Outbreak of Adenovirus in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Critical Importance of Equipment Cleaning During Inpatient Ophthalmologic Examinations.

PURPOSE: Outbreaks of adenovirus in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) can lead to widespread transmission and serious adverse outcomes. We describe the investigation, response, and successful containment of an adenovirus outbreak in a NICU associated with contaminated handheld ophthalmologic equipment used during retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening. DESIGN: Epidemiologic outbreak investigation. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 23 hospitalized neonates, as well as NICU staff and parents of affected infants. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Routine surveillance identified an adenovirus outbreak in a level IV NICU in August 2016. Epidemiologic investigation followed, including chart review, staff interviews, and observations. Cases were defined as hospital-acquired adenovirus identified from any clinical specimen (NICU patient or employee) or compatible illness in a family member. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and partial- and whole-genome sequencing assays were used for testing of clinical and environmental specimens. RESULTS: We identified 23 primary neonatal cases and 9 secondary cases (6 employees and 3 parents). All neonatal case-patients had respiratory symptoms. Of these, 5 developed pneumonia and 12 required increased respiratory support. Less than half (48%) had ocular symptoms. All neonatal case-patients (100%) had undergone a recent ophthalmologic examination, and 54% of neonates undergoing examinations developed adenovirus infection. All affected employees and parents had direct contact with infected neonates. Observations revealed inconsistent disinfection of bedside ophthalmologic equipment and limited glove use. Sampling of 2 handheld lenses and 2 indirect ophthalmoscopes revealed adenovirus serotype 3 DNA on each device. Sequence analysis of 16 neonatal cases, 2 employees, and 2 lenses showed that cases and equipment shared 100% identity across the entire adenovirus genome. Infection control interventions included strict hand hygiene, including glove use; isolation precautions; enhanced cleaning of lenses and ophthalmoscopes between all examinations; and staff furlough. We identified no cases of secondary transmission among neonates. CONCLUSIONS: Adenovirus outbreaks can result from use of contaminated ophthalmologic equipment. Even equipment that does not directly contact patients can facilitate indirect transmission. Patient-to-patient transmission can be prevented with strict infection control measures and equipment cleaning. Ophthalmologists performing inpatient examinations should take measures to avoid adenoviral spread from contaminated handheld equipment.

Preventing Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Catheter-associated urinary tract infections are common health care-associated infections and have been associated with increased mortality, morbidity, length of stay, and cost. Prevention strategies are grouped into bundles focused on reducing unnecessary catheter use and promptly removing urinary catheters. Before intervention in the study institution, no urinary catheters were unnecessarily used and compliance with the catheter-associated urinary tract infection bundle was 84%. OBJECTIVE: To increase bundle compliance by using targeted rounds specifically focused on eliminating dependent loops in drainage tubing and ensuring appropriate catheter use to reduce the incidence of catheter-associated urinary tract infections. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team was formed to identify misperceptions, highlight best practices, and eliminate barriers to success over 1 year in a single pediatric intensive care unit. The team completed a quality improvement project of daily targeted rounding for patients with an indwelling urinary catheter. The goals were to assess appropriateness of catheterization, increase bundle compliance, and decrease catheter-associated urinary tract infection risk. Targeted rounds were conducted in addition to the medical team rounds. RESULTS: Bundle compliance supported by targeted rounding increased from 84% to 93% and helped reduce the overall catheter-associated urinary tract infection rate from 2.7 infections per 1000 catheter-days at baseline to 0. This change was sustained for 1 year. CONCLUSION: Targeted rounding for pediatric patients with an indwelling urinary catheter is an effective and sustainable strategy to reduce catheter-associated urinary tract infections. The ease of implementation for this intervention lends itself to generalizability to other patient populations.

Reemergence of gram-negative health care-associated bloodstream infections.

BACKGROUND: Primary health care-associated bloodstream infections (PHA-BSIs) affect as many as 350 000 patients in the United States annually. Whereas gram-negative organisms were the leading cause before the 1970s, gram-positive organisms have been the predominant microbial isolates since then. METHODS: We identified all PHA-BSIs among adult inpatients in a 625-bed quaternary care hospital from January 1, 1996, through December 31, 2003, and evaluated trends in the microbial etiology, geographic distribution within the institution, and antimicrobial susceptibilities. RESULTS: A total of 3662 PHA-BSIs caused by 4349 bacterial and fungal isolates were identified. From 1999 to 2003, the proportion of PHA-BSIs due to gram-negative organisms increased from 15.9% to 24.1% (P<.001 for trend). This trend was not significantly different across various units of the hospital, and no specific gram-negative species contributed disproportionately to the increase. With few exceptions, there were no significant increases in antimicrobial resistance. The increase in gram-negative organisms was accompanied by a decline in the proportion of PHA-BSIs from coagulase-negative staphylococci (from 33.5% in 1999 to 29.9% in 2003, P = .007) and from Staphylococcus aureus (from 18.8% in 1999 to 11.8% in 2003, P = .004). The proportion of PHA-BSIs from Candida species almost doubled from 5.8% in 1999 to 11.3% in 2003 (P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first US study to report a reemergence of gram-negative organisms as a cause of PHA-BSIs. This finding does not seem to be related to changes in specific gram-negative organisms or to antimicrobial resistance. If this trend continues, it will have important implications for the management of bloodstream infections.

Reasons Why Physicians and Advanced Practice Clinicians Work While Sick: A Mixed-Methods Analysis.

IMPORTANCE: When clinicians work with symptoms of infection, they can put patients and colleagues at risk. Little is known about the reasons why attending physicians and advanced practice clinicians (APCs) work while sick. OBJECTIVE: To identify a comprehensive understanding of the reasons why attending physicians and APCs work while sick. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed a mixed-methods analysis of a cross-sectional, anonymous survey administered from January 15 through March 20, 2014, in a large children's hospital in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Data were analyzed from April 1 through June 1, 2014. The survey was administered to 459 attending physicians and 470 APCs, including certified registered nurse practitioners, physician assistants, clinical nurse specialists, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and certified nurse midwives. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Self-reported frequency of working while experiencing symptoms of infection, perceived importance of various factors that encourage working while sick, and free-text comments written in response to open-ended questions. RESULTS: Of those surveyed, we received responses from 280 attending physicians (61.0%) and 256 APCs (54.5%). Most of the respondents (504 [95.3%]) believed that working while sick put patients at risk. Despite this belief, 446 respondents (83.1%) reported working sick at least 1 time in the past year, and 50 (9.3%) reported working while sick at least 5 times. Respondents would work with significant symptoms, including diarrhea (161 [30.0%]), fever (86 [16.0%]), and acute onset of significant respiratory symptoms (299 [55.6%]). Physicians were more likely to report working with each of these symptoms than APCs (109 [38.9%] vs 51 [19.9%], 61 [21.8%] vs 25 [9.8%], and 168 [60.0%] vs 130 [50.8%], respectively [P < .05]). Reasons deemed important in deciding to work while sick included not wanting to let colleagues down (521 [98.7%]), staffing concerns (505 [94.9%]), not wanting to let patients down (494 [92.5%]), fear of ostracism by colleagues (342 [64.0%]), and concern about continuity of care (337 [63.8%]). Systematic qualitative analysis of free-text comments from 316 respondents revealed additional reasons why attending physicians and APCs work while sick, including extreme difficulty finding coverage (205 [64.9%]), a strong cultural norm to come to work unless remarkably ill (193 [61.1%]), and ambiguity about what constitutes "too sick to work" (180 [57.0%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Attending physicians and APCs frequently work while sick despite recognizing that this choice puts patients at risk. The decision to work sick is shaped by systems-level and sociocultural factors. Multimodal interventions are needed to reduce the frequency of this behavior.

Health system preparedness for bioterrorism: bringing the tabletop to the hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the acceptance and usefulness of a hospital-based tabletop bioterrorism exercise. DESIGN: A descriptive study of responses to a smallpox scenario delivered as a tabletop exercise in three modules. SETTING: A large, multi-institutional urban health system. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare workers representing 16 hospital departments. RESULTS: Thirty-nine (78%) of 50 invited employees from 4 hospitals participated. Key responses highlighted the importance of pre-event planning in intra-departmental communication, identification of resources for the dependents of healthcare workers, clarification of the chain of command within the hospital, establishment of a link to key governmental agencies, and advanced identification of negative pressure rooms for cohorting large numbers of patients. Almost one-fourth of the participants described their hospital department as poorly prepared for a bioterrorism event of moderate size. At the conclusion of the tabletop, 79% of the participants stated that the exercise had increased their knowledge of preplanning activities. Seventy-nine percent of all participants, 94% of physicians and nurses, and 95% of participants from non-university hospitals ranked the exercise as extremely or very useful. The exercise was completed in 3 1/2 hours and its total direct cost (excluding lost time from work) was 225 dollars (U.S.). CONCLUSIONS: Tabletop exercises are a feasible, well-accepted modality for hospital bioterrorism preparedness training. Hospital employees, including physicians and nurses, rank this method as highly useful for guiding preplanning activities. Infection control staff and hospital epidemiologists should play a lead role in hospital preparedness activities. Further assessment of the optimal duration, type, and frequency of tabletop exercises is needed.