Duodenoscope-Related Outbreak of a Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Identified Using Advanced Molecular Diagnostics.

Background: Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae infections are increasingly prevalent in North American hospitals. We describe an outbreak of carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae containing the blaOXA-232 gene transmitted by contaminated duodenoscopes during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures. Methods: An outbreak investigation was performed when 9 patients with blaOXA-232 carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae infections were identified at a tertiary care hospital. The investigation included 2 case-control studies, review of duodenoscope reprocessing procedures, and culture of devices. Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriacieae (CRE) isolates were evaluated with polymerase chain reaction analysis for carbapenemase genes, and isolates with the blaOXA-232 gene were subjected to whole-genome sequencing and chromosome single-nucleotide polymorphism analysis. On recognition of ERCP as a key risk factor for infection, targeted patient notification and CRE screening cultures were performed. Results: Molecular testing ultimately identified 17 patients with blaOxa-232 carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae isolates, including 9 with infections, 7 asymptomatic carriers who had undergone ERCP, and 1 additional patient who had been hospitalized in India and was probably the initial carrier. Two case-control studies established a point-source outbreak associated with 2 specific duodenoscopes. A field investigation of the use, reprocessing, and storage of deuodenoscopes did not identify deviations from US Food and Drug Administration or manufacturer recommendations for reprocessing. Conclusions: This outbreak demonstrated the previously underappreciated potential for duodenoscopes to transmit disease, even after undergoing high-level disinfection according to manufacturers' guidelines.

Discord among performance measures for central line-associated bloodstream infection.

BACKGROUND: Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) is a national target for mandatory reporting and a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services target for value-based purchasing. Differences in chart review versus claims-based metrics used by national agencies and groups raise concerns about the validity of these measures. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate consistency and reasons for discordance among chart review and claims-based CLABSI events. METHODS: We conducted 2 multicenter retrospective cohort studies within 6 academic institutions. A total of 150 consecutive patients were identified with CLABSI on the basis of National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) criteria (NHSN cohort), and an additional 150 consecutive patients were identified with CLABSI on the basis of claims codes (claims cohort). All events had full-text medical record reviews and were identified as concordant or discordant with the other metric. RESULTS: In the NHSN cohort, there were 152 CLABSIs among 150 patients, and 73.0% of these cases were discordant with claims data. Common reasons for the lack of associated claims codes included coding omission and lack of physician documentation of bacteremia cause. In the claims cohort, there were 150 CLABSIs among 150 patients, and 65.3% of these cases were discordant with NHSN criteria. Common reasons for the lack of NHSN reporting were identification of non-CLABSI with bacteremia meeting Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria for an alternative infection source. CONCLUSION: Substantial discordance between NHSN and claims-based CLABSI indicators persists. Compared with standardized CDC chart review criteria, claims data often had both coding omissions and misclassification of non-CLABSI infections as CLABSI. Additionally, claims did not identify any additional CLABSIs for CDC reporting. NHSN criteria are a more consistent interhospital standard for CLABSI reporting.

Observation and measurement of hand hygiene and patient identification improve compliance with patient safety practices.

Measurement, a crucial step in any quality improvement activity, is difficult in two important patient safety processes: hand hygiene and patient identification. This study describes a program at the UCLA Medical Center, called Measure to Achieve Patient Safety (MAPS), which uses undergraduate student volunteers to carry out observations in the hospital. This program has been an important part of UCLA's efforts for quality improvement in patient safety efforts. Since 2004, approximately 20 students per year plus two student leaders have been selected to participate in the MAPS program. They were trained in techniques of measuring and observation and in professional behavior. They participated in weekly and monthly meetings with program leadership, received continuing education from the UCLA patient safety staff, and were trained in observational measurement. The students' observational results have been systematically reported to clinicians and departmental and hospital leadership. Handwashing increased from 50% to 93%, and nurses' checking of two identifiers at the time of medication administration increased from 50% to 95%. Compliance with proper patient identification at the time of nurse-to-transporter handoffs of patients for procedures increased to >90%. This unique program has made a significant contribution to UCLA's quality, safety, and service programs. MAPS has been widely accepted by the clinical staff and has also been valuable to the student volunteers. Such an approach is easily adaptable to other academic medical centers.