Positive and Neutral Needleless Connectors: A Comparative Study of Central-line Associated Bloodstream Infection, Occlusion, and Bacterial Contamination of the Connector Lumen.

A pragmatic, multiphase prospective quality improvement initiative was performed to determine whether a positive displacement connector (PD) causes reduction of central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), occlusion, and catheter hub colonization when compared with a neutral displacement connector with alcohol disinfecting cap (AC). Patients with an active central vascular access device (CVAD) were enrolled March 2018 to February 2019 (P2) and compared to the prior year (P1). Two hospitals were randomized to use PD without AC (Hospital A) and with AC (Hospital B). Two hospitals utilized a neutral displacement connector with AC (Hospitals C and D). CVADs were monitored for CLABSI, occlusion, and bacterial contamination during P2. Of the 2454 lines in the study, 1049 were cultured. CLABSI decreased in all groups between P1 and P2: Hospital A, 13 (1.1%) to 2 (0.2%); Hospital B, 2 (0.3%) to 0; and Hospitals C and D, 5 (0.5%) to 1 (0.1%). CLABSI reduction was equivalent between P1 and P2 with and without AC, at around 86%. The rate of occlusion per lumen was 14.4%, 12.1%, and 8.5% for Hospitals A, B and C, D, respectively. Hospitals using PD had a higher rate of occlusion than those that did not (P = .003). Lumen contamination with pathogens was 1.5% for Hospitals A and B and 2.1% for Hospitals C and D (P = .38). The rate of CLABSI was reduced with both connectors, and PD reduced infections with and without the use of AC. Both connector types had low-level catheter hub colonization with significant bacteria. The lowest rates of occlusion were found in the group using neutral displacement connectors.

Use of a simplified sample processing step without RNA extraction for direct SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR detection.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has resulted in significant shortages of RT-PCR testing supplies including RNA extraction kits. The goal of our study was to determine if a simplified heat-RNA release method would provide comparable detection of SARS-CoV-2 without the need for nucleic acid extraction. RT-PCR results using the ChromaCode HDPCR™ SARS-CoV-2 were compared using the heat-RNA release method and an automated RNA extraction system (EMAG). The heat-RNA release method correctly identified 94 % (81/86 nasopharyngeal samples) that were positive for SARS-CoV-2. Five samples that were missed by heat-RNA release method had a mean Ct value: 35 using the automated extraction instrument, indicating a very low viral load. Our findings show that a simple heat-RNA release method is a reasonable alternative for the majority of COVID-19 positive patients and can help overcome the cost and availability issues of RNA extraction reagents.

Cost-effectiveness of a modified two-step algorithm using a combined glutamate dehydrogenase/toxin enzyme immunoassay and real-time PCR for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.

The analytical performance and cost-effectiveness of the Wampole Toxin A/B EIA, the C. Diff. Quik Chek Complete (CdQCC) (a combined glutamate dehydrogenase antigen/toxin enzyme immunoassay), two RT-PCR assays (Progastro Cd and BD GeneOhm) and a modified two-step algorithm using the CdQCC reflexed to RT-PCR for indeterminate results were compared. The sensitivity of the Wampole Toxin A/B EIA, CdQCC (GDH antigen), BD GeneOhm and Progastro Cd RT-PCR were 85.4%, 95.8%, 100% and 93.8%, respectively. The algorithm provided rapid results for 86% of specimens and the remaining indeterminate results were resolved by RT-PCR, offering the best balance of sensitivity and cost savings per test (algorithm ∼US$13.50/test versus upfront RT-PCR ∼US$26.00/test).