SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers: the role of occupational and household exposures during the first three pandemic waves in Quebec, Canada.

Objective: We described the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 source of infection in a cohort of healthcare workers (HCWs) of Quebec, Canada, during the first three pandemic waves. We also estimated their household secondary attack rate (SAR) and its risk factors. Design: Cross-sectional surveys. Participants: HCWs with a SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by polymerasa chain reaction and diagnosed between March 2020 and May 2021. Methods: We collected demographic, clinical, vaccination, and employment information, self-reported perceived source of infection, and transmission to household members during the first three pandemic waves. SAR was calculated for households with ≥2 members where the HCW was the index case. A Poisson regression model estimated the association between risk factors and SAR. Results: Among the 11,670 HCWs completing the survey, 91%, perceived their workplace as the source of infection during the first wave (March-July 2020), 71% during the second wave (July 2020-March 2021), and 40% during the third wave (March-May 2021). Conversely, HCWs reported an increasing proportion of household-acquired infections with each wave from 4% to 14% and 33%, respectively. The overall household SAR of 7,990 HCWs living with ≥1 person was 30% (95%CI: 29-30). SAR increased with the presence of symptoms, older age, and during Alpha-variant predominant period. Conclusions: HCWs and their household members were largely affected during the first pandemic waves of COVID-19, but the relative importance of occupational exposure changed overtime. Pandemic preparedness in healthcare settings is essential to protect HCWs from emerging biological hazard exposures.

Risk and protective factors for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare workers: A test-negative case-control study in Québec, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: In Québec, Canada, we evaluated the risk of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection associated with (1) the demographic and employment characteristics among healthcare workers (HCWs) and (2) the workplace and household exposures and the infection prevention and control (IPC) measures among patient-facing HCWs. DESIGN: Test-negative case-control study. SETTING: Provincial health system. PARTICIPANTS: HCWs with PCR-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosed between November 15, 2020, and May 29, 2021 (ie, cases), were compared to HCWs with compatible symptoms who tested negative during the same period (ie, controls). METHODS: Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of infection were estimated using regression logistic models evaluating demographic and employment characteristics (all 4,919 cases and 4,803 controls) or household and workplace exposures and IPC measures (2,046 patient-facing cases and 1,362 controls). RESULTS: COVID-19 risk was associated with working as housekeeping staff (aOR, 3.6), as a patient-support assistant (aOR, 1.9), and as nursing staff (aOR, 1.4), compared to administrative staff. Other risk factors included being unexperienced (aOR, 1.5) and working in private seniors' homes (aOR, 2.1) or long-term care facilities (aOR, 1.5), compared to acute-care hospitals. Among patient-facing HCWs, exposure to a household contact was reported by 9% of cases and was associated with the highest risk of infection (aOR, 7.8). Most infections were likely attributable to more frequent exposure to infected patients (aOR, 2.7) and coworkers (aOR, 2.2). Wearing an N95 respirator during contacts with COVID-19 patients (aOR, 0.7) and vaccination (aOR, 0.2) were the measures associated with risk reduction. CONCLUSION: In the context of the everchanging SARS-CoV-2 virus with increasing transmissibility, measures to ensure HCW protection, including vaccination and respiratory protection, and patient safety will require ongoing evaluation.

Detection of Free Toxin B in the Stool of Asymptomatic Clostridioides difficile Carriers by the Cell Cytotoxicity Neutralization Assay.

Cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA) is considered to be a gold standard to diagnose Clostridioides difficile infections. We performed CCNA on 77 consecutive admission screening rectal swabs from asymptomatic toxigenic C. difficile carriers. Thirty-nine percent of specimens from asymptomatic carriers were positive. Thus, CCNA specificity may be lower than previously thought.

Low incidence of airborne SARS-CoV-2 in acute care hospital rooms with optimized ventilation.

The worldwide repercussions of COVID-19 sparked important research efforts, yet the detailed contribution of aerosols in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has not been elucidated. In an attempt to quantify viral aerosols in the environment of infected patients, we collected 100 air samples in acute care hospital rooms hosting 22 patients over the course of nearly two months using three different air sampling protocols. Quantification by RT-qPCR (ORF1b) led to 11 positive samples from 6 patient rooms (Ct < 40). Viral cultures were negative. No correlation was observed between particular symptoms, length of hospital stay, clinical parameters, and time since symptom onset and the detection of airborne viral RNA. Low detection rates in the hospital rooms may be attributable to the appropriate application of mitigation methods according to the risk control hierarchy, such as increased ventilation to 4.85 air changes per hour to create negative pressure rooms. Our work estimates the mean emission rate of patients and potential airborne concentration in the absence of ventilation. Additional research is needed understand aerosolization events occur, contributing factors, and how best to prevent them.

Predictors of Clostridioides difficile Infection Among Asymptomatic, Colonized Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Asymptomatic patients colonized with Clostridioides difficile are at risk of developing C. difficile infection (CDI), but the factors associated with disease onset are poorly understood. Our aims were to identify predictors of hospital-onset CDI (HO-CDI) among colonized patients and to explore the potential benefits of primary prophylaxis to prevent CDI. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a tertiary academic institution. Colonized patients were identified by detecting the tcdB gene by polymerase chain reaction on a rectal swab. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors of HO-CDI. RESULTS: There were 19 112 patients screened, from which 960 (5%) colonized patients were identified: 513 met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 39 (7.6%) developed a HO-CDI, with a 30-day attributable mortality of 15%. An increasing length of stay (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] per day, 1.03; P = .006), exposure to multiple classes of antibiotics (aOR per class, 1.45; P = .02), use of opioids (aOR, 2.78; P = .007), and cirrhosis (aOR 5.49; P = .008) were independently associated with increased risks of HO-CDI, whereas the use of laxatives was associated with a lower risk of CDI (aOR 0.36; P = .01). Among the antimicrobials, B-lactam with B-lactamase inhibitors (OR 3.65; P < .001), first-generation cephalosporins (OR 2.38; P = .03), and carbapenems (OR 2.44; P = .03) correlated with the greatest risk of HO-CDI. By contrast, patient age, the use of proton pump inhibitors, and the use of primary prophylaxis were not significant predictors of HO-CDI. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies several factors that are associated with CDI among colonized patients. Whether modifying these variables could decrease the risk of CDI should be investigated.

Detection and Isolation of Clostridium difficile Asymptomatic Carriers During Clostridium difficile Infection Outbreaks: An Exploratory Study.

During 4 Clostridium difficile infection outbreaks, unit-wide screening of 114 patients led to detection and isolation of 15 (13%) C. difficile asymptomatic carriers. Carriage prevalence varied between outbreaks, from 0% to 29% (P = .004). Isolating carriers was not associated with significantly shorter outbreak durations, compared with historical controls.

Impact of Isolating Clostridium difficile Carriers on the Burden of Isolation Precautions: A Time Series Analysis.

Background: The isolation of asymptomatic Clostridium difficile (CD) carriers may decrease the incidence of hospital-associated C. difficile infections (CDI), but its impact on isolation precaution needs is unknown. Methods: A time series analysis was conducted to investigate the impact of isolating CD carriers on the burden of isolation precautions from 2008 to 2016 in a Canadian hospital. To account for the changes in C. difficile infection control policies, the series was divided into 3 intervention periods: period 1 (2008-2011), isolation of patients with CDI until symptom resolution; period 2 (2011-2013), isolation of patients with CDI until discharge; and period 3 (2013-2016), isolation of patients with CDI and CD carriers until discharge. We compared the prevalence of isolation-days for C. difficile (ie, for either CDI or carriage) per 1000 patient-days between study periods. Changes in trend were analyzed by segmented regression analysis. Results: A total of 806357 patient-days and 20455 isolation-days were included. Isolation-day prevalence during periods 1, 2, and 3 were 12.9, 26.2, and 37.8 isolation-days per 1000 patient-days, respectively (P < .001 between periods). Isolating CD carriers was associated with an increase in isolation-days' prevalence compared with period 2 (rate ratio [RR], 1.66; P < .001) followed by a significant decrease in trend (RR per 4-week period, 0.97; P < .001). The downward trend was mainly due to decreasing isolation needs for patients with CDI (RR per 4-week period, 0.94; P < .001) rather than for carriage (RR per 4-week period, 0.996; P = .21). Conclusions: Isolating CD carriers led to an initial increase in isolation needs that was partially compensated by a decrease in isolation needs for CDI.

Effect of Detecting and Isolating Clostridium difficile Carriers at Hospital Admission on the Incidence of C difficile Infections: A Quasi-Experimental Controlled Study.

IMPORTANCE: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a major cause of health care-associated infection worldwide, and new preventive strategies are urgently needed. Current control measures do not target asymptomatic carriers, despite evidence that they can contaminate the hospital environment and health care workers' hands and potentially transmit C difficile to other patients. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of detecting and isolating C difficile asymptomatic carriers at hospital admission on the incidence of health care-associated CDI (HA-CDI). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed a controlled quasi-experimental study between November 19, 2013, and March 7, 2015, in a Canadian acute care facility. Admission screening was conducted by detecting the tcdB gene by polymerase chain reaction on a rectal swab. Carriers were placed under contact isolation precautions during their hospitalization. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Changes in HA-CDI incidence level and trend during the intervention period (17 periods of 4 weeks each) were compared with the preintervention control period (120 periods of 4 weeks each) by segmented regression analysis and autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) modeling. Concomitant changes in the aggregated HA-CDI incidence at other institutions in Québec City, Québec (n = 6) and the province of Québec (n = 94) were also examined. RESULTS: Overall, 7599 of 8218 (92.5%) eligible patients were screened, among whom 368 (4.8%) were identified as C difficile carriers. During the intervention, 38 patients (3.0 per 10 000 patient-days) developed an HA-CDI compared with 416 patients (6.9 per 10 000 patient-days) during the preintervention control period (P < .001). There was no immediate change in the level of HA-CDIs on implementation (P = .92), but there was a significant decrease in trend over time of 7% per 4-week period (rate ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.99 per period; P = .02). ARIMA modeling also detected a significant effect of the intervention, represented by a gradual progressive decrease in the HA-CDI time series by an overall magnitude of 7.2 HA-CDIs per 10 000 patient-days. We estimated that the intervention had prevented 63 of the 101 (62.4%) expected cases. By contrast, no significant decrease in HA-CDI rates occurred in the control groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Detecting and isolating C difficile carriers was associated with a significant decrease in the incidence of HA-CDI. If confirmed in subsequent studies, this strategy could help prevent HA-CDI.

Impact of the type of diagnostic assay on Clostridium difficile infection and complication rates in a mandatory reporting program.

BACKGROUND: Most Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) surveillance programs neither specify the diagnostic method to be used nor stratify rates accordingly. We assessed the difference in healthcare-associated CDI (HA-CDI) incidence and complication rates obtained by 2 validated diagnostic methods. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of patients for whom a C. difficile test was ordered between 1 August 2010 and 31 July 2011. All specimens were tested in parallel by a commercial polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay targeting toxin B gene tcdB, and a 3-step algorithm detecting glutamate dehydrogenase and toxins A and B by enzyme immunoassay and cell culture cytotoxicity assay (EIA/CCA). CDI incidence rate ratios were calculated using univariate Poisson regression. RESULTS: A total of 1321 stool samples were tested during a period totaling 95 750 patient-days. Eighty-five HA-CDI cases were detected by PCR and 56 cases by EIA/CCA (P = .01). The overall incidence rate was 8.9 per 10 000 patient-days (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1-10.9) by PCR and 5.8 per 10 000 patient-days (95% CI, 4.4-7.4) by EIA/CCA (P = .01). The incidence rate ratio comparing PCR and EIA/CCA was 1.52 (95% CI, 1.08-2.13; P = .015). Overall complication rate was 27% (23/85) when CDI was diagnosed by PCR and 39% (22/56) by EIA/CCA (P = .16). Cases detected by PCR only were less likely to develop a complication of CDI compared with cases detected by both PCR and EIA/CCA (3% vs 39%, respectively; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Performing PCR instead of EIA/CCA is associated with a >50% increase in the CDI incidence rate. Standardization of diagnostic methods may be indicated to improve interhospital comparison.