National survey of infectious disease fellowship program directors: A call for subspecialized training in infection prevention and control and healthcare epidemiology.

OBJECTIVE: The importance of infection prevention and control and healthcare epidemiology (IPC/HE) in healthcare facilities was highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Infectious disease (ID) clinicians often hold leadership positions in IPC/HE teams; however, there is no standard for training or certification of ID physicians specializing in IPC/HE. We evaluated the current state of IPC/HE training in ID fellowship programs. DESIGN: A national survey of ID fellowship program directors was conducted to assess current IPC/HE training components in programs and plans for expanded offerings. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: All ID fellowship program directors in the United States and Puerto Rico. METHODS: Surveys were distributed using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) to program directors in March 2023, with 2 reminder emails; the survey closed after 4 weeks. RESULTS: Of 166 program directors, 54 (32.5%) responded to the survey. Among respondent programs, 49 (90.7%) of 54 programs reported didactic training in IPC/HE averaging 4.4 hours over the course of the fellowship. Also, 18 (33.3%) of 54 reported a dedicated IPC/HE training track. Furthermore, 23 programs (42.6%) reported barriers to expanding training. There was support (n = 47, 87.0%) for formal IPC/HE certification from a professional society within the standard fellowship. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the COVID-19 pandemic highlighting the need for ID medical doctors with IPC/HE expertise, formal training in ID fellowship remains limited. Most program directors support formalization of IPC/HE training by a professional organization. Creation of standardized advanced curriculums for ID fellowship training in IPC/HE could be considered by the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) to grow, retain, and enhance the IPC/HE physician workforce.

Use of expert consensus to develop a shared list of procedures with potential for aerosol generation during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the lack of agreement regarding the definition of aerosol-generating procedures and potential risk to healthcare personnel. We convened a group of Massachusetts healthcare epidemiologists to develop consensus through expert opinion in an area where broader guidance was lacking at the time.

Asymptomatic screening for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as an infection prevention measure in healthcare facilities: Challenges and considerations.

Testing of asymptomatic patients for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (ie, "asymptomatic screening) to attempt to reduce the risk of nosocomial transmission has been extensive and resource intensive, and such testing is of unclear benefit when added to other layers of infection prevention mitigation controls. In addition, the logistic challenges and costs related to screening program implementation, data noting the lack of substantial aerosol generation with elective controlled intubation, extubation, and other procedures, and the adverse patient and facility consequences of asymptomatic screening call into question the utility of this infection prevention intervention. Consequently, the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) recommends against routine universal use of asymptomatic screening for SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare facilities. Specifically, preprocedure asymptomatic screening is unlikely to provide incremental benefit in preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the procedural and perioperative environment when other infection prevention strategies are in place, and it should not be considered a requirement for all patients. Admission screening may be beneficial during times of increased virus transmission in some settings where other layers of controls are limited (eg, behavioral health, congregate care, or shared patient rooms), but widespread routine use of admission asymptomatic screening is not recommended over strengthening other infection prevention controls. In this commentary, we outline the challenges surrounding the use of asymptomatic screening, including logistics and costs of implementing a screening program, and adverse patient and facility consequences. We review data pertaining to the lack of substantial aerosol generation during elective controlled intubation, extubation, and other procedures, and we provide guidance for when asymptomatic screening for SARS-CoV-2 may be considered in a limited scope.

Contact Tracing and Exposure Investigation in Response to the First Case of Monkeypox Virus Infection in the United States During the 2022 Global Monkeypox Outbreak.

BACKGROUND: In May 2022, the first case of monkeypox virus (MPXV) infection in the United States in the current global outbreak was identified. As part of the public health and health care facility response, a contact tracing and exposure investigation was done. OBJECTIVE: To describe the contact tracing, exposure identification, risk stratification, administration of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP), and exposure period monitoring for contacts of the index patient, including evaluation of persons who developed symptoms possibly consistent with MPXV infection. DESIGN: Contact tracing and exposure investigation. SETTING: Multiple health care facilities and community settings in Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: Persons identified as contacts of the index patient. INTERVENTION: Contact notification, risk stratification, and symptom monitoring; PEP administration in a subset of contacts. MEASUREMENTS: Epidemiologic and clinical data collected through standard surveillance procedures at each facility and then aggregated and analyzed. RESULTS: There were 37 community and 129 health care contacts identified, with 4 at high risk, 49 at intermediate risk, and 113 at low or uncertain risk. Fifteen health care contacts developed symptoms during the monitoring period. Three met criteria for MPXV testing, with negative results. Two community contacts developed symptoms. Neither met criteria for MPXV testing, and neither showed disease progression consistent with monkeypox. Among 4 persons with high-risk exposures offered PEP, 3 elected to receive PEP. Among 10 HCP with intermediate-risk exposures for which PEP was offered as part of informed clinical decision making, 2 elected to receive PEP. No transmissions were identified at the conclusion of the 21-day monitoring period, despite the delay in recognition of monkeypox in the index patient. LIMITATION: Descriptions of exposures are subject to recall bias, which affects risk stratification. CONCLUSION: In a contact tracing investigation involving 166 community and health care contacts of a patient with monkeypox, no secondary cases were identified. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Assessing changes to N95 respirator filtration efficiency, qualitative and quantitative fit, and seal check with repeated vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP) decontamination.

N95 respirators were reprocessed using vaporized hydrogen peroxide to supplement limited supplies during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we found no statistically significant differences in qualitative and quantitative fit or filtration efficiency with reprocessing. Filtration efficiency remained above 95% even at 25 cycles of reprocessing without statistically significant change from cycle 20-25 compared to cycle 0 (P = .10, P = .05, respectively). Vaporous hydrogen peroxide is an effective option to augment N95 respirator supplies.

Multisociety statement on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination as a condition of employment for healthcare personnel.

This consensus statement by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine (AMDA), the Association for Professionals in Epidemiology and Infection Control (APIC), the HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA), the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (PIDS), and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists (SIDP) recommends that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination should be a condition of employment for all healthcare personnel in facilities in the United States. Exemptions from this policy apply to those with medical contraindications to all COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States and other exemptions as specified by federal or state law. The consensus statement also supports COVID-19 vaccination of nonemployees functioning at a healthcare facility (eg, students, contract workers, volunteers, etc).

At the vanguard: Leaders' perspectives on establishing healthcare system infection prevention programs.

Hospitals are increasingly consolidating into health systems. Some systems have appointed healthcare epidemiologists to lead system-level infection prevention programs. Ideal program infrastructure and support resources have not been described. We informally surveyed 7 healthcare epidemiologists with recent experience building and leading system-level infection prevention programs. Key facilitators and barriers for program structure and implementation are described.