Effect of single-patient room design on the incidence of nosocomial infection in the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Previous studies have yielded varying conclusions regarding the impact of single-patient room design on nosocomial infection in the intensive care unit (ICU). We aimed to examine the impact of ICU single-patient room design on infection control. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, and CBM databases from inception to October 2023, without language restrictions. We included observational cohort and quasi-experimental studies assessing the effect of single- versus multi-patient rooms on infection control in the ICU. Outcomes measured included the nosocomial infection rate, incidence density of nosocomial infection, nosocomial colonization and infection rate, acquisition rate of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs), and nosocomial bacteremia rate. The choice of effect model was determined by heterogeneity. Results: Our final analysis incorporated 12 studies involving 12,719 patients. Compared with multi-patient rooms in the ICU, single-patient rooms demonstrated a significant benefit in reducing the nosocomial infection rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59, 0.79; p < 0.00001). Analysis based on nosocomial infection incidence density revealed a statistically significant reduction in single-patient rooms (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.44, 0.92; p = 0.02). Single-patient rooms were associated with a marked decrease in nosocomial colonization and infection rate (OR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.32, 0.62; p < 0.00001). Furthermore, patients in single-patient rooms experienced lower nosocomial bacteremia rate (OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59, 0.89; p = 0.002) and lower acquisition rate of MDROs (OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.23, 0.73; p = 0.002) than those in multi-patient rooms. Conclusion: Implementation of single-patient rooms represents an effective strategy for reducing nosocomial infections in the ICU. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/).

Nirmatrelvir and ritonavir for inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19 beyond five days of symptom onset: a propensity score-matched, multicenter, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for therapeutic strategies for inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19. The evaluation of the clinical benefits of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (Nmr/r) for these patients beyond five days of symptom onset is insufficient. METHODS: A new propensity score-matched cohort was constructed by using multicenter data from 6695 adult inpatients with COVID-19 from December 2022 to February 2023 in China after the epidemic control measures were lifted across the country. The severity of disease of the inpatients was based on the tenth trial edition of the Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of COVID-19 in China. The symptom onset of 1870 enrolled severe or critical inpatients was beyond five days, and they received either Nmr/r plus standard treatment or only standard care. The ratio of patients whose SOFA score improved more than 2 points, crucial respiratory endpoints, changes in inflammatory markers, safety on the seventh day following the initiation of Nmr/r treatment, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. RESULTS: In the Nmr/r group, on Day 7, the number of patients with an improvement in SOFA score ≥ 2 was much greater than that in the standard treatment group (P = 0.024) without a significant decrease in glomerular filtration rate (P = 0.815). Additionally, the rate of new intubation was lower (P = 0.004) and the no intubation days were higher (P = 0.003) in the first 7 days in the Nmr/r group. Other clinical benefits were limited. CONCLUSIONS: Our study may provide new insight that inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19 beyond five days of symptom onset benefit from Nmr/r. Future studies, particularly randomized controlled trials, are necessary to verify the above findings.

Effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir versus azvudine for adult inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: In China, both nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (Paxlovid) and azvudine have been granted approval to treat adult SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with moderate symptoms. Information about the clinical effect of the two available agents among inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19 is scarce. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of Paxlovid and azvudine among adult inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in two large medical centres after the epidemic control measures were lifted in China. A new propensity score matched-inverse probability of treatment weighting cohort was constructed to evaluate the in-hospital all-cause mortality, hospital length of stay, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and safety. RESULTS: A total of 955 individuals were in the cohort. The antiviral therapy strategies were decided by the senior physician and the supplies of the pharmacy. A total of 451 patients were in the Paxlovid group, and 504 patients were in the azvudine group. Compared with Paxlovid, the effects of azvudine on in-hospital all-cause mortality were not significantly different, and the OR (95% CI) was 1.084 (0.822 to 1.430), and the average hospital length of stay of patients discharged alive was also similar in the azvudine group, and the difference (day) and (95% CI) was 0.530 (-0.334 to 1.393). After 7 days of therapy, the degree of decline in the SOFA score was greater in the Paxlovid group than in the azvudine group (p<0.001). The change in glomerular filtration rate was not significantly different (p=0.824). CONCLUSION: Paxlovid and azvudine had similar effectiveness on in-hospital all-cause mortality and hospital length of stay. Compared with the azvudine group, after 7 days of therapy, the degree of decline in SOFA score was significantly higher in the Paxlovid group. These findings need to be verified in larger prospective studies or randomised controlled trials.

Dual-targeting tigecycline nanoparticles for treating intracranial infections caused by multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii.

Multidrug-resistant (MDR) Acinetobacter baumannii (A. baumannii) is a formidable pathogen responsible for severe intracranial infections post-craniotomy, exhibiting a mortality rate as high as 71%. Tigecycline (TGC), a broad-spectrum antibiotic, emerged as a potential therapeutic agent for MDR A. baumannii infections. Nonetheless, its clinical application was hindered by a short in vivo half-life and limited permeability through the blood-brain barrier (BBB). In this study, we prepared a novel core-shell nanoparticle encapsulating water-soluble tigecycline using a blend of mPEG-PLGA and PLGA materials. This nanoparticle, modified with a dual-targeting peptide Aß11 and Tween 80 (Aß11/T80@CSs), was specifically designed to enhance the delivery of tigecycline to the brain for treating A. baumannii-induced intracranial infections. Our findings demonstrated that Aß11/T80@CSs nanocarriers successfully traversed the BBB and effectively delivered TGC into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), leading to a significant therapeutic response in a model of MDR A. baumannii intracranial infection. This study offers initial evidence and a platform for the application of brain-targeted nanocarrier delivery systems, showcasing their potential in administering water-soluble anti-infection drugs for intracranial infection treatments, and suggesting promising avenues for clinical translation.