Outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 Infections in Nursing Homes during Periods of Delta and Omicron Predominance, United States, July 2021-March 2022.

SARS-CoV-2 infections among vaccinated nursing home residents increased after the Omicron variant emerged. Data on booster dose effectiveness in this population are limited. During July 2021-March 2022, nursing home outbreaks in 11 US jurisdictions involving >3 infections within 14 days among residents who had received at least the primary COVID-19 vaccine(s) were monitored. Among 2,188 nursing homes, 1,247 outbreaks were reported in the periods of Delta (n = 356, 29%), mixed Delta/Omicron (n = 354, 28%), and Omicron (n = 536, 43%) predominance. During the Omicron-predominant period, the risk for infection within 14 days of an outbreak start was lower among boosted residents than among residents who had received the primary vaccine series alone (risk ratio [RR] 0.25, 95% CI 0.19-0.33). Once infected, boosted residents were at lower risk for all-cause hospitalization (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.40-0.49) and death (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34-0.59) than primary vaccine-only residents.

Multidrug-Resistant Bacterial Infections in U.S. Hospitalized Patients, 2012-2017.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria that are commonly associated with health care cause a substantial health burden. Updated national estimates for this group of pathogens are needed to inform public health action. METHODS: Using data from patients hospitalized in a cohort of 890 U.S. hospitals during the period 2012-2017, we generated national case counts for both hospital-onset and community-onset infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE), extended-spectrum cephalosporin resistance in Enterobacteriaceae suggestive of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) production, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, carbapenem-resistant acinetobacter species, and MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa. RESULTS: The hospital cohort in the study accounted for 41.6 million hospitalizations (>20% of U.S. hospitalizations annually). The overall rate of clinical cultures was 292 cultures per 1000 patient-days and was stable throughout the time period. In 2017, these pathogens caused an estimated 622,390 infections (95% confidence interval [CI], 579,125 to 665,655) among hospitalized patients. Of these infections, 517,818 (83%) had their onset in the community, and 104,572 (17%) had their onset in the hospital. MRSA and ESBL infections accounted for the majority of the infections (52% and 32%, respectively). Between 2012 and 2017, the incidence decreased for MRSA infection (from 114.18 to 93.68 cases per 10,000 hospitalizations), VRE infection (from 24.15 to 15.76 per 10,000), carbapenem-resistant acinetobacter species infection (from 3.33 to 2.47 per 10,000), and MDR P. aeruginosa infection (from 13.10 to 9.43 per 10,000), with decreases ranging from -20.5% to -39.2%. The incidence of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infection did not change significantly (from 3.36 to 3.79 cases per 10,000 hospitalizations). The incidence of ESBL infection increased by 53.3% (from 37.55 to 57.12 cases per 10,000 hospitalizations), a change driven by an increase in community-onset cases. CONCLUSIONS: Health care-associated antimicrobial resistance places a substantial burden on patients in the United States. Further work is needed to identify improved interventions for both the inpatient and outpatient settings. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).

Presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infections and Transmission in a Skilled Nursing Facility.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can spread rapidly within skilled nursing facilities. After identification of a case of Covid-19 in a skilled nursing facility, we assessed transmission and evaluated the adequacy of symptom-based screening to identify infections in residents. METHODS: We conducted two serial point-prevalence surveys, 1 week apart, in which assenting residents of the facility underwent nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal testing for SARS-CoV-2, including real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR), viral culture, and sequencing. Symptoms that had been present during the preceding 14 days were recorded. Asymptomatic residents who tested positive were reassessed 7 days later. Residents with SARS-CoV-2 infection were categorized as symptomatic with typical symptoms (fever, cough, or shortness of breath), symptomatic with only atypical symptoms, presymptomatic, or asymptomatic. RESULTS: Twenty-three days after the first positive test result in a resident at this skilled nursing facility, 57 of 89 residents (64%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Among 76 residents who participated in point-prevalence surveys, 48 (63%) tested positive. Of these 48 residents, 27 (56%) were asymptomatic at the time of testing; 24 subsequently developed symptoms (median time to onset, 4 days). Samples from these 24 presymptomatic residents had a median rRT-PCR cycle threshold value of 23.1, and viable virus was recovered from 17 residents. As of April 3, of the 57 residents with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 11 had been hospitalized (3 in the intensive care unit) and 15 had died (mortality, 26%). Of the 34 residents whose specimens were sequenced, 27 (79%) had sequences that fit into two clusters with a difference of one nucleotide. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid and widespread transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was demonstrated in this skilled nursing facility. More than half of residents with positive test results were asymptomatic at the time of testing and most likely contributed to transmission. Infection-control strategies focused solely on symptomatic residents were not sufficient to prevent transmission after SARS-CoV-2 introduction into this facility.

Effectiveness of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection Among Residents of US Nursing Homes Before and During the Delta Variant Predominance, December 2020-November 2021.

BACKGROUND: Residents of nursing homes experience disproportionate morbidity and mortality related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and were prioritized for vaccine introduction. We evaluated COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections among nursing home residents. METHODS: We used a retrospective cohort of 4315 nursing home residents during 14 December 2020-9 November 2021. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios comparing residents with a completed vaccination series with unvaccinated among those with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, by vaccine product, and by time period. RESULTS: Overall adjusted VE was 58% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44% to 69%) among residents without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. During the pre-Delta period, the VE within 150 days of receipt of the second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech (67%; 95% CI, 40% to 82%) and Moderna (75%; 95% CI, 32% to 91%) was similar. During the Delta period, VE measured >150 days after the second dose was 33% (95% CI, -2% to 56%) for Pfizer-BioNTech and 77% (95% CI, 48% to 91%) for Moderna. Rates of infection were 78% lower (95% CI, 67% to 85%) among residents with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and completed vaccination series compared with unvaccinated residents without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccines were effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections among nursing home residents, and history of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provided additional protection. Maintaining high coverage of recommended doses of COVID-19 vaccines remains a critical tool for preventing infections in nursing homes.

Evaluating the Presence of Replication-Competent Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) From Nursing Home Residents With Persistently Positive Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) Results.

Replication-competent virus has not been detected in individuals with mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) more than 10 days after symptom onset. It is unknown whether these findings apply to nursing home residents. Of 273 specimens collected from nursing home residents >10 days from the initial positive test, none were culture positive.

Performance Evaluation of Serial SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Testing During a Nursing Home Outbreak.

BACKGROUND: To address high COVID-19 burden in U.S. nursing homes, rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests have been widely distributed in those facilities. However, performance data are lacking, especially in asymptomatic people. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing when used for facility-wide testing during a nursing home outbreak. DESIGN: A prospective evaluation involving 3 facility-wide rounds of testing where paired respiratory specimens were collected to evaluate the performance of the BinaxNOW antigen test compared with virus culture and real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Early and late infection were defined using changes in RT-PCR cycle threshold values and prior test results. SETTING: A nursing home with an ongoing SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. PARTICIPANTS: 532 paired specimens collected from 234 available residents and staff. MEASUREMENTS: Percentage of positive agreement (PPA) and percentage of negative agreement (PNA) for BinaxNOW compared with RT-PCR and virus culture. RESULTS: BinaxNOW PPA with virus culture, used for detection of replication-competent virus, was 95%. However, the overall PPA of antigen testing with RT-PCR was 69%, and PNA was 98%. When only the first positive test result was analyzed for each participant, PPA of antigen testing with RT-PCR was 82% among 45 symptomatic people and 52% among 343 asymptomatic people. Compared with RT-PCR and virus culture, the BinaxNOW test performed well in early infection (86% and 95%, respectively) and poorly in late infection (51% and no recovered virus, respectively). LIMITATION: Accurate symptom ascertainment was challenging in nursing home residents; test performance may not be representative of testing done by nonlaboratory staff. CONCLUSION: Despite lower positive agreement compared with RT-PCR, antigen test positivity had higher agreement with shedding of replication-competent virus. These results suggest that antigen testing could be a useful tool to rapidly identify contagious people at risk for transmitting SARS-CoV-2 during nascent outbreaks and help reduce COVID-19 burden in nursing homes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

National Estimates of Healthcare Costs Associated With Multidrug-Resistant Bacterial Infections Among Hospitalized Patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Treating patients with infections due to multidrug-resistant pathogens often requires substantial healthcare resources. The purpose of this study was to report estimates of the healthcare costs associated with infections due to multidrug-resistant bacteria in the United States (US). METHODS: We performed retrospective cohort studies of patients admitted for inpatient stays in the Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system between January 2007 and October 2015. We performed multivariable generalized linear models to estimate the attributable cost by comparing outcomes in patients with and without positive cultures for multidrug-resistant bacteria. Finally, we multiplied these pathogen-specific, per-infection attributable cost estimates by national counts of infections due to each pathogen from patients hospitalized in a cohort of 722 US hospitals from 2017 to generate estimates of the population-level healthcare costs in the US attributable to these infections. RESULTS: Our analysis cohort consisted of 16 676 patients with community-onset infections and 172 712 matched controls and 8246 patients with hospital-onset infections and 66 939 matched controls. The highest cost was seen in hospital-onset invasive infections, with attributable costs (95% confidence intervals) ranging from $30 998 ($25 272-$36 724) for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus to $74 306 ($20 377-$128 235) for carbapenem-resistant (CR) Acinetobacter. The highest attributable costs for community-onset invasive infections were seen in CR Acinetobacter ($62 396; $20 370-$104 422). Treatment of these infections cost an estimated $4.6 billion ($4.1 billion-$5.1 billion) in 2017 in the US for community- and hospital-onset infections combined. CONCLUSIONS: We found that antimicrobial-resistant infections led to substantial healthcare costs.

Epidemiology, Outcomes, and Trends of Patients With Sepsis and Opioid-Related Hospitalizations in U.S. Hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: Widespread use and misuse of prescription and illicit opioids have exposed millions to health risks including serious infectious complications. Little is known, however, about the association between opioid use and sepsis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: About 373 U.S. hospitals. PATIENTS: Adults hospitalized between January 2009 and September 2015. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sepsis was identified by clinical indicators of concurrent infection and organ dysfunction. Opioid-related hospitalizations were identified by the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes and/or inpatient orders for buprenorphine. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared by sepsis and opioid-related hospitalization status. The association between opioid-related hospitalization and all-cause, in-hospital mortality in patients with sepsis was assessed using mixed-effects logistic models to adjust for baseline characteristics and severity of illness.The cohort included 6,715,286 hospitalizations; 375,479 (5.6%) had sepsis, 130,399 (1.9%) had opioid-related hospitalizations, and 8,764 (0.1%) had both. Compared with sepsis patients without opioid-related hospitalizations (n = 366,715), sepsis patients with opioid-related hospitalizations (n = 8,764) were younger (mean 52.3 vs 66.9 yr) and healthier (mean Elixhauser score 5.4 vs 10.5), had more bloodstream infections from Gram-positive and fungal pathogens (68.9% vs 47.0% and 10.6% vs 6.4%, respectively), and had lower in-hospital mortality rates (10.6% vs 16.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60-0.79; p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Of 1,803 patients with opioid-related hospitalizations who died in-hospital, 928 (51.5%) had sepsis. Opioid-related hospitalizations accounted for 1.5% of all sepsis-associated deaths, including 5.7% of sepsis deaths among patients less than 50 years old. From 2009 to 2015, the proportion of sepsis hospitalizations that were opioid-related increased by 77% (95% CI, 40.7-123.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Sepsis is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with opioid-related hospitalizations, and opioid-related hospitalizations contribute disproportionately to sepsis-associated deaths among younger patients. In addition to ongoing efforts to combat the opioid crisis, public health agencies should focus on raising awareness about sepsis among patients who use opioids and their providers.

Association Between Antibiotic Use and Hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile Infection in US Acute Care Hospitals, 2006-2012: An Ecologic Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Unnecessary antibiotic use (AU) contributes to increased rates of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). The impact of antibiotic restriction on hospital-onset CDI (HO-CDI) has not been assessed in a large group of US acute care hospitals (ACHs). METHODS: We examined cross-sectional and temporal associations between rates of hospital-level AU and HO-CDI using data from 549 ACHs. HO-CDI was defined as a discharge with a secondary International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification code for CDI (008.45), and treatment with metronidazole or oral vancomycin > 3 days after admission. Analyses were performed using multivariable generalized estimating equation models adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: During 2006-2012, the unadjusted annual rates of HO-CDI and total AU were 7.3 per 10 000 patient-days (PD) (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1-7.5) and 811 days of therapy (DOT)/1000 PD (95% CI, 803-820), respectively. In the cross-sectional analysis, for every 50 DOT/1000 PD increase in total AU, there was a 4.4% increase in HO-CDI. For every 10 DOT/1000 PD increase in use of third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins or carbapenems, there was a 2.1% and 2.9% increase in HO-CDI, respectively. In the time-series analysis, the 6 ACHs with a ≥30% decrease in total AU had a 33% decrease in HO-CDI (rate ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, .47-.96]); ACHs with a ≥20% decrease in fluoroquinolone or third- and fourth-generation cephalosporin use had a corresponding decrease in HO-CDI of 8% and 13%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At an ecologic level, reductions in total AU, use of fluoroquinolones, and use of third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins were each associated with decreased HO-CDI rates.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Among Residents and Staff Members of an Independent and Assisted Living Community for Older Adults - Seattle, Washington, 2020.

In the Seattle, Washington metropolitan area, where the first case of novel coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) in the United States was reported (1), a community-level outbreak is ongoing with evidence of rapid spread and high morbidity and mortality among older adults in long-term care skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) (2,3). However, COVID-19 morbidity among residents of senior independent and assisted living communities, in which residents do not live as closely together as do residents in SNFs and do not require skilled nursing services, has not been described. During March 5-9, 2020, two residents of a senior independent and assisted living community in Seattle (facility 1) were hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 infection; on March 6, social distancing and other preventive measures were implemented in the community. UW Medicine (the health system linked to the University of Washington), Public Health - Seattle & King County, and CDC conducted an investigation at the facility. On March 10, all residents and staff members at facility 1 were tested for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and asked to complete a questionnaire about their symptoms; all residents were tested again 7 days later. Among 142 residents and staff members tested during the initial phase, three of 80 residents (3.8%) and two of 62 staff members (3.2%) had positive test results. The three residents had no symptoms at the time of testing, although one reported an earlier cough that had resolved. A fourth resident, who had negative test results in the initial phase, had positive test results 7 days later. This resident was asymptomatic on both days. Possible explanations for so few cases of COVID-19 in this residential community compared with those in several Seattle SNFs with high morbidity and mortality include more social distancing among residents and less contact with health care providers. In addition, early implementation of stringent isolation and protective measures after identification of two COVID-19 cases might have been effective in minimizing spread of the virus in this type of setting. When investigating a potential outbreak of COVID-19 in senior independent and assisted living communities, symptom screening is unlikely to be sufficient to identify all persons infected with SARS-CoV-2. Adherence to CDC guidance to prevent COVID-19 transmission in senior independent and assisted living communities (4) could be instrumental in preventing a facility outbreak.

Facility-Wide Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in Nursing Homes - Seven U.S. Jurisdictions, March-June 2020.

Undetected infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contributes to transmission in nursing homes, settings where large outbreaks with high resident mortality have occurred (1,2). Facility-wide testing of residents and health care personnel (HCP) can identify asymptomatic and presymptomatic infections and facilitate infection prevention and control interventions (3-5). Seven state or local health departments conducted initial facility-wide testing of residents and staff members in 288 nursing homes during March 24-June 14, 2020. Two of the seven health departments conducted testing in 195 nursing homes as part of facility-wide testing all nursing homes in their state, which were in low-incidence areas (i.e., the median preceding 14-day cumulative incidence in the surrounding county for each jurisdiction was 19 and 38 cases per 100,000 persons); 125 of the 195 nursing homes had not reported any COVID-19 cases before the testing. Ninety-five of 22,977 (0.4%) persons tested in 29 (23%) of these 125 facilities had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. The other five health departments targeted facility-wide testing to 93 nursing homes, where 13,443 persons were tested, and 1,619 (12%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. In regression analyses among 88 of these nursing homes with a documented case before facility-wide testing occurred, each additional day between identification of the first case and completion of facility-wide testing was associated with identification of 1.3 additional cases. Among 62 facilities that could differentiate results by resident and HCP status, an estimated 1.3 HCP cases were identified for every three resident cases. Performing facility-wide testing immediately after identification of a case commonly identifies additional unrecognized cases and, therefore, might maximize the benefits of infection prevention and control interventions. In contrast, facility-wide testing in low-incidence areas without a case has a lower proportion of test positivity; strategies are needed to further optimize testing in these settings.

Initial and Repeated Point Prevalence Surveys to Inform SARS-CoV-2 Infection Prevention in 26 Skilled Nursing Facilities - Detroit, Michigan, March-May 2020.

Skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) are focal points of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and asymptomatic infections with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, among SNF residents and health care personnel have been described (1-3). Repeated point prevalence surveys (serial testing of all residents and health care personnel at a health care facility irrespective of symptoms) have been used to identify asymptomatic infections and have reduced SARS-CoV-2 transmission during SNF outbreaks (1,3). During March 2020, the Detroit Health Department and area hospitals detected a sharp increase in COVID-19 diagnoses, hospitalizations, and associated deaths among SNF residents. The Detroit Health Department collaborated with local government, academic, and health care system partners and a CDC field team to rapidly expand SARS-CoV-2 testing and implement infection prevention and control (IPC) activities in all Detroit-area SNFs. During March 7-May 8, among 2,773 residents of 26 Detroit SNFs, 1,207 laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19 were identified during three periods: before (March 7-April 7) and after two point prevalence surveys (April 8-25 and April 30-May 8): the overall attack rate was 44%. Within 21 days of receiving their first positive test results, 446 (37%) of 1,207 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized, and 287 (24%) died. Among facilities participating in both surveys (n = 12), the percentage of positive test results declined from 35% to 18%. Repeated point prevalence surveys in SNFs identified asymptomatic COVID-19 cases, informed cohorting and IPC practices aimed at reducing transmission, and guided prioritization of health department resources for facilities experiencing high levels of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. With the increased availability of SARS-CoV-2 testing, repeated point prevalence surveys and enhanced and expanded IPC support should be standard tools for interrupting and preventing COVID-19 outbreaks in SNFs.

Asymptomatic and Presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infections in Residents of a Long-Term Care Skilled Nursing Facility - King County, Washington, March 2020.

Older adults are susceptible to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes as a consequence of their age and, in some cases, underlying health conditions (1). A COVID-19 outbreak in a long-term care skilled nursing facility (SNF) in King County, Washington that was first identified on February 28, 2020, highlighted the potential for rapid spread among residents of these types of facilities (2). On March 1, a health care provider at a second long-term care skilled nursing facility (facility A) in King County, Washington, had a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19, after working while symptomatic on February 26 and 28. By March 6, seven residents of this second facility were symptomatic and had positive test results for SARS-CoV-2. On March 13, CDC performed symptom assessments and SARS-CoV-2 testing for 76 (93%) of the 82 facility A residents to evaluate the utility of symptom screening for identification of COVID-19 in SNF residents. Residents were categorized as asymptomatic or symptomatic at the time of testing, based on the absence or presence of fever, cough, shortness of breath, or other symptoms on the day of testing or during the preceding 14 days. Among 23 (30%) residents with positive test results, 10 (43%) had symptoms on the date of testing, and 13 (57%) were asymptomatic. Seven days after testing, 10 of these 13 previously asymptomatic residents had developed symptoms and were recategorized as presymptomatic at the time of testing. The reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing cycle threshold (Ct) values indicated large quantities of viral RNA in asymptomatic, presymptomatic, and symptomatic residents, suggesting the potential for transmission regardless of symptoms. Symptom-based screening in SNFs could fail to identify approximately half of residents with COVID-19. Long-term care facilities should take proactive steps to prevent introduction of SARS-CoV-2 (3). Once a confirmed case is identified in an SNF, all residents should be placed on isolation precautions if possible (3), with considerations for extended use or reuse of personal protective equipment (PPE) as needed (4).

Toxin Enzyme Immunoassays Detect Clostridioides difficile Infection With Greater Severity and Higher Recurrence Rates.

BACKGROUND: Few data suggest that Clostridioides difficile infections (CDIs) detected by toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA) are more severe and have worse outcomes than those detected by nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) only. We compared toxin- positive and NAAT-positive-only CDI across geographically diverse sites. METHODS: A case was defined as a positive C. difficile test in a person ≥1 year old with no positive tests in the prior 8 weeks. Cases were detected during 2014-2015 by a testing algorithm (specimens initially tested by glutamate dehydrogenase and toxin EIA; if discordant results, specimens were reflexed to NAAT) and classified as toxin positive or NAAT positive only. Medical charts were reviewed. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to compare CDI-related complications, recurrence, and 30-day mortality between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Of 4878 cases, 2160 (44.3%) were toxin positive and 2718 (55.7%) were NAAT positive only. More toxin-positive than NAAT-positive-only cases were aged ≥65 years (48.2% vs 38.0%; P < .0001), had ≥3 unformed stools for ≥1 day (43.9% vs 36.6%; P < .0001), and had white blood cell counts ≥15 000 cells/µL (31.4% vs 21.4%; P < .0001). In multivariable analysis, toxin positivity was associated with recurrence (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.61-2.23), but not with CDI-related complications (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, .67-1.23) or 30-day mortality (aOR, 0.95; 95% CI, .73-1.24). CONCLUSIONS: Toxin-positive CDI is more severe, but there were no differences in adjusted CDI-related complication and mortality rates between toxin-positive and NAAT-positive-only CDI that were detected by an algorithm that utilized an initial glutamate dehydrogenase screening test.

Vital Signs: Trends in Staphylococcus aureus Infections in Veterans Affairs Medical Centers - United States, 2005-2017.

INTRODUCTION: By 2007, all Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers (VAMCs) had initiated a multifaceted methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) prevention program. MRSA and methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) infection rates among VAMC inpatients from 2005 to 2017 were assessed. METHODS: Clinical microbiology data from any patient admitted to an acute-care VAMC in the United States from 2005 through 2017 and trends in hospital-acquired MRSA colonization were examined. RESULTS: S. aureus infections decreased by 43% overall during the study period (p<0.001), driven primarily by decreases in MRSA, which decreased by 55% (p<0.001), whereas MSSA decreased by 12% (p = 0.003). Hospital-onset MRSA and MSSA infections decreased by 66% (p<0.001) and 19% (p = 0.02), respectively. Community-onset MRSA infections decreased by 41% (p<0.001), whereas MSSA infections showed no significant decline. Acquisition of MRSA colonization decreased 78% during 2008-2017 (17% annually, p<0.001). MRSA infection rates declined more sharply among patients who had negative admission surveillance MRSA screening tests (annual 9.7% decline) compared with those among patients with positive admission MRSA screening tests (4.2%) (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE: Significant reductions in S. aureus infection following the VAMC intervention were led primarily by decreases in MRSA. Moreover, MRSA infection declines were much larger among patients not carrying MRSA at the time of admission than among those who were. Taken together, these results suggest that decreased MRSA transmission played a substantial role in reducing overall S. aureus infections at VAMCs. Recent calls to withdraw infection control interventions designed to prevent MRSA transmission might be premature and inadvisable, at least until more is known about effective control of bacterial pathogen transmission in health care settings. Effective S. aureus prevention strategies require a multifaceted approach that includes adherence to current CDC recommendations for preventing not only device- and procedure-associated infections, but also transmission of health care-prevalent strains.

Duration of Antibiotic Use Among Adults With Uncomplicated Community-Acquired Pneumonia Requiring Hospitalization in the United States.

Background: Previous studies suggest that duration of antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) often exceeds national recommendations and might represent an important opportunity to improve antibiotic stewardship nationally. Our objective was to determine the average length of antibiotic therapy (LOT) for patients treated for uncomplicated CAP in US hospitals and the proportion of patients with excessive durations. Methods: Records of retrospective cohorts of patients aged 18-64 years with private insurance and aged ≥65 years with Medicare hospitalized for CAP in 2012-2013 were used. Inpatient LOT was estimated as a function of length of stay. Outpatient LOT was based on prescriptions filled post discharge based on data from outpatient pharmacy files. Excessive duration was defined as outpatient LOT >3 days. Results: Inclusion criteria were met for 22128 patients aged 18-64 years across 2100 hospitals and 130746 patients aged ≥65 years across 3227 hospitals. Median total LOT was 9.5 days. LOT exceeded recommended duration for 74% of patients aged 18-64 years and 71% of patients aged ≥65 years. Patients aged 18-64 years had a median (quartile 1-quartile 3) 6 (3-7) days outpatient LOT and those aged ≥65 years had 5 (3-7) days. Conclusions: In this nationwide sample of patients hospitalized for CAP, median total LOT was just under 10 days, with more than 70% of patients having likely excessive treatment duration. Better adherence to recommended CAP therapy duration by improving prescribing at hospital discharge may be an important target for antibiotic stewardship programs.

Risk of Subsequent Sepsis Within 90 Days After a Hospital Stay by Type of Antibiotic Exposure.

Background: We examined the risk of sepsis within 90 days after discharge from a previous hospital stay by type of antibiotic received during the previous stay. Methods: We retrospectively identified a cohort of hospitalized patients from the Truven Health MarketScan Hospital Drug Database. We examined the association between the use of certain antibiotics during the initial hospital stay, determined a priori, and the risk of postdischarge sepsis controlling for potential confounding factors in a multivariable logistic regression model. Our primary exposure was receipt of antibiotics more strongly associated with clinically important microbiome disruption. Our primary outcome was a hospital stay within 90 days of the index stay that included an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) discharge diagnosis of severe sepsis (ICD-9-CM code 995.92) or septic shock (785.52). Results: Among 516 hospitals, we randomly selected a single stay for eligible patients. In 0.17% of these patients, severe sepsis/septic shock developed within 90 days after discharge. The risk of sepsis associated with exposure to our high-risk antibiotics was 65% higher than in those without antibiotic exposure. Conclusions: Our study identified an increased risk of sepsis within 90 days of discharge among patients with exposure to high-risk antibiotics or increased quantities of antibiotics during hospitalization. Given that a significant proportion of inpatient antimicrobial use may be unnecessary, this study builds on previous evidence suggesting that increased stewardship efforts in hospitals may not only prevent antimicrobial resistance, Clostridium difficile infection, and other adverse effects, but may also reduce unwanted outcomes potentially related to disruption of the microbiota, including sepsis.

Assessing Variability in Hospital-Level Mortality Among U.S. Medicare Beneficiaries With Hospitalizations for Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the variability in short-term sepsis mortality by hospital among Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services beneficiaries in the United States during 2013-2014. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort design. SETTING: Hospitalizations from 3,068 acute care hospitals that participated in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services inpatient prospective payment system in 2013 and 2014. PATIENTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries greater than or equal to 65 years old who had an inpatient hospitalization coded with present at admission severe sepsis or septic shock. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Individual level mortality was assessed as death at or within 7 days of hospital discharge and aggregated to calculate hospital-level mortality rates. We used a logistic hierarchal linear model to calculate mortality risk-adjusted for patient characteristics. We quantified variability among hospitals using the median odds ratio and calculated risk-standardized mortality rates for each hospital. The overall crude mortality rate was 34.7%. We found significant variability in mortality by hospital (p < 0.001). The middle 50% of hospitals had similar risk-standardized mortality rates (32.7-36.9%), whereas the decile of hospitals with the highest risk-standardized mortality rates had a median mortality rate of 40.7%, compared with a median of 29.2% for hospitals in the decile with the lowest risk-standardized mortality rates. The median odds ratio (1.29) was lower than the adjusted odds ratios for several measures of patient comorbidities and severity of illness, including present at admission organ dysfunction, no identified source of infection, and age. CONCLUSIONS: In a large study of present at admission sepsis among Medicare beneficiaries, we showed that mortality was most strongly associated with underlying comorbidities and measures of illness on arrival. However, after adjusting for patient characteristics, mortality also modestly depended on where a patient with sepsis received care, suggesting that efforts to improve sepsis outcomes in lower performing hospitals could impact sepsis survival.

An Airway Risk Assessment Score for Unplanned Extubation in Intensive Care Pediatric Patients.

OBJECTIVE: As a result of a workshop to identify common causes of unplanned extubation, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta developed a scoring tool (Risk Assessment Score) to stratify patients into groups of low, moderate, high, and extreme risk. This tool could be used to institute appropriate monitoring or interventions for patients with high risks of unplanned extubation to enhance safety. The objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that the Risk Assessment Score will correlate with the occurrence rate of unplanned extubation in pediatric patients. DESIGN: Retrospective review of 2,811 patients at five ICUs conducted between December 2012 and July 2014. SETTING: Five ICUs at two freestanding pediatric hospitals within a large children's healthcare system in the United States. PATIENTS: All intubated pediatric patients. INTERVENTIONS: Data of intubations and Risk Assessment Score were collected. Extubation outcomes and severity levels were compared across demographic groups and with the maximum Risk Assessment Score of each intubation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Out of 4,566 intubations, 244 were unplanned extubations (5.3%). The occurrence rates of unplanned extubations in those less than 1, 1-6, and more than 6 years old were 6.7%, 3.6%, and 2.7%, respectively, corresponding to a rate of 0.59, 0.53, and 0.58 unplanned extubation every 100 ventilator days. The occurrence rates were 13.6% for patients weighing less than 1 kg (0.59 unplanned extubation per 100 ventilation days) and 3.8% for patients weighing greater than or equal to 1 kg (0.58 unplanned extubation per 100 ventilation days). For intubations with maximum risk score falling in risk categories of low, moderate, high, and extreme, the occurrence rates were 4.7%, 7.7%, 12.0%, and 8.3%, respectively, which corresponded to rates of 0.54, 0.62, 0.95, and 0.92 unplanned extubation per 100 ventilator days. CONCLUSIONS: Higher Risk Assessment Scores are associated with occurrence rates of unplanned extubation.