Factors associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and evaluation of a recruitment protocol among healthcare personnel in a COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness study.

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine factors associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare personnel. Secondary objectives were to assess representativeness of recruited participants and the effectiveness of a multiple-contact protocol for recruiting healthcare personnel in this COVID-19 study. Design: Survey study, conducted as part of an observational test-negative study of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. Setting: University of Utah Health system, including both inpatient and outpatient facilities. Participants: Clinical and non-clinical healthcare personnel at University of Utah Health. 1456 were contacted and 503 (34.5%) completed the survey. Cases were all eligible employees testing positive for COVID-19, with 3:1 randomly selected, matched controls (test negative) selected weekly. Methods: Online survey. Results: Significant differences in the demographics of participants and the source population were observed; e.g., nursing staff comprised 31.6% of participants but only 23.3% of the source population. The multiple-contact recruitment protocol increased participation by ten percentage points and ensured equal representation of controls. Potential exposure to illness outside of work was strongly predictive of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (OR = 3.74; 95% CI: 2.29, 6.11) whereas potential exposure at work was protective against testing positive (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29, 0.88). Conclusions: Carefully designed recruitment protocols increase participation and representation of controls, but bias in participant demographics still exists. The negative association between potential workplace exposure and positive test suggests testing bias in the test-negative design. Healthcare personnel's potential exposures to COVID-19 outside of the workplace are important predictors of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.

Clinical Decision Support Systems to Reduce Unnecessary Clostridioides difficile Testing Across Multiple Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate Clostridioides difficile testing has adverse consequences for patients, hospitals, and public health. Computerized clinical decision support (CCDS) systems in the electronic health record (EHR) may reduce C. difficile test ordering; however, effectiveness of different approaches, ease of use, and best fit into healthcare providers' (HCP) workflow are not well understood. METHODS: Nine academic and 6 community hospitals in the United States participated in this 2-year cohort study. CCDS (hard stop or soft stop) triggered when a duplicate C. difficile test order was attempted or if laxatives were recently received. The primary outcome was the difference in testing rates pre- and post-CCDS interventions, using incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and mixed-effect Poisson regression models. We performed qualitative evaluation (contextual inquiry, interviews, focus groups) based on a human factors model. We identified themes using a codebook with primary nodes and subnodes. RESULTS: In 9 hospitals implementing hard-stop CCDS and 4 hospitals implementing soft-stop CCDS, C. difficile testing incidence rate (IR) reduction was 33% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 30%-36%) and 23% (95% CI: 21%-25%), respectively. Two hospitals implemented a non-EHR-based human intervention with IR reduction of 21% (95% CI: 15%-28%). HCPs reported generally favorable experiences and highlighted time efficiencies such as inclusion of the patient's most recent laxative administration on the CCDS. Organizational factors, including hierarchical cultures and communication between HCPs caring for the same patient, impact CCDS acceptance and integration. CONCLUSIONS: CCDS systems reduced unnecessary C. difficile testing and were perceived positively by HCPs when integrated into their workflow and when displaying relevant patient-specific information needed for decision making.

Development and evaluation of a structured guide to assess the preventability of hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess preventability of hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia (HOB), we developed and evaluated a structured rating guide accounting for intrinsic patient and extrinsic healthcare-related risks. DESIGN: HOB preventability rating guide was compared against a reference standard expert panel. PARTICIPANTS: A 10-member panel of clinical experts was assembled as the standard of preventability assessment, and 2 physician reviewers applied the rating guide for comparison. METHODS: The expert panel independently rated 82 hypothetical HOB scenarios using a 6-point Likert scale collapsed into 3 categories: preventable, uncertain, or not preventable. Consensus was defined as concurrence on the same category among ≥70% experts. Scenarios without consensus were deliberated and followed by a second round of rating.Two reviewers independently applied the rating guide to adjudicate the same 82 scenarios in 2 rounds, with interim revisions. Interrater reliability was evaluated using the κ (kappa) statistic. RESULTS: Expert panel consensus criteria were met for 52 scenarios (63%) after 2 rounds.After 2 rounds, guide-based rating matched expert panel consensus in 40 of 52 (77%) and 39 of 52 (75%) cases for reviewers 1 and 2, respectively. Agreement rates between the 2 reviewers were 84% overall (κ, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-0.88]) and 87% (κ, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.94) for the 52 scenarios with expert consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Preventability ratings of HOB scenarios by 2 reviewers using a rating guide matched expert consensus in most cases with moderately high interreviewer reliability. Although diversity of expert opinions and uncertainty of preventability merit further exploration, this is a step toward standardized assessment of HOB preventability.

Effectiveness of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine among U.S. Health Care Personnel.

BACKGROUND: The prioritization of U.S. health care personnel for early receipt of messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), allowed for the evaluation of the effectiveness of these new vaccines in a real-world setting. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative case-control study involving health care personnel across 25 U.S. states. Cases were defined on the basis of a positive polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) or antigen-based test for SARS-CoV-2 and at least one Covid-19-like symptom. Controls were defined on the basis of a negative PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, regardless of symptoms, and were matched to cases according to the week of the test date and site. Using conditional logistic regression with adjustment for age, race and ethnic group, underlying conditions, and exposures to persons with Covid-19, we estimated vaccine effectiveness for partial vaccination (assessed 14 days after receipt of the first dose through 6 days after receipt of the second dose) and complete vaccination (assessed ≥7 days after receipt of the second dose). RESULTS: The study included 1482 case participants and 3449 control participants. Vaccine effectiveness for partial vaccination was 77.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70.9 to 82.7) with the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) and 88.9% (95% CI, 78.7 to 94.2) with the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna); for complete vaccination, vaccine effectiveness was 88.8% (95% CI, 84.6 to 91.8) and 96.3% (95% CI, 91.3 to 98.4), respectively. Vaccine effectiveness was similar in subgroups defined according to age (<50 years or ≥50 years), race and ethnic group, presence of underlying conditions, and level of patient contact. Estimates of vaccine effectiveness were lower during weeks 9 through 14 than during weeks 3 through 8 after receipt of the second dose, but confidence intervals overlapped widely. CONCLUSIONS: The BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were highly effective under real-world conditions in preventing symptomatic Covid-19 in health care personnel, including those at risk for severe Covid-19 and those in racial and ethnic groups that have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).

Efficient and effective single-step screening of individual samples for SARS-CoV-2 RNA using multi-dimensional pooling and Bayesian inference.

Rapid and widespread implementation of infectious disease surveillance is a critical component in the response to novel health threats. Molecular assays are the preferred method to detect a broad range of viral pathogens with high sensitivity and specificity. The implementation of molecular assay testing in a rapidly evolving public health emergency, such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, can be hindered by resource availability or technical constraints. We present a screening strategy that is easily scaled up to support a sustained large volume of testing over long periods of time. This non-adaptive pooled-sample screening protocol employs Bayesian inference to yield a reportable outcome for each individual sample in a single testing step (no confirmation of positive results required). The proposed method is validated using clinical specimens tested using a real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2. This screening protocol has substantial advantages for its implementation, including higher sample throughput, faster time to results, no need to retrieve previously screened samples from storage to undergo retesting, and excellent performance of the algorithm's sensitivity and specificity compared with the individual test's metrics.

Interim Estimates of Vaccine Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 Vaccines Among Health Care Personnel - 33 U.S. Sites, January-March 2021.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, health care personnel (HCP) have been at high risk for exposure to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, through patient interactions and community exposure (1). The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended prioritization of HCP for COVID-19 vaccination to maintain provision of critical services and reduce spread of infection in health care settings (2). Early distribution of two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) to HCP allowed assessment of the effectiveness of these vaccines in a real-world setting. A test-negative case-control study is underway to evaluate mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic illness among HCP at 33 U.S. sites across 25 U.S. states. Interim analyses indicated that the VE of a single dose (measured 14 days after the first dose through 6 days after the second dose) was 82% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 74%-87%), adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, and underlying medical conditions. The adjusted VE of 2 doses (measured ≥7 days after the second dose) was 94% (95% CI = 87%-97%). VE of partial (1-dose) and complete (2-dose) vaccination in this population is comparable to that reported from clinical trials and recent observational studies, supporting the effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic disease in adults, with strong 2-dose protection.

Environmental Contamination of Contact Precaution and Non-Contact Precaution Patient Rooms in Six Acute Care Facilities.

BACKGROUND: Environmental contamination is an important source of hospital multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) transmission. Factors such as patient MDRO contact precautions (CP) status, patient proximity to surfaces, and unit type likely influence MDRO contamination and bacterial bioburden levels on patient room surfaces. Identifying factors associated with environmental contamination in patient rooms and on shared unit surfaces could help identify important environmental MDRO transmission routes. METHODS: Surfaces were sampled from MDRO CP and non-CP rooms, nursing stations, and mobile equipment in acute care, intensive care, and transplant units within 6 acute care hospitals using a convenience sampling approach blinded to cleaning events. Precaution rooms had patients with clinical or surveillance tests positive for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae or Acinetobacter within the previous 6 months, or Clostridioides difficile toxin within the past 30 days. Rooms not meeting this definition were considered non-CP rooms. Samples were cultured for the above MDROs and total bioburden. RESULTS: Overall, an estimated 13% of rooms were contaminated with at least 1 MDRO. MDROs were detected more frequently in CP rooms (32% of 209 room-sample events) than non-CP rooms (12% of 234 room-sample events). Surface bioburden did not differ significantly between CP and non-CP rooms or MDRO-positive and MDRO-negative rooms. CONCLUSIONS: CP room surfaces are contaminated more frequently than non-CP room surfaces; however, contamination of non-CP room surfaces is not uncommon and may be an important reservoir for ongoing MDRO transmission. MDRO contamination of non-CP rooms may indicate asymptomatic patient MDRO carriage, inadequate terminal cleaning, or cross-contamination of room surfaces via healthcare personnel hands.

Shedding of multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacilli by colonized patients during procedures and patient care activities.

BACKGROUND: Medical procedures and patient care activities may facilitate environmental shedding of health care-associated pathogens. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of hospitalized patients in contact precautions for carriage of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing gram-negative bacilli (N = 38) or carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli (CR-GNB) (N = 22) to determine the frequency of environmental shedding during procedures and care activities. Perirectal, wound, and skin were cultured for ESBL-producing and CR-GNB. High-touch surfaces and portable equipment were disinfected before and cultured after procedures; control cultures were collected in the absence of procedures. RESULTS: Of 60 patients enrolled, 34 (57%) had positive perirectal and/or skin or wound cultures. For these 34 patients, 15 (44%) shed their colonizing organism to surfaces during 1 or more procedures. Patients with shedding had significantly higher concentrations of the pathogens recovered from perirectal swabs than those with no shedding (mean, 3.5 vs 2.2 log10 colony-forming units per swab; P < .01). Environmental shedding occurred more frequently during procedures and care activities than in the absence of a procedure (21 of 117, 18% vs 1 of 61, 2%; P < .01), and 6 of 56 (10%) portable devices used for procedures became contaminated. CONCLUSIONS: Environmental shedding of antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacilli occurs frequently during medical procedures and patient care activities. Decontamination of surfaces and equipment and approaches that reduce the burden of carriage could reduce the risk for dissemination.

A qualitative study of factors affecting personal protective equipment use among health care personnel.

BACKGROUND: Health care personnel (HCP) use of personal protective equipment (PPE) reduces infectious disease transmission. However, PPE compliance remains low. The objective of this study was to better understand how HCP perceptions factor into PPE decision making as well as how organizational processes and the environment impact behavior. METHODS: This qualitative study used observation and focus groups at 2 medical centers. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The decision to use PPE and to follow precaution practices was influenced by risk perception as well as organizational and environmental factors. Perceived risk, related to certain organisms and work tasks, was considered by HCP when deciding to use PPE. Organizational processes, such as policies that were not applied uniformly, and environmental factors, such as clean versus contaminated space, also played a role in HCP PPE use. DISCUSSION: Because HCP seemed focused on organisms and work tasks, education on specific organisms and helping HCP think through their workflow may be more effective in conveying the importance of PPE in reducing transmission. Additionally, isolation practices should be compared across disciplines to ensure they complement, rather than contradict, one another. Assessment of the environment may help protect HCP and patients from infectious organisms. CONCLUSION: Preventing the spread of infectious organisms should not depend solely on PPE use, but should also be recognized as an organizational responsibility.

Reinforcement of an infection control bundle targeting prevention practices for Clostridioides difficile in Veterans Health Administration nursing homes.

BACKGROUND: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) causes significant morbidity in nursing home residents. Our aim was to describe adherence to a bundled CDI prevention initiative, which had previously been deployed nationwide in Veterans Health Administration (VA) long-term care facilities (LTCFs), and to improve compliance with reinforcement. METHODS: A multicenter pre- and post-reinforcement of the VA bundle consisting of environmental management, hand hygiene, and contact precautions was conducted in 6 VA LTCFs. A campaign to reinforce VA bundle components, as well as to promote select antimicrobial stewardship recommendations and contact precautions for 30 days, was employed. Hand hygiene, antimicrobial usage, and environmental contamination, before and after bundle reinforcement, were assessed. RESULTS: All LTCFs reported following the guidelines for cleaning and contact precautions until diarrhea resolution pre-reinforcement. Environmental specimens rarely yielded C difficile pre- or post-reinforcement. Proper hand hygiene across all facilities did not change with reinforcement (pre 52.51%, post 52.18%), nor did antimicrobial use (pre 87-197 vs. post 84-245 antibiotic days per 1,000 resident-days). LTCFs found it challenging to maintain prolonged contact precautions. DISCUSSION: Variation in infection prevention and antimicrobial prescribing practices across LTCFs were identified and lessons learned. CONCLUSIONS: Introducing bundled interventions in LTCFs is challenging, given the available resources, and may be more successful with fewer components and more intensive execution with feedback.

Estimating the Incidence of Influenza at the State Level - Utah, 2016-17 and 2017-18 Influenza Seasons.

The 2017-18 U.S. influenza season was notable for its high severity, with approximately 45 million illnesses and 810,000 influenza-associated hospitalizations throughout the United States (1). The purpose of the investigation reported here was to create a state-level estimate of the number of persons in Utah who became ill with influenza disease during this severe national seasonal influenza epidemic and to create a sustainable system for making timely updates in future influenza seasons. Knowing the extent of influenza-associated illness can help public health officials, policymakers, and clinicians tailor influenza messaging, planning, and responses for seasonal influenza epidemics or during pandemics. Using national methods and existing influenza surveillance and testing data, the influenza burden (number of influenza illnesses, medical visits for influenza, and influenza-associated hospitalizations) in Utah during the 2016-17 and 2017-18 influenza seasons was estimated. During the 2016-17 season, an estimated 265,000 symptomatic illnesses affecting 9% of Utah residents occurred, resulting in 125,000 medically attended illnesses and 2,700 hospitalizations. During the 2017-18 season, an estimated 338,000 symptomatic illnesses affecting 11% of Utah residents occurred, resulting in 160,000 medically attended illnesses and 3,900 hospitalizations. Other state or county health departments could adapt similar methods in their jurisdictions to estimate the burden of influenza locally and support prompt public health activities.

Environmental Contamination with Candida Species in Multiple Hospitals Including a Tertiary Care Hospital with a Candida auris Outbreak.

BACKGROUND: Environmental sources have been implicated as a potential source for exogenous acquisition of Candida species, particularly the emerging multidrug-resistant Candida auris. However, limited information is available on environmental reservoirs of Candida species in healthcare facilities. METHODS: During a 6-month period, cultures for Candida species were collected from high-touch surfaces in patient rooms and from portable equipment in 6 US acute care hospitals in 4 states. Additional cultures were collected from sink drains and floors in one of the hospitals and from high-touch surfaces, portable equipment, and sink drains in a hospital experiencing an outbreak due to C. auris. Candida species were identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectometry. RESULTS: Candida species were recovered from patient rooms in 4 of the 6 hospitals. Seven of 147 patient room cultures (4.8%) and 1 of 57 (1.8%) portable equipment cultures were positive, with the most common species being C. parapsilosis. For the hospital where additional sites were sampled, Candida species were recovered from 8 of 22 (36.4%) hospital room floors and 4 of 17 (23.5%) sink drains. In the facility with a C. auris outbreak, Candida species were frequently recovered from sink drains (20.7%) and high-touch surfaces (15.4%), but recovery of C. auris was uncommon (3.8% of high-touch surfaces, 3.4% of sink drains, and 0% of portable equipment) and only present in rooms that currently or recently housed a patient with C. auris. CONCLUSION: Candida species often contaminate surfaces in hospitals and may be particularly common on floors and in sink drains. However, C. auris contamination was uncommon in a facility experiencing an outbreak, suggesting that current cleaning and disinfection practices can be effective in minimizing environmental contamination.

Understanding Workflow and Personal Protective Equipment Challenges Across Different Healthcare Personnel Roles.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals use standard and transmission-based precautions, including personal protective equipment (PPE), to prevent the spread of infectious organisms. However, little attention has been paid to the potentially unique challenges of various healthcare personnel (HCP) in following precaution practices. METHODS: From September through December 2016, 5 physicians, 5 nurses, and 4 physical therapists were shadowed for 1 hour 30 minutes to 3 hours 15 minutes at an academic medical center. Observers documented activities using unstructured field notes. Focus groups were conducted to better understand HCP perspectives about precautions and PPE-related challenges. Data were analyzed by comparing workflow and challenges (observed and stated) in precaution practices across HCP roles. RESULTS: Precaution patients were interspersed throughout physician rounds, which covered a broad geographic range throughout the hospital. Patient encounters were generally brief, and appropriate use of gowns and cleaning of personal stethoscopes varied among observed physicians. Nurses were unit based and frequently entered/exited rooms. Frustration with donning/doffing was especially apparent when needing supplies while in a precaution room, which nurses acknowledged was a time when practice lapses could occur. The observed physical therapists worked in one geographic location, spent extended periods of time with patients, and noted that given their close physical contact with patients, gowns do not fully protect them. CONCLUSIONS: Movement patterns, time with patients, care activities, and equipment use varied across HCP, leading to a diverse set of challenges in following precaution practices and PPE use. Attention to these differences among HCP is important for understanding and developing effective strategies to prevent the potential spread of infectious organisms.

Evaluation of a Redesigned Personal Protective Equipment Gown.

BACKGROUND: In healthcare, the goal of personal protective equipment (PPE) is to protect healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients from body fluids and infectious organisms via contact, droplet, or airborne transmission. The critical importance of using PPE properly is highlighted by 2 potentially fatal viral infections, severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus and Ebola virus, where HCP became infected while caring for patients due to errors in the use of PPE. However, PPE in dealing with less dangerous, but highly infectious organisms is important as well. This work proposes a framework to test and evaluate PPE with a focus on gown design. METHODS: An observational study identified issues with potential for contamination related to gown use. After redesigning the existing gown, a high-fidelity patient simulator study with 40 HCP as participants evaluated the gown redesign using 2 commonly performed tasks. Variables of interest were nonadherence to procedural standards, use problems with the gown during task performance, and usability and cognitive task load ratings of the standard and redesigned gowns. RESULTS: While no differences were found in terms of nonadherence and use problems between the current and the redesigned gown, differences in usability and task load ratings suggested that the redesigned gown is perceived more favorably by HCP. CONCLUSIONS: This work proposes a framework to guide the evaluation of PPE. The results suggest that the current design of the PPE gown can be improved in usability and user satisfaction. Although our data did not find an increase in adherence to protocol when using the redesigned gown, it is likely that higher usability and lower task load could result in higher adherence over longer periods of use.

Effectiveness of a multisite personal protective equipment (PPE)-free zone intervention in acute care.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the effectiveness of a personal protective equipment (PPE)-free zone intervention on healthcare personnel (HCP) entry hand hygiene (HH) and PPE donning compliance in rooms of patients in contact precautions. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental, multicenter intervention, before-and-after study with concurrent controls. SETTING: All patient rooms on contact precautions on 16 units (5 medical-surgical, 6 intensive care, 5 specialty care units) at 3 acute-care facilities (2 academic medical centers, 1 Veterans Affairs hospital). Observations of PPE donning and entry HH compliance by HCP were conducted during both study phases. Surveys of HCP perceptions of the PPE-free zone were distributed in both study phases. INTERVENTION: A PPE-free zone, where a low-risk area inside door thresholds of contact precautions rooms was demarcated by red tape on the floor. Inside this area, HCP were not required to wear PPE. RESULTS: We observed 3,970 room entries. HH compliance did not change between study phases among intervention units (relative risk [RR], 0.92; P = .29) and declined in control units (RR, 0.70; P = .005); however, the PPE-free zone did not significantly affect compliance (P = .07). The PPE-free zone effect on HH was significant only for rooms on enteric precautions (P = .008). PPE use was not significantly different before versus after the intervention (P = .15). HCP perceived the zone positively; 65% agreed that it facilitated communication and 66.8% agreed that it permitted checking on patients more frequently. CONCLUSIONS: HCP viewed the PPE-free zone favorably and it did not adversely affect PPE or HH compliance. Future infection prevention interventions should consider the complex sociotechnical system factors influencing behavior change.

Frequent and unexpected deviations from personal protective equipment guidelines increase contamination risks.

Personal protective equipment (PPE) training aims to reinforce the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for donning and doffing; however, many health care and ancillary personnel use non-guideline methods to don and doff their PPE gowns and gloves. We found that hospital personnel commonly deviated from the guidelines, increasing the likelihood of self-contamination. Furthermore, securing the gown ties inappropriately was an especially common problem that consequently increased doffing missteps.

Human Factors Engineering Contributions to Infection Prevention and Control.

OBJECTIVE: This article provides a review of areas that present significant challenges in infection prevention and control and describes human factors engineering (HFE) approaches that have been applied successfully to these areas. In addition, implications and recommendations for HFE use in future research are discussed. BACKGROUND: Infection prevention and control aims to prevent patients and health care personnel from acquiring preventable infections in healthcare. Effective infection control practices of healthcare-associated infections have recently become even more critical with the emergence of life-threatening infections. HFE could benefit infection prevention and control in addressing older and more recent challenges, but uptake has been limited. METHOD/RESULTS: This literature review is an integration and synthesis of recently published research that describes HFE-based approaches in infection prevention and control to address the challenges for three specific topics. The results of the review suggests that HFE is in a position to support work in infection prevention and control and improve overall healthcare safety. CONCLUSION: HFE provides conceptual frameworks and methods that have significant potential to improve infection prevention and control. APPLICATION: The work reviewed can provide potential solutions for current infection prevention and control challenges by applying HFE based recommendations.

Shedding of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by colonized patients during procedures and patient care activities.

OBJECTIVE: Medical procedures and patient care activities may facilitate environmental dissemination of healthcare-associated pathogens such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). DESIGN: Observational cohort study of MRSA-colonized patients to determine the frequency of and risk factors for environmental shedding of MRSA during procedures and care activities in carriers with positive nares and/or wound cultures. Bivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with environmental shedding. SETTING: A Veterans Affairs hospital. PARTICIPANTS: This study included 75 patients in contact precautions for MRSA colonization or infection. RESULTS: Of 75 patients in contact precautions for MRSA, 55 (73%) had MRSA in nares and/or wounds and 25 (33%) had positive skin cultures. For the 52 patients with MRSA in nares and/or wounds and at least 1 observed procedure, environmental shedding of MRSA occurred more frequently during procedures and care activities than in the absence of a procedure (59 of 138, 43% vs 8 of 83, 10%; P 0.9 m from the patient (52 of 138, 38% vs 25 of 138, 18%; P = .0004). Contamination occurred frequently on surfaces touched by personnel (12 of 38, 32%) and on portable equipment used for procedures (25 of 101, 25%). By bivariate analysis, the presence of a wound with MRSA was associated with shedding (17 of 29, 59% versus 6 of 23, 26%; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Environmental shedding of MRSA occurs frequently during medical procedures and patient care activities. There is a need for effective strategies to disinfect surfaces and equipment after procedures.

Forming a successful public health collaborative: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Coordinated approaches are needed to optimally control the spread of resistant organisms across facilities that share patients. Our goal was to understand social tensions that may inhibit public health-led community partnerships and to identify factors for success. METHODS: A collaborative to control transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) was formed in Utah following a regional outbreak, with members from public health, hospitals, laboratories, and transport services. We conducted and qualitatively analyzed 3 focus groups among collaborative stakeholders to discuss their experiences. RESULTS: Via 3 focus groups and additional interviews, we found the collaborative made institutional tensions between stakeholders explicit. We identified 4 factors that facilitated the ability to overcome institutional tensions: public health leadership to establish a safe space, creation of cross-institutional group identity with mutual respect and support, standardized communication, and group cohesiveness through shared mental models of interdependencies. DISCUSSION: Stakeholders' concerns regarding being blamed for MDRO transmission versus contributing to shared health care community MDRO control efforts resembled a "prisoner's dilemma." Four social components mitigated tensions and facilitated cooperation in this public health-led collaborative. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified strategies that public health-led coordinated approaches can use to facilitate cooperation.