Pathogens causing central-line-associated bloodstream infections in acute-care hospitals-United States, 2011-2017.

OBJECTIVE: To describe pathogen distribution and rates for central-line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) from different acute-care locations during 2011-2017 to inform prevention efforts. METHODS: CLABSI data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) were analyzed. Percentages and pooled mean incidence density rates were calculated for a variety of pathogens and stratified by acute-care location groups (adult intensive care units [ICUs], pediatric ICUs [PICUs], adult wards, pediatric wards, and oncology wards). RESULTS: From 2011 to 2017, 136,264 CLABSIs were reported to the NHSN by adult and pediatric acute-care locations; adult ICUs and wards reported the most CLABSIs: 59,461 (44%) and 40,763 (30%), respectively. In 2017, the most common pathogens were Candida spp/yeast in adult ICUs (27%) and Enterobacteriaceae in adult wards, pediatric wards, oncology wards, and PICUs (23%-31%). Most pathogen-specific CLABSI rates decreased over time, excepting Candida spp/yeast in adult ICUs and Enterobacteriaceae in oncology wards, which increased, and Staphylococcus aureus rates in pediatric locations, which did not change. CONCLUSIONS: The pathogens associated with CLABSIs differ across acute-care location groups. Learning how pathogen-targeted prevention efforts could augment current prevention strategies, such as strategies aimed at preventing Candida spp/yeast and Enterobacteriaceae CLABSIs, might further reduce national rates.

One needle, one syringe, only one time? A survey of physician and nurse knowledge, attitudes, and practices around injection safety.

BACKGROUND: To inform development, targeting, and penetration of materials from a national injection safety campaign, an evaluation was conducted to assess provider knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to unsafe injection practices. METHODS: A panel of physicians (n = 370) and nurses (n = 320) were recruited from 8 states to complete an online survey. Questions, using 5-point Likert and Spector scales, addressed acceptability and frequency of unsafe practices (eg, reuse of a syringe on >1 patient). Results were stratified to identify differences among physician specialties and nurse practice locations. RESULTS: Unsafe injection practices were reported by both physicians and nurses across all surveyed physician specialties and nurse practice locations. Twelve percent (12.4%) of physicians and 3% of nurses indicated reuse of syringes for >1 patient occurs in their workplace; nearly 5% of physicians indicated this practice usually or always occurs. A higher proportion of oncologists reported unsafe practices occurring in their workplace. CONCLUSIONS: There is a dangerous minority of providers violating basic standards of care; practice patterns may vary by provider group and specialty. More research is needed to understand how best to identify providers placing patients at risk of infection and modify their behaviors.

Public perceptions and preferences for patient notification after an unsafe injection.

BACKGROUND: Unsafe injection practices in health-care settings often result in notification of potentially affected patients, to disclose the error and recommend blood-borne pathogens testing. Few studies have assessed public perceptions and preferences for patient notification. METHODS: Six focus groups were conducted during Fall 2009, with residents of Atlanta, GA, and New York City, NY. Questions focused on preferences for receiving health information, knowledge of safe injection practices, and responses to and preferences for a patient notification letter. A mixed-method analysis was performed for qualitative themes and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 53 individuals participated; only 2 had ever heard of the term safe injection practices. After identification of unsafe injection practices, participants preferred to be notified via telephone, letter/mailing, email, or face-to-face from the facility where the incident occurred. More than 25 different types of information were mentioned as elements to be placed in a patient notification letter including: corrective actions by the facility, course of action for the patient, assurance of medical coverage, and how it happened/reason for the incident. Participants preferred that the tone of the letter be empathetic; nearly all indicated it was "very likely" that they would seek testing if notified. CONCLUSIONS: Facilities and health departments should strive to assure the notification process is conducted swiftly, clearly guiding affected patients to the necessary course of action. Notification letters are not "one size fits all," and some preferences expressed by patients may not be feasible in all situations. Prevention efforts should be complemented by research on improving effective patient communications when unsafe injection practices necessitate patient notification.

Infection control assessment of ambulatory surgical centers.

CONTEXT: More than 5000 ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) in the United States participate in the Medicare program. Little is known about infection control practices in ASCs. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) piloted an infection control audit tool in a sample of ASC inspections to assess facility adherence to recommended practices. OBJECTIVE: To describe infection control practices in a sample of ASCs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: All State Survey Agencies were invited to participate. Seven states volunteered; 3 were selected based on geographic dispersion, number of ASCs each state committed to inspect, and relative cost per inspection. A stratified random sample of ASCs was selected from each state. Sample size was based on the number of inspections each state estimated it could complete between June and October 2008. Sixty-eight ASCs were assessed; 32 in Maryland, 16 in North Carolina, and 20 in Oklahoma. Surveyors from CMS, trained in use of the audit tool, assessed compliance with specific infection control practices. Assessments focused on 5 areas of infection control: hand hygiene, injection safety and medication handling, equipment reprocessing, environmental cleaning, and handling of blood glucose monitoring equipment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of facilities with lapses in each infection control category. RESULTS: Overall, 46 of 68 ASCs (67.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 55.9%-77.9%) had at least 1 lapse in infection control; 12 of 68 ASCs (17.6%; 95% CI, 9.9%-28.1%) had lapses identified in 3 or more of the 5 infection control categories. Common lapses included using single-dose medication vials for more than 1 patient (18/64; 28.1%; 95% CI, 18.2%-40.0%), failing to adhere to recommended practices regarding reprocessing of equipment (19/67; 28.4%; 95% CI, 18.6%-40.0%), and lapses in handling of blood glucose monitoring equipment (25/54; 46.3%; 95% CI, 33.4%-59.6%). CONCLUSION: Among a sample of US ASCs in 3 states, lapses in infection control were common.

Impact of different methods of feedback to clinicians after postprescription antimicrobial review based on the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention's 12 Steps to Prevent Antimicrobial Resistance Among Hospitalized Adults.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate (1) the framework of the 12 Steps to Prevent Antimicrobial Resistance Among Hospitalized Adults that is part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Campaign to Prevent Antimicrobial Resistance in Healthcare Settings, with regard to steps addressing antimicrobial use; and (2) methods of feedback to clinicians regarding antimicrobial use after postprescription review. DESIGN: Prospective intervention to identify and modify inappropriate antimicrobial therapy. SETTING: A 1,000-bed, tertiary care teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Inpatients in selected medicine and surgery units receiving broad-spectrum antimicrobials for 48-72 hours. INTERVENTIONS: We created a computer-based clinical-event detection system that automatically identified inpatients taking broad-spectrum and "reserve" antimicrobials for 48-72 hours. Although prior approval was required for initial administration of broad-spectrum and reserve antimicrobials, once approval was obtained, therapy with the antimicrobials could be continued indefinitely at the discretion of the treating clinician. Therapy that was ongoing at 48-72 hours was reviewed by an infectious diseases pharmacist or physician, and when indicated feedback was provided to clinicians to modify or discontinue therapy. Feedback was provided via a direct telephone call, a note on the front of the medical record, or text message sent to the clinician's pager. The acceptance rate of feedback was recorded and recommendations were categorized according to the 12 steps recommended by the CDC. RESULTS: Interventions were recommended for 334 (30%) of 1,104 courses of antimicrobial therapy reviewed. A total of 87% of interventions fit into one of the CDC's 12 steps of prevention: 39% into step 3 ("target the pathogen"), 1% into step 4 ("access experts"), 3% into steps 7 and 8 ("treat infection, not colonization or contamination"), 18% into step 9 ("say ;no' to vancomycin"), and 26% into step 10 ("stop treatment when no infection"). The rate of compliance with recommendations to improve antimicrobial use was 72%. No differences in compliance were seen with the different methods of feedback. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-third of antimicrobial courses did not follow the CDC's recommended 12 steps for prevention of antimicrobial resistance. Clinicians demonstrated high compliance with following suggestions made after postprescription review, suggesting that it is a useful approach to decreasing and improving antimicrobial use among inpatients.

Hand hygiene practices after brief encounters with patients: an important opportunity for prevention.

OBJECTIVE: To identify characteristics of encounters between healthcare workers (HCWs) and patients that correlated with hand hygiene adherence among HCWs. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Intensive care unit in a Veterans Affairs hospital. PARTICIPANTS: HCWs. RESULTS: There were 767 patient encounters observed (48.6% involved nurses, 20.6% involved physicians, and 30.8% involved other HCWs); 39.8% of encounters involved patients placed under contact precautions. HCW contact with either the patient or surfaces in the patient's environment occurred during all encounters; direct patient contact occurred during 439 encounters (57.4%), and contact with environmental surfaces occurred during 710 encounters (92.6%). The median duration of encounters was 2 minutes (range, <1 to 51 minutes); 33.6% of encounters lasted 1 minute or less, with no significant occupation-associated differences in the median duration of encounters. Adherence with hand hygiene practices was correlated with the duration of the encounter, with overall adherences of 30.0% after encounters of < or =1 minute, 43.4% after encounters of >1 to < or =2 minutes, 51.1% after encounters of >3 to < or =5 minutes, and 64.9% after encounters of >5 minutes (P<.001 by the chi (2) for trend). In multivariate analyses, longer encounter duration, contact precautions status, patient contact, and nursing occupation were independently associated with adherence to hand hygiene recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, adherence to hand hygiene practices was lowest after brief patient encounters (i.e., < 2 minutes). Brief encounters accounted for a substantial proportion of all observed encounters, and opportunities for hand contamination occurred during all brief encounters. Therefore, improving adherence after brief encounters may have an important overall impact on the transmission of healthcare-associated pathogens and may deserve special emphasis in the design of programs to promote adherence to hand hygiene practices.

Vancomycin use in hospitalized pediatric patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess vancomycin utilization at children's hospitals, to determine risk factors for vancomycin use and length of therapy, and to facilitate adapting recommendations to optimize vancomycin prescribing practices in pediatric patients. METHODS: Two surveys were conducted at Pediatric Prevention Network hospitals. The first (Survey I) evaluated vancomycin control programs. The second (Survey II) prospectively reviewed individual patient records. Each hospital was asked to complete questionnaires on 25 consecutive patients or all patients for whom vancomycin was prescribed during a 1-month period. RESULTS: In Survey I, 55 of 65 (85%) hospitals reported their vancomycin control policies. Three quarters had specific policies in place to restrict vancomycin use. One half had at least 3 vancomycin restriction measures. In Survey II, personnel at 22 hospitals reviewed 416 vancomycin courses, with 2 to 25 (median = 12) patients tracked per hospital. Eighty-two percent of the vancomycin prescribed was for treatment of neonatal sepsis, fever/neutropenia, fever of unknown origin, positive blood culture, pneumonia, or meningitis. In an additional 6% (26/416), vancomycin was prescribed for patients with beta-lactam allergies and in 13% (56/416) for prophylaxis. Median duration of prophylaxis was 2 days (range: 1-15 days). Almost half (196, 47%) of the patients who received vancomycin were in intensive care units; 27% of the vancomycin courses were initiated by neonatologists and 19% by hematologists/oncologists. The predominant risk factor at the time of vancomycin initiation was the presence of vascular catheters (322, 77%); other host factors included cancer chemotherapy (55, 13%), transplant (30, 7%), shock (24, 6%), other immunosuppressant therapy (17, 4%), or hyposplenic state (2, <1%). Other clinical considerations were severity of illness (96, 23%), uncertainty about diagnosis (51, 12%), patient not responding to current antibiotic therapy (40, 10%), or implant infection (13, 3%). When vancomycin was initiated, blood cultures were positive in 85 patients (20%); cultures from other sites were positive in 45 (11%), and Gram stains of body fluids were positive in 37 (9%). In 29 (7%) patients, organisms sensitive only to vancomycin were isolated before vancomycin initiation. Reasons for discontinuing vancomycin included: therapeutic course completed (125, 30%), negative cultures (106, 25%), alternative antibiotics initiated (75, 18%), illness resolved (14, 3%), or patient expired (13, 3%). Final results of blood culture isolates resistant to beta-lactam antibiotics included 48 coagulase-negative staphylococcus, 5 Staphylococcus aureus, and 10 other species. CONCLUSIONS: At children's hospitals, vancomycin is initiated for therapy in patients who have vascular catheters and compromised host factors. Only 7% had laboratory-confirmed beta-lactam-resistant organisms isolated at the time vancomycin was prescribed. Efforts to modify empiric vancomycin use in children's hospitals should be targeted at intensivists, neonatologists, and hematologists. Initiatives to decrease length of therapy by decreasing the number of surgical prophylaxis doses and days of therapy before laboratory results may decrease vancomycin exposure.

Risk factors for Burkholderia cepacia complex colonization and infection among patients with cystic fibrosis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine risk factors for acquiring Burkholderia cepacia complex among patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). STUDY DESIGN: A case-control study was conducted with active surveillance for B cepacia complex colonization/infection among patients at 21 CF centers from April 1986 to March 1989 (study period). A case-patient was defined as any CF patient with B cepacia complex colonization for the first time during the study period. Control patients were patients with CF not B cepacia complex colonized during the study period. For each patient, a questionnaire was completed semiannually. RESULTS: In multivariate analyses, hospitalization for pulmonary exacerbations, living with a B cepacia complex-positive person, attending a CF summer camp, and direct contact with a B cepacia complex-colonized CF person outside of camp and home were associated with B cepacia complex acquisition. Receiving antimicrobial aerosol therapy or cleaning and drying a home-used nebulizer between uses were associated with a decrease in B cepacia complex acquisition. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous factors inside and outside the health care setting are associated with person-to-person transmission of B cepacia complex among patients with CF. Prevention programs should reduce direct or indirect contact between noncolonized and B cepacia complex-colonized/infected patients with CF.