Implementing nasal povidone-iodine decolonization to reduce infections in hemodialysis units: a qualitative assessment.

BACKGROUND: A substantial proportion of patients undergoing hemodialysis carry Staphylococcus aureus in their noses, and carriers are at increased risk of S. aureus bloodstream infections. Our pragmatic clinical trial implemented nasal povidone-iodine (PVI) decolonization for the prevention of bloodstream infections in the novel setting of hemodialysis units. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify pragmatic strategies for implementing PVI decolonization among patients in outpatient hemodialysis units. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study. SETTING: Outpatient hemodialysis units affiliated with five US academic medical centers. Units varied in size, patient demographics, and geographic location. INTERVIEWEES: Sixty-six interviewees including nurses, hemodialysis technicians, research coordinators, and other personnel. METHODS: We conducted interviews with personnel affiliated with all five academic medical centers and conducted thematic analysis of transcripts. RESULTS: Hemodialysis units had varied success with patient recruitment, but interviewees reported that patients and healthcare personnel (HCP) found PVI decolonization acceptable and feasible. Leadership support, HCP engagement, and tailored patient-focused tools or strategies facilitated patient engagement and PVI implementation. Interviewees reported both patients and HCP sometimes underestimated patients' infection risks and experienced infection-prevention fatigue. Other HCP barriers included limited staffing and poor staff engagement. Patient barriers included high health burdens, language barriers, memory issues, and lack of social support. CONCLUSION: Our qualitative study suggests that PVI decolonization would be acceptable to patients and clinical personnel, and implementation is feasible for outpatient hemodialysis units. Hemodialysis units could facilitate implementation by engaging unit leaders, patients and personnel, and developing education for patients about their infection risk.

Incidence and Outcomes Associated With Infections Caused by Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci in the United States: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND Information about the health and economic impact of infections caused by vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) can inform investments in infection prevention and development of novel therapeutics. OBJECTIVE To systematically review the incidence of VRE infection in the United States and the clinical and economic outcomes. METHODS We searched various databases for US studies published from January 1, 2000, through June 8, 2015, that evaluated incidence, mortality, length of stay, discharge to a long-term care facility, readmission, recurrence, or costs attributable to VRE infections. We included multicenter studies that evaluated incidence and single-center and multicenter studies that evaluated outcomes. We kept studies that did not have a denominator or uninfected controls only if they assessed postinfection length of stay, costs, or recurrence. We performed meta-analysis to pool the mortality data. RESULTS Five studies provided incidence data and 13 studies evaluated outcomes or costs. The incidence of VRE infections increased in Atlanta and Detroit but did not increase in national samples. Compared with uninfected controls, VRE infection was associated with increased mortality (pooled odds ratio, 2.55), longer length of stay (3-4.6 days longer or 1.4 times longer), increased risk of discharge to a long-term care facility (2.8- to 6.5-fold) or readmission (2.9-fold), and higher costs ($9,949 higher or 1.6-fold more). CONCLUSIONS VRE infection is associated with large attributable burdens, including excess mortality, prolonged in-hospital stay, and increased treatment costs. Multicenter studies that use suitable controls and adjust for time at risk or confounders are needed to estimate the burden of VRE infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017;38:203-215.

Costs and Mortality Associated With Multidrug-Resistant Healthcare-Associated Acinetobacter Infections.

BACKGROUND Our objective was to estimate the per-infection and cumulative mortality and cost burden of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Acinetobacter healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) in the United States using data from published studies. METHODS We identified studies that estimated the excess cost, length of stay (LOS), or mortality attributable to MDR Acinetobacter HAIs. We generated estimates of the cost per HAI using 3 methods: (1) overall cost estimates, (2) multiplying LOS estimates by a cost per inpatient-day ($4,350) from the payer perspective, and (3) multiplying LOS estimates by a cost per inpatient-day from the hospital ($2,030) perspective. We deflated our estimates for time-dependent bias using an adjustment factor derived from studies that estimated attributable LOS using both time-fixed methods and either multistate models (70.4% decrease) or matching patients with and without HAIs using the timing of infection (47.4% decrease). Finally, we used the incidence rate of MDR Acinetobacter HAIs to generate cumulative incidence, cost, and mortality associated with these infections. RESULTS Our estimates of the cost per infection were $129,917 (method 1), $72,025 (method 2), and $33,510 (method 3). The pooled relative risk of mortality was 4.51 (95% CI, 1.10-32.65), which yielded a mortality rate of 10.6% (95% CI, 2.5%-29.4%). With an incidence rate of 0.141 (95% CI, 0.136-0.161) per 1,000 patient-days at risk, we estimated an annual cumulative incidence of 12,524 (95% CI, 11,509-13,625) in the United States. CONCLUSION The estimates presented here are relevant to understanding the expenditures and lives that could be saved by preventing MDR Acinetobacter HAIs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1-7.

Automated and electronically assisted hand hygiene monitoring systems: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene is one of the most effective ways to prevent transmission of health care-associated infections. Electronic systems and tools are being developed to enhance hand hygiene compliance monitoring. Our systematic review assesses the existing evidence surrounding the adoption and accuracy of automated systems or electronically enhanced direct observations and also reviews the effectiveness of such systems in health care settings. METHODS: We systematically reviewed PubMed for articles published between January 1, 2000, and March 31, 2013, containing the terms hand AND hygiene or hand AND disinfection or handwashing. Resulting articles were reviewed to determine if an electronic system was used. RESULTS: We identified 42 articles for inclusion. Four types of systems were identified: electronically assisted/enhanced direct observation, video-monitored direct observation systems, electronic dispenser counters, and automated hand hygiene monitoring networks. Fewer than 20% of articles identified included calculations for efficiency or accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Limited data are currently available to recommend adoption of specific automatic or electronically assisted hand hygiene surveillance systems. Future studies should be undertaken that assess the accuracy, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of such systems. Given the restricted clinical and infection prevention budgets of most facilities, cost-effectiveness analysis of specific systems will be required before these systems are widely adopted.