Secondary Cases of Delta Variant Coronavirus Disease 2019 Among Vaccinated Healthcare Workers With Breakthrough Infections is Rare.

In a retrospective, cohort study at 4 medical centers with high coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination rates, we evaluated breakthrough severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Delta variant infections in vaccinated healthcare workers. Few work-related secondary cases were identified. Breakthrough cases were largely due to unmasked social activities outside of work.

The Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) on Healthcare-Associated Infections.

BACKGROUND: The profound changes wrought by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on routine hospital operations may have influenced performance on hospital measures, including healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). We aimed to evaluate the association between COVID-19 surges and HAI and cluster rates. METHODS: In 148 HCA Healthcare-affiliated hospitals, from 1 March 2020 to 30 September 2020, and a subset of hospitals with microbiology and cluster data through 31 December 2020, we evaluated the association between COVID-19 surges and HAIs, hospital-onset pathogens, and cluster rates using negative binomial mixed models. To account for local variation in COVID-19 pandemic surge timing, we included the number of discharges with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis per staffed bed per month. RESULTS: Central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI), and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia increased as COVID-19 burden increased. There were 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 23-108%) more CLABSI, 43% (95% CI: 8-90%) more CAUTI, and 44% (95% CI: 10-88%) more cases of MRSA bacteremia than expected over 7 months based on predicted HAIs had there not been COVID-19 cases. Clostridioides difficile infection was not significantly associated with COVID-19 burden. Microbiology data from 81 of the hospitals corroborated the findings. Notably, rates of hospital-onset bloodstream infections and multidrug resistant organisms, including MRSA, vancomycin-resistant enterococcus, and Gram-negative organisms, were each significantly associated with COVID-19 surges. Finally, clusters of hospital-onset pathogens increased as the COVID-19 burden increased. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 surges adversely impact HAI rates and clusters of infections within hospitals, emphasizing the need for balancing COVID-related demands with routine hospital infection prevention.

COVID-19 in vaccinated versus unvaccinated hematologic malignancy patients.

The effect of vaccination on severity of subsequent COVID-19 in patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs) is unknown. In this single-center retrospective cohort study, we found no difference in severity of COVID-19 disease in vaccinated (n = 16) versus unvaccinated (n = 54) HM patients using an adjusted multiple logistic regression model. Recent anti-B-cell therapy was associated with more severe illness.

Ranking Hospitals Based on Colon Surgery and Abdominal Hysterectomy Surgical Site Infection Outcomes: Impact of Limiting Surveillance to the Operative Hospital.

Background: Hospital-specific surgical site infection (SSI) performance following colon surgery and abdominal hysterectomies can impact hospitals' relative rankings around quality metrics used to determine financial penalties. Current SSI surveillance largely focuses on SSI detected at the operative hospital. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study to assess the impact on hospitals' relative SSI performance rankings when SSI detected at nonoperative hospitals are included. We used data from a California statewide hospital registry to assess for evidence of SSI following colon surgery or abdominal hysterectomies performed 1 March 2011 through 30 November 2013 using previously validated claims-based SSI surveillance methods. Risk-adjusted hospital-specific rankings based on SSI detected at operative hospitals versus any California hospital were generated. Results: Among 60059 colon surgeries at 285 hospitals and 64918 abdominal hysterectomies at 270 hospitals, 5921 (9.9%) colon surgeries and 1481 (2.3%) abdominal hysterectomies received a diagnosis code for SSI within the 30 days following surgery. Operative hospital surveillance alone would have missed 7.2% of colon surgery and 13.4% of abdominal hysterectomy SSIs. The proportion of an individual hospital's SSIs detected during hospitalizations at other hospitals varied widely. Including nonoperative hospital SSIs resulted in improved relative ranking of 11 (3.9%) colon surgery and 13 (4.8%) hysterectomy hospitals so that they were no longer in the worst performing quartile, mainly among hospitals with relatively high surgical volumes. Conclusions: Standard SSI surveillance that mainly focuses on infections detected at the operative hospital causes varying degrees of SSI underestimation, leading to inaccurate assignment or avoidance of financial penalties for approximately 1 in 11-16 hospitals.

Evolving Insights Into the Epidemiology and Control of Clostridium difficile in Hospitals.

Typing studies suggest that most cases of hospital-onset Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) are unrelated to other cases of active disease in the hospital. New cases may instead be due to transmissions from asymptomatic carriers or progression of latent C. difficile present on admission to active infection. Direct exposure to antibiotics remains the primary risk factor for CDI but ward-level antibiotic use, antibiotic exposure of the prior room occupant, and C. difficile status of the prior room occupant increase risk for C. difficile acquisition while antibiotic exposure, gastric acid suppression, and immunosuppression increase risk for progression to infection. These insights suggest possible new approaches to prevent CDI, including screening to identify and isolate carriers, universal gloving, greater use of sporicidal cleaning methods, enhancing antibiotic and possibly proton pump inhibitor stewardship, and prescribing prophylactic vancomycin and/or probiotics to colonized patients to prevent progression from colonization to infection. We review current evidence and questions related to these interventions.

Surgical Site Infections: Volume-Outcome Relationship and Year-to-Year Stability of Performance Rankings.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) rates are publicly reported as quality metrics and increasingly used to determine financial reimbursement. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the volume-outcome relationship as well as the year-to-year stability of performance rankings following coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and hip arthroplasty. RESEARCH DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent CABG surgery or hip arthroplasty at US hospitals from 2005 to 2011, with outcomes analyzed through March 2012. Nationally validated claims-based surveillance methods were used to assess for SSI within 90 days of surgery. The relationship between procedure volume and SSI rate was assessed using logistic regression and generalized additive modeling. Year-to-year stability of SSI rates was evaluated using logistic regression to assess hospitals' movement in and out of performance rankings linked to financial penalties. RESULTS: Case-mix adjusted SSI risk based on claims was highest in hospitals performing <50 CABG/year and <200 hip arthroplasty/year compared with hospitals performing ≥200 procedures/year. At that same time, hospitals in the worst quartile in a given year based on claims had a low probability of remaining in that quartile the following year. This probability increased with volume, and when using 2 years' experience, but the highest probabilities were only 0.59 for CABG (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.66) and 0.48 for hip arthroplasty (95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Aggregate SSI risk is highest in hospitals with low annual procedure volumes, yet these hospitals are currently excluded from quality reporting. Even for higher volume hospitals, year-to-year random variation makes past experience an unreliable estimator of current performance.

Effect of daily chlorhexidine bathing on hospital-acquired infection.

BACKGROUND: Results of previous single-center, observational studies suggest that daily bathing of patients with chlorhexidine may prevent hospital-acquired bloodstream infections and the acquisition of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, cluster-randomized, nonblinded crossover trial to evaluate the effect of daily bathing with chlorhexidine-impregnated washcloths on the acquisition of MDROs and the incidence of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections. Nine intensive care and bone marrow transplantation units in six hospitals were randomly assigned to bathe patients either with no-rinse 2% chlorhexidine-impregnated washcloths or with nonantimicrobial washcloths for a 6-month period, exchanged for the alternate product during the subsequent 6 months. The incidence rates of acquisition of MDROs and the rates of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections were compared between the two periods by means of Poisson regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 7727 patients were enrolled during the study. The overall rate of MDRO acquisition was 5.10 cases per 1000 patient-days with chlorhexidine bathing versus 6.60 cases per 1000 patient-days with nonantimicrobial washcloths (P=0.03), the equivalent of a 23% lower rate with chlorhexidine bathing. The overall rate of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections was 4.78 cases per 1000 patient-days with chlorhexidine bathing versus 6.60 cases per 1000 patient-days with nonantimicrobial washcloths (P=0.007), a 28% lower rate with chlorhexidine-impregnated washcloths. No serious skin reactions were noted during either study period. CONCLUSIONS: Daily bathing with chlorhexidine-impregnated washcloths significantly reduced the risks of acquisition of MDROs and development of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Sage Products; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00502476.).

Public reporting of health care-associated surveillance data: recommendations from the healthcare infection control practices advisory committee.

Health care-associated infection (HAI) rates are used as measures of a health care facility's quality of patient care. Recently, these outcomes have been used to publicly rank quality efforts and determine facility reimbursement. The value of comparing HAI rates among health care facilities is limited by many factors inherent to HAI surveillance, and incentives that reward low HAI rates can lead to unintended consequences that can compromise medical care surveillance efforts, such as the use of clinical adjudication panels to veto events that meet HAI surveillance definitions.The Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, a federal advisory committee that provides advice and guidance to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services about strategies for surveillance, prevention, and control of HAIs, assessed the challenges associated with using HAI surveillance data for external quality reporting, including the unintended consequences of clinician veto and clinical adjudication panels. Discussions with stakeholder liaisons and committee members were then used to formulate recommended standards for the use of HAI surveillance data for external facility assessment to ensure valid comparisons and to provide as level a playing field as possible.The final recommendations advocate for consistent, objective, and independent application of CDC HAI definitions with concomitant validation of HAIs and surveillance processes. The use of clinician veto and adjudication is discouraged.

Assessing past versus present severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection: A survey of criteria for discontinuing precautions in asymptomatic patients testing positive on admission.

Infection prevention program leaders report frequent use of criteria to distinguish recently recovered coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases from actively infectious cases when incidentally positive asymptomatic patients were identified on routine severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. Guidance on appropriate interpretation of high-sensitivity molecular tests can prevent harm from unnecessary precautions that delay admission and impede medical care.

A Trial of Automated Outbreak Detection to Reduce Hospital Pathogen Spread.

BACKGROUND: Detection and containment of hospital outbreaks currently depend on variable and personnel-intensive surveillance methods. Whether automated statistical surveillance for outbreaks of health care-associated pathogens allows earlier containment efforts that would reduce the size of outbreaks is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial in 82 community hospitals within a larger health care system. All hospitals followed an outbreak response protocol when outbreaks were detected by their infection prevention programs. Half of the hospitals additionally used statistical surveillance of microbiology data, which alerted infection prevention programs to outbreaks. Statistical surveillance was also applied to microbiology data from control hospitals without alerting their infection prevention programs. The primary outcome was the number of additional cases occurring after outbreak detection. Analyses assessed differences between the intervention period (July 2019 to January 2022) versus baseline period (February 2017 to January 2019) between randomized groups. A post hoc analysis separately assessed pre-coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and Covid-19 pandemic intervention periods. RESULTS: Real-time alerts did not significantly reduce the number of additional outbreak cases (intervention period versus baseline: statistical surveillance relative rate [RR]=1.41, control RR=1.81; difference-in-differences, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 1.52; P=0.46). Comparing only the prepandemic intervention with baseline periods, the statistical outbreak surveillance group was associated with a 64.1% reduction in additional cases (statistical surveillance RR=0.78, control RR=2.19; difference-in-differences, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.99). There was no similarly observed association between the pandemic versus baseline periods (statistical surveillance RR=1.56, control RR=1.66; difference-in-differences, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.92). CONCLUSIONS: Automated detection of hospital outbreaks using statistical surveillance did not reduce overall outbreak size in the context of an ongoing pandemic. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04053075. Support for HCA Healthcare's participation in the study was provided in kind by HCA.).

Reporting surgical site infections following total hip and knee arthroplasty: impact of limiting surveillance to the operative hospital.

BACKGROUND: Public reporting of surgical site infections (SSIs) by hospitals is largely limited to infections detected during surgical hospitalizations or readmissions to the same facility. SSI rates may be underestimated if patients with SSIs are readmitted to other hospitals. We assessed the impact of readmissions to other facilities on hospitals' SSI rates following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent primary THA or TKA at California hospitals between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2009. SSIs were identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes predictive of SSI assigned at any California hospital within 365 days of surgery using a statewide repository of hospital data that allowed tracking of patients between facilities. We used statewide data to estimate the fraction of each hospital's THA and TKA SSIs identified at the operative hospital versus other hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 91 121 THA and 121 640 TKA procedures were identified. Based on diagnosis codes, SSIs developed following 2214 (2.3%) THAs and 2465 (2.0%) TKAs. Seventeen percent of SSIs would have been missed by operative hospital surveillance alone. The proportion of hospitals' SSIs detected at nonoperative hospitals ranged from 0% to 100%. Including SSIs detected at nonoperative hospitals resulted in better relative ranking for 61% of THA hospitals and 61% of TKA hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Limiting SSI surveillance to the operative hospital caused varying degrees of SSI underestimation and substantially impacted hospitals' relative rankings, suggesting that alternative methods for comprehensive postdischarge surveillance are needed for accurate benchmarking.

Universal glove and gown use and acquisition of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the ICU: a randomized trial.

IMPORTANCE: Antibiotic-resistant bacteria are associated with increased patient morbidity and mortality. It is unknown whether wearing gloves and gowns for all patient contact in the intensive care unit (ICU) decreases acquisition of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether wearing gloves and gowns for all patient contact in the ICU decreases acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) compared with usual care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cluster-randomized trial in 20 medical and surgical ICUs in 20 US hospitals from January 4, 2012, to October 4, 2012. INTERVENTIONS: In the intervention ICUs, all health care workers were required to wear gloves and gowns for all patient contact and when entering any patient room. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was acquisition of MRSA or VRE based on surveillance cultures collected on admission and discharge from the ICU. Secondary outcomes included individual VRE acquisition, MRSA acquisition, frequency of health care worker visits, hand hygiene compliance, health care­associated infections, and adverse events. RESULTS: From the 26,180 patients included, 92,241 swabs were collected for the primary outcome. Intervention ICUs had a decrease in the primary outcome of MRSA or VRE from 21.35 acquisitions per 1000 patient-days (95% CI, 17.57 to 25.94) in the baseline period to 16.91 acquisitions per 1000 patient-days (95% CI, 14.09 to 20.28) in the study period, whereas control ICUs had a decrease in MRSA or VRE from 19.02 acquisitions per 1000 patient-days (95% CI, 14.20 to 25.49) in the baseline period to 16.29 acquisitions per 1000 patient-days (95% CI, 13.48 to 19.68) in the study period, a difference in changes that was not statistically significant (difference, −1.71 acquisitions per 1000 person-days, 95% CI, −6.15 to 2.73; P = .57). For key secondary outcomes, there was no difference in VRE acquisition with the intervention (difference, 0.89 acquisitions per 1000 person-days; 95% CI, −4.27 to 6.04, P = .70), whereas for MRSA, there were fewer acquisitions with the intervention (difference, −2.98 acquisitions per 1000 person-days; 95% CI, −5.58 to −0.38; P = .046). Universal glove and gown use also decreased health care worker room entry (4.28 vs 5.24 entries per hour, difference, −0.96; 95% CI, −1.71 to −0.21, P = .02), increased room-exit hand hygiene compliance (78.3% vs 62.9%, difference, 15.4%; 95% CI, 8.99% to 21.8%; P = .02) and had no statistically significant effect on rates of adverse events (58.7 events per 1000 patient days vs 74.4 events per 1000 patient days; difference, −15.7; 95% CI, −40.7 to 9.2, P = .24). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The use of gloves and gowns for all patient contact compared with usual care among patients in medical and surgical ICUs did not result in a difference in the primary outcome of acquisition of MRSA or VRE. Although there was a lower risk of MRSA acquisition alone and no difference in adverse events, these secondary outcomes require replication before reaching definitive conclusions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT0131821.

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.

Strategies to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infections in acute-care hospitals: 2022 Update.

The intent of this document is to highlight practical recommendations in a concise format designed to assist physicians, nurses, and infection preventionists at acute-care hospitals in implementing and prioritizing their catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) prevention efforts. This document updates the Strategies to Prevent Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections in Acute-Care Hospitals published in 2014. It is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), the American Hospital Association (AHA), and The Joint Commission.

Implementing strategies to prevent infections in acute-care settings.

This document introduces and explains common implementation concepts and frameworks relevant to healthcare epidemiology and infection prevention and control and can serve as a stand-alone guide or be paired with the "SHEA/IDSA/APIC Compendium of Strategies to Prevent Healthcare-Associated Infections in Acute Care Hospitals: 2022 Updates," which contain technical implementation guidance for specific healthcare-associated infections. This Compendium article focuses on broad behavioral and socio-adaptive concepts and suggests ways that infection prevention and control teams, healthcare epidemiologists, infection preventionists, and specialty groups may utilize them to deliver high-quality care. Implementation concepts, frameworks, and models can help bridge the "knowing-doing" gap, a term used to describe why practices in healthcare may diverge from those recommended according to evidence. It aims to guide the reader to think about implementation and to find resources suited for a specific setting and circumstances by describing strategies for implementation, including determinants and measurement, as well as the conceptual models and frameworks: 4Es, Behavior Change Wheel, CUSP, European and Mixed Methods, Getting to Outcomes, Model for Improvement, RE-AIM, REP, and Theoretical Domains.

Strategies to prevent surgical site infections in acute-care hospitals: 2022 Update.

The intent of this document is to highlight practical recommendations in a concise format designed to assist acute-care hospitals in implementing and prioritizing their surgical-site infection (SSI) prevention efforts. This document updates the Strategies to Prevent Surgical Site Infections in Acute Care Hospitals published in 2014. This expert guidance document is sponsored by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA). It is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), the American Hospital Association (AHA), and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of a number of organizations and societies with content expertise.

Whole-genome sequencing rule-out of suspected hospital-onset Rhizopus outbreaks.

Two independent temporal-spatial clusters of hospital-onset Rhizopus infections were evaluated using whole-genome sequencing (WGS). Phylogenetic analysis confirmed that isolates within each cluster were unrelated despite epidemiological suspicion of outbreaks. The ITS1 region alone was insufficient for accurate analysis. WGS has utility for rapid rule-out of suspected nosocomial Rhizopus outbreaks.

Prolonged silent carriage, genomic virulence potential and transmission between staff and patients characterize a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) outbreak of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is an important pathogen in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) that confers significant morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: Improving our understanding of MRSA transmission dynamics, especially among high-risk patients, is an infection prevention priority. METHODS: We investigated a cluster of clinical MRSA cases in the NICU using a combination of epidemiologic review and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) of isolates from clinical and surveillance cultures obtained from patients and healthcare personnel (HCP). RESULTS: Phylogenetic analysis identified 2 genetically distinct phylogenetic clades and revealed multiple silent-transmission events between HCP and infants. The predominant outbreak strain harbored multiple virulence factors. Epidemiologic investigation and genomic analysis identified a HCP colonized with the dominant MRSA outbreak strain who cared for most NICU patients who were infected or colonized with the same strain, including 1 NICU patient with severe infection 7 months before the described outbreak. These results guided implementation of infection prevention interventions that prevented further transmission events. CONCLUSIONS: Silent transmission of MRSA between HCP and NICU patients likely contributed to a NICU outbreak involving a virulent MRSA strain. WGS enabled data-driven decision making to inform implementation of infection control policies that mitigated the outbreak. Prospective WGS coupled with epidemiologic analysis can be used to detect transmission events and prompt early implementation of control strategies.