9, p < .001), linezolid/vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (48.5 vs. 15.8, p =.004), and daptomycin/vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (32.2 vs. 4.8, p = .002). Increases in facility-wide median monthly AU/AR ratios were observed between periods for ceftazidime-avibactam/carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (0.0 vs. 3.2, p = .020) and ceftazidime-avibactam/multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (0.0 vs. 4.0, p = .017). The AU/AR ratio for intravenous vancomycin/methicillin-resistant S. aureus in the surgical intensive care unit was 191.5 in the pre-COVID period. CONCLUSIONS: AU/AR ratios may be used to supplement current AU and AR metrics. Future directions should include the development of more AU metrics benchmarked to microbiological information. AU metrics more specific to transplant infectious diseases should be developed.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Outpatient Treatment of COVID-19 - United States, January-July 2022.

In December 2021 and early 2022, four medications received emergency use authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration for outpatient treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in patients who are at high risk for progressing to severe disease; these included nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) and molnupiravir (Lagevrio) (both oral antivirals), expanded use of remdesivir (Veklury; an intraveneous antiviral), and bebtelovimab (a monoclonal antibody [mAb]).* Reports have documented disparities in mAb treatment by race and ethnicity (1) and in oral antiviral treatment by zip code-level social vulnerability (2); however, limited data are available on racial and ethnic disparities in oral antiviral treatment.† Using electronic health record (EHR) data from 692,570 COVID-19 patients aged ≥20 years who sought medical care during January-July 2022, treatment with Paxlovid, Lagevrio, Veklury, and mAbs was assessed by race and ethnicity, overall and among high-risk patient groups. During 2022, the percentage of COVID-19 patients seeking medical care who were treated with Paxlovid increased from 0.6% in January to 20.2% in April and 34.3% in July; the other three medications were used less frequently (0.7%-5.0% in July). During April-July 2022, when Paxlovid use was highest, compared with White patients, Black or African American (Black) patients were prescribed Paxlovid 35.8% less often, multiple or other race patients 24.9% less often, American Indian or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (AIAN/NHOPI) patients 23.1% less often, and Asian patients 19.4% less often; Hispanic patients were prescribed Paxlovid 29.9% less often than non-Hispanic patients. Racial and ethnic disparities in Paxlovid treatment were generally somewhat higher among patients at high risk for severe COVID-19, including those aged ≥50 years and those who were immunocompromised. The expansion of programs focused on equitable awareness of and access to outpatient COVID-19 treatments, as well as COVID-19 vaccination, including updated bivalent booster doses, can help protect persons most at risk for severe illness and facilitate equitable health outcomes.

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.

Prevalence of Select New Symptoms and Conditions Among Persons Aged Younger Than 20 Years and 20 Years or Older at 31 to 150 Days After Testing Positive or Negative for SARS-CoV-2.

Importance: New symptoms and conditions can develop following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Whether they occur more frequently among persons with SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with those without is unclear. Objective: To compare the prevalence of new diagnoses of select symptoms and conditions between 31 and 150 days after testing among persons who tested positive vs negative for SARS-CoV-2. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed aggregated electronic health record data from 40 health care systems, including 338 024 persons younger than 20 years and 1 790 886 persons aged 20 years or older who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 during March to December 2020 and who had medical encounters between 31 and 150 days after testing. Main Outcomes and Measures: International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to capture new symptoms and conditions that were recorded 31 to 150 days after a SARS-CoV-2 test but absent in the 18 months to 7 days prior to testing. The prevalence of new symptoms and conditions was compared between persons with positive and negative SARS-CoV-2 tests stratified by age (20 years or older and young than 20 years) and care setting (nonhospitalized, hospitalized, or hospitalized and ventilated). Results: A total of 168 701 persons aged 20 years or older and 26 665 younger than 20 years tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 1 622 185 persons aged 20 years or older and 311 359 younger than 20 years tested negative. Shortness of breath was more common among persons with a positive vs negative test result among hospitalized patients (≥20 years: prevalence ratio [PR], 1.89 [99% CI, 1.79-2.01]; <20 years: PR, 1.72 [99% CI, 1.17-2.51]). Shortness of breath was also more common among nonhospitalized patients aged 20 years or older with a positive vs negative test result (PR, 1.09 [99% CI, 1.05-1.13]). Among hospitalized persons aged 20 years or older, the prevalence of new fatigue (PR, 1.35 [99% CI, 1.27-1.44]) and type 2 diabetes (PR, 2.03 [99% CI, 1.87-2.19]) was higher among those with a positive vs a negative test result. Among hospitalized persons younger than 20 years, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes (PR, 2.14 [99% CI, 1.13-4.06]) was higher among those with a positive vs a negative test result; however, the prevalence difference was less than 1%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, among persons hospitalized after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, diagnoses of certain symptoms and conditions were higher than among those with a negative test result. Health care professionals should be aware of symptoms and conditions that may develop after SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly among those hospitalized after diagnosis.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Receipt of Medications for Treatment of COVID-19 - United States, March 2020-August 2021.

The COVID-19 pandemic has magnified longstanding health care and social inequities, resulting in disproportionately high COVID-19-associated illness and death among members of racial and ethnic minority groups (1). Equitable use of effective medications (2) could reduce disparities in these severe outcomes (3). Monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, initially received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in November 2020. mAbs are typically administered in an outpatient setting via intravenous infusion or subcutaneous injection and can prevent progression of COVID-19 if given after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result or for postexposure prophylaxis in patients at high risk for severe illness.† Dexamethasone, a commonly used steroid, and remdesivir, an antiviral drug that received EUA from FDA in May 2020, are used in inpatient settings and help prevent COVID-19 progression§ (2). No large-scale studies have yet examined the use of mAb by race and ethnicity. Using COVID-19 patient electronic health record data from 41 U.S. health care systems that participated in the PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network,¶ this study assessed receipt of medications for COVID-19 treatment by race (White, Black, Asian, and Other races [including American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and multiple or Other races]) and ethnicity (Hispanic or non-Hispanic). Relative disparities in mAb** treatment among all patients†† (805,276) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result and in dexamethasone and remdesivir treatment among inpatients§§ (120,204) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result were calculated. Among all patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results, the overall use of mAb was infrequent, with mean monthly use at 4% or less for all racial and ethnic groups. Hispanic patients received mAb 58% less often than did non-Hispanic patients, and Black, Asian, or Other race patients received mAb 22%, 48%, and 47% less often, respectively, than did White patients during November 2020-August 2021. Among inpatients, disparities were different and of lesser magnitude: Hispanic inpatients received dexamethasone 6% less often than did non-Hispanic inpatients, and Black inpatients received remdesivir 9% more often than did White inpatients. Vaccines and preventive measures are the best defense against infection; use of COVID-19 medications postexposure or postinfection can reduce morbidity and mortality and relieve strain on hospitals but are not a substitute for COVID-19 vaccination. Public health policies and programs centered around the specific needs of communities can promote health equity (4). Equitable receipt of outpatient treatments, such as mAb and antiviral medications, and implementation of prevention practices are essential to reducing existing racial and ethnic inequities in severe COVID-19-associated illness and death.

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.

Healthcare personnel experiences implementing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales infection control measures at a ventilator-capable skilled nursing facility-A qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Ventilator-capable skilled nursing facilities (vSNFs) are critical to the epidemiology and control of antibiotic-resistant organisms. During an infection prevention intervention to control carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), we conducted a qualitative study to characterize vSNF healthcare personnel beliefs and experiences regarding infection control measures. DESIGN: A qualitative study involving semistructured interviews. SETTING: One vSNF in the Chicago, Illinois, metropolitan region. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 17 healthcare personnel representing management, nursing, and nursing assistants. METHODS: We used face-to-face, semistructured interviews to measure healthcare personnel experiences with infection control measures at the midpoint of a 2-year quality improvement project. RESULTS: Healthcare personnel characterized their facility as a home-like environment, yet they recognized that it is a setting where germs were 'invisible' and potentially 'threatening.' Healthcare personnel described elaborate self-protection measures to avoid acquisition or transfer of germs to their own household. Healthcare personnel were motivated to implement infection control measures to protect residents, but many identified structural barriers such as understaffing and time constraints, and some reported persistent preference for soap and water. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare personnel in vSNFs, from management to frontline staff, understood germ theory and the significance of multidrug-resistant organism transmission. However, their ability to implement infection control measures was hampered by resource limitations and mixed beliefs regarding the effectiveness of infection control measures. Self-protection from acquiring multidrug-resistant organisms was a strong motivator for healthcare personnel both outside and inside the workplace, and it could explain variation in adherence to infection control measures such as a higher hand hygiene adherence after resident care than before resident care.

Disparities and Temporal Trends in COVID-19 Exposures and Mitigating Behaviors Among Black and Hispanic Adults in an Urban Setting.

Importance: COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus, has disproportionately affected Black and Hispanic communities in the US, which can be attributed to social factors including inconsistent public health messaging and suboptimal adoption of prevention efforts. Objectives: To identify behaviors and evaluate trends in COVID-19-mitigating practices in a predominantly Black and Hispanic population, to identify differences in practices by self-reported ethnicity, and to evaluate whether federal emergency financial assistance was associated with SARS-CoV-2 acquisition. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study was conducted by telephone from July 1 through August 30, 2020, on a random sample of adults who underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing at a safety-net health care system in Chicago during the surge in COVID-19 cases in the spring of 2020. Behaviors and receipt of a stimulus check were compared between participants testing positive and negative for SARS-CoV-2. Differences in behaviors and temporal trends were assessed by race and ethnicity. Main Outcomes and Measures: SARS-CoV-2 infection was assessed using nasopharyngeal quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction testing. Mitigating behaviors and federal emergency financial assistance were assessed by survey. Race and ethnicity data were collected from electronic health records. Results: Of 750 randomly sampled individuals, 314 (41.9%) consented to participate (169 [53.8%] women). Of those, 159 (51%) self-reported as Hispanic and 155 (49%) as non-Hispanic (120 [38.2%] Black), of whom 133 (84%) and 76 (49%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, respectively. For all participants, consistent mask use (public transport: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00-0.34; social gatherings: aOR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.00-0.50; running errands: aOR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.07-0.42; at work: aOR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.07-0.79) and hand sanitizer use (aOR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.13-0.52) were associated with lower odds of infection. During 3 sampled weeks, mitigation practices were less frequent among Hispanic compared with non-Hispanic participants (eg, mask use while running errands: aOR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.15-0.46). Hispanic participants were at high risk of infection (aOR, 5.52; 95% CI, 4.30-7.08) and more likely to work outside the home (aOR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.27-3.30) compared with non-Hispanic participants, possibly because of limited receipt of stimulus checks (aOR, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.02-0.07) or unemployment benefits (aOR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.74). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of adults in a large US city, public health messaging improved preventive behaviors over time but lagged among Hispanic participants; messaging tailored to Hispanic communities, especially for mask use, should be prioritized. Hispanic individuals were at higher risk for infection, more often worked outside the home, and were less likely to have received a stimulus check; this suggests larger studies are needed to evaluate the provision of economic support on SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics in low-income populations.

Computer Informatics for Infection Control.

Computer informatics have the potential to improve infection control outcomes in surveillance, prevention, and public health. Surveillance activities include surveillance of infections, device use, and facility/ward outbreak detection and investigation. Prevention activities include awareness of multidrug-resistant organism carriage on admission, identification of high-risk individuals or populations, reducing device use, and antimicrobial stewardship. Enhanced communication with public health and other health care facilities across networks includes automated electronic communicable disease reporting, syndromic surveillance, and regional outbreak detection. Computerized public health networks may represent the next major evolution in infection control. This article reviews the use of informatics for infection control.

Spatial, Ecologic, and Clinical Epidemiology of Community-Onset, Ceftriaxone-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae, Cook County, Illinois, USA.

We performed a spatial and mixed ecologic study of community-onset Enterobacteriaceae isolates collected from a public healthcare system in Cook County, Illinois, USA. Individual-level data were collected from the electronic medical record and census tract-level data from the US Census Bureau. Associations between individual- and population-level characteristics and presence of ceftriaxone resistance were determined by logistic regression analysis. Spatial analysis confirmed nonrandom distribution of ceftriaxone resistance across census tracts, which was associated with higher percentages of Hispanic, foreign-born, and uninsured residents. Individual-level analysis showed that ceftriaxone resistance was associated with male sex, an age range of 35-85 years, race or ethnicity other than non-Hispanic Black, inpatient encounter, and percentage of foreign-born residents in the census tract of isolate provenance. Our findings suggest that the likelihood of community-onset ceftriaxone resistance in Enterobacteriaceae is influenced by geographic and population-level variables. The development of effective mitigation strategies might depend on better accounting for these factors.

Variability in comorbidites and health services use across homeless typologies: multicenter data linkage between healthcare and homeless systems.

BACKGROUND: Homelessness is associated with substantial morbidity. Data linkages between homeless and health systems are important to understand unique needs across homeless populations, identify homeless individuals not registered in homeless databases, quantify the impact of housing services on health-system use, and motivate health systems and payers to contribute to housing solutions. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey including six health systems and two Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS) in Cook County, Illinois. We performed privacy-preserving record linkage to identify homelessness through HMIS or ICD-10 codes captured in electronic medical records. We measured the prevalence of health conditions and health-services use across the following typologies: housing-service utilizers stratified by service provided (stable, stable plus unstable, unstable) and non-utilizers (i.e., homelessness identified through diagnosis codes-without receipt of housing services). RESULTS: Among 11,447 homeless recipients of healthcare, nearly 1 in 5 were identified by ICD10 code alone without recorded homeless services (n = 2177; 19%). Almost half received homeless services that did not include stable housing (n = 5444; 48%), followed by stable housing (n = 3017; 26%), then receipt of both stable and unstable services (n = 809; 7%). Setting stable housing recipients as the referent group, we found a stepwise increase in behavioral-health conditions from stable housing to those known as homeless solely by health systems. Compared to those in stable housing, prevalence rate ratios (PRR) for those without homeless services were as follows: depression (PRR = 2.2; 95% CI 1.9 to 2.5), anxiety (PRR = 2.5; 95% CI 2.1 to 3.0), schizophrenia (PRR = 3.3; 95% CI 2.7 to 4.0), and alcohol-use disorder (PRR = 4.4; 95% CI 3.6 to 5.3). Homeless individuals who had not received housing services relied on emergency departments for healthcare-nearly 3 of 4 visited at least one and many (24%) visited multiple. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in behavioral-health conditions and health-system use across homeless typologies highlight the particularly high burden among homeless who are disconnected from homeless services. Fragmented and high use of emergency departments for care should motivate health systems and payers to promote housing solutions, especially those that incorporate substance use and mental health treatment.

Regional Spread of blaNDM-1-Containing Klebsiella pneumoniae ST147 in Post-Acute Care Facilities.

BACKGROUND: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) harboring blaKPC have been endemic in Chicago-area healthcare networks for more than a decade. During 2016-2019, a series of regional point-prevalence surveys identified increasing prevalence of blaNDM-containing CRE in multiple long-term acute care hospitals (LTACHs) and ventilator-capable skilled nursing facilities (vSNFs). We performed a genomic epidemiology investigation of blaNDM-producing CRE to understand their regional emergence and spread. METHODS: We performed whole-genome sequencing on New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase (NDM)+ CRE isolates from 4 point-prevalence surveys across 35 facilities (LTACHs, vSNFs, and acute care hospital medical intensive care units) in the Chicago area and investigated the genomic relatedness and transmission dynamics of these isolates over time. RESULTS: Genomic analyses revealed that the rise of NDM+ CRE was due to the clonal dissemination of an sequence type (ST) 147 Klebsiella pneumoniae strain harboring blaNDM-1 on an IncF plasmid. Dated phylogenetic reconstructions indicated that ST147 was introduced into the region around 2013 and likely acquired NDM around 2015. Analyzing the relatedness of strains within and between facilities supported initial increases in prevalence due to intrafacility transmission in certain vSNFs, with evidence of subsequent interfacility spread among LTACHs and vSNFs connected by patient transfer. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a regional outbreak of blaNDM-1 ST147 that began in and disseminated across Chicago area post-acute care facilities. Our findings highlight the importance of performing genomic surveillance at post-acute care facilities to identify emerging threats.

Epidemiology of COVID-19 vs. influenza: Differential failure of COVID-19 mitigation among Hispanics, Cook County Health, Illinois.

BACKGROUND: During the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S., African-American or Hispanic communities were disproportionately impacted. To better understand the epidemiology and relative effects of COVID-19 among hospitalized Hispanic patients, we compared individual and census-tract level characteristics of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 to those diagnosed with influenza, another viral infection with respiratory transmission. We evaluated temporal changes in epidemiology related to a shelter-in-place mandate. METHODS: We evaluated patients hospitalized at Cook County Health, the safety-net health system for the Chicago metropolitan area. Among self-identified hospitalized Hispanic patients, we compared those with influenza (2019-2020 season) to COVID-19 infection during March 16, 2020-May 11, 2020. We used multivariable analysis to identify differences in individual and census-tract level characteristics between the two groups. RESULTS: Relative to non-Hispanic blacks and whites, COVID-19 rapidly increased among Hispanics during promotion of social-distancing policies. Whereas non-Hispanic blacks were more likely to be hospitalized for influenza, Hispanic patients predominated among COVID-19 infections (40% relative increase compared to influenza). In the comparative analysis of influenza and COVID-19, Hispanic patients with COVID-19 were more likely to reside in census tracts with higher proportions of residents with the following characteristics: Hispanic; no high school diploma; non-US citizen; limited English speaking ability; employed in manufacturing or construction; and overcrowding. By multivariable analysis, Hispanic patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared to those with influenza were more likely to be male (adjusted OR = 1.8; 95% CI 1.1 to 2.9), obese (aOR = 2.5; 95% CI 1.5 to 4.2), or reside in a census tract with ≥40% of residents without a high-school diploma (aOR = 2.5; 95% CI 1.3 to 4.8). CONCLUSIONS: The rapid and disproportionate increase in COVID-19 hospitalizations among Hispanics after the shelter-in-place mandate indicates that public health strategies were inadequate in protecting this population-in particular, for those residing in neighborhoods with lower levels of educational attainment.

Significant Regional Differences in Antibiotic Use Across 576 US Hospitals and 11 701 326 Adult Admissions, 2016-2017.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying the amount and diversity of antibiotic use in United States hospitals assists antibiotic stewardship efforts but is hampered by limited national surveillance. Our study aimed to address this knowledge gap by examining adult antibiotic use across 576 hospitals and nearly 12 million encounters in 2016-2017. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients aged ≥ 18 years discharged from hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2017. Using daily antibiotic charge data, we mapped antibiotics to mutually exclusive classes and to spectrum of activity categories. We evaluated relationships between facility and case-mix characteristics and antibiotic use in negative binomial regression models. RESULTS: The study included 11 701 326 admissions, totaling 64 064 632 patient-days, across 576 hospitals. Overall, patients received antibiotics in 65% of hospitalizations, at a crude rate of 870 days of therapy (DOT) per 1000 patient-days. By class, use was highest among ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitor combinations, third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, and glycopeptides. Teaching hospitals averaged lower rates of total antibiotic use than nonteaching hospitals (834 vs 957 DOT per 1000 patient-days; P < .001). In adjusted models, teaching hospitals remained associated with lower use of third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins and antipseudomonal agents (adjusted incidence rate ratio [95% confidence interval], 0.92 [.86-.97] and 0.91 [.85-.98], respectively). Significant regional differences in total and class-specific antibiotic use also persisted in adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: Adult inpatient antibiotic use remains high, driven predominantly by broad-spectrum agents. Better understanding reasons for interhospital usage differences, including by region and teaching status, may inform efforts to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing.