RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In the initial phase of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, masking has been widely accepted in healthcare institutions to mitigate the risk of healthcare-associated infection. Evidence, however, is still scant and the role of masks in preventing healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 acquisition remains unclear.We investigated the association of variation in institutional mask policies with healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections in acute care hospitals in Switzerland during the BA.4/5 2022 wave. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 infections in hospitalized patients between June 1 and September 5, 2022, were obtained from the "Hospital-based surveillance of COVID-19 in Switzerland"-database and classified as healthcare- or community-associated based on time of disease onset. Institutions provided information regarding institutional masking policies for healthcare workers and other prevention policies. The percentage of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections was calculated per institution and per type of mask policy. The association of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections with mask policies was tested using a negative binominal mixed-effect model. RESULTS: We included 2'980 SARS-CoV-2 infections from 13 institutions, 444 (15%) were classified as healthcare-associated. Between June 20 and June 30, 2022, six (46%) institutions switched to a more stringent mask policy. The percentage of healthcare-associated infections subsequently declined in institutions with policy switch but not in the others. In particular, the switch from situative masking (standard precautions) to general masking of HCW in contact with patients was followed by a strong reduction of healthcare-associated infections (rate ratio 0.39, 95% CI 0.30-0.49). In contrast, when compared across hospitals, the percentage of health-care associated infections was not related to mask policies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest switching to a more stringent mask policy may be beneficial during increases of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections at an institutional level.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Infección Hospitalaria , Máscaras , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Suiza/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Infección Hospitalaria/prevención & control , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Hospitales , Anciano , Personal de Salud , Control de Infecciones/métodos , Política Organizacional , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is debate about the causes of the recent birth rate decline in high-income countries worldwide. During the pandemic, concern about the effects on reproductive health has caused vaccine hesitancy. We investigated the association of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and infection with involuntary childlessness. METHODS: Females in fertility age within a prospective multicenter cohort of healthcare workers (HCW) were followed since August 2020. Data on baseline health, SARS-CoV-2-infection, and vaccination were obtained and regularly updated, in which serum samples were collected repetitively and screened for anti-nucleocapsid and anti-spike antibodies. In October 2023, participants indicated the presence of involuntary childlessness with onset during the pandemic, whereas those indicating an onset before the pandemic were excluded. The association of involuntary childlessness and SARS-CoV-2-vaccination and infection was investigated using univariable and multivariable analysis. Sensitivity analysis was performed to compare those reporting involuntary childlessness with those birthing a child since 2020. RESULTS: Of 798 participants, 26 (3.2%) reported involuntary childlessness starting since the pandemic. Of the involuntary childless women, 73.1% (19/26) were vaccinated compared to 86.0% (664/772) without involuntary childlessness (p = 0.73). SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported by 76.9% (20/26) compared to 72.4% (559/772) of controls (p = 0.64). Neither SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (aOR 0.91 per dose, 95%CI 0.67-1.26) nor infection (aOR per infection 1.05, 95%CI 0.62-1.71) was associated with involuntary childlessness. Sensitivity analysis confirmed these results. CONCLUSIONS: Among female HCW of fertility age, 3.2% indicated involuntary childlessness, which is comparable to pre-pandemic data. No association between involuntary childlessness and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or infection was found.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Personal de Salud , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunación , Humanos , Femenino , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/inmunología , Personal de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Estudios Prospectivos , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Cohortes , Vacilación a la Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
The prospective before-after quality improvement study was to assess bundle effectiveness to reduce urinary catheter days and prevent associated complications. All patients with preexisting or new urinary catheters in a regional hospital in Switzerland were included. We showed a reduction of catheter days, incorrect urinary catheter indications, and most strikingly formally correct indications.
RESUMEN
AIMS OF THE STUDY: We aimed to assess the extent of SARS-CoV-2 humoral immunity elicited by previous infections and/or vaccination among healthcare workers, and to identify reasons why healthcare workers decided against vaccination. METHODS: This nested cross-sectional study included volunteer healthcare workers from 14 healthcare institutions in German-speaking Switzerland. In January 2021, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were available for healthcare workers. In May and June 2022, participants answered electronic questionnaires regarding baseline characteristics including SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status (with one or more vaccine doses defined as vaccinated) and previous SARS-CoV-2 infections. Unvaccinated participants indicated their reasons for non-vaccination. Participants underwent testing for SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike (anti-S) and anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) antibodies. Antibody prevalence was described across age groups. In addition, we performed multivariable logistic regression to identify baseline characteristics independently associated with non-vaccination and described reasons for non-vaccination. RESULTS: Among 22,438 eligible employees, 3,436 (15%) participated; the median age was 43.7 years (range 16-73), 2,794 (81.3%) were female, and 1,407 (47.7%) identified as nurses; 3,414 (99.4%) underwent serology testing, among whom 3,383 (99.0%) had detectable anti-S (3,357, 98.3%) antibodies, anti-N (2,396, 70.1%) antibodies, or both (2,370, 69.4%). A total of 296 (8.6%) healthcare workers were unvaccinated, whereas 3,140 (91.4%) were vaccinated. In multivariable analysis, age (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.02 per year, 95% CI 1.01-1.03), being a physician (aOR 3.22, 95% CI 1.75-5.92) or administrator (aOR 1.88, 95% CI 1.27-2.80), and having higher education (aOR 2.23, 95% CI 1.09-4.57) were positively associated with vaccine uptake, whereas working in non-acute care (aOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34-0.97), active smoking (aOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51-0.91), and taking prophylactic home remedies against SARS-CoV-2 (aOR 0.42, 95% CI 0.31-0.56) were negatively associated. Important reasons for non-vaccination were a belief that the vaccine might not have long-lasting immunity (267/291, 92.1%) and a preference for gaining naturally acquired instead of vaccine-induced immunity (241/289, 83.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Almost all healthcare workers in our cohort had specific antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 from natural infection and/or from vaccination. Young healthcare workers and those working in non-acute settings were less likely to be vaccinated, whereas physicians and administrative staff showed higher vaccination uptake. Presumed ineffectiveness of the vaccine is an important reason for non-vaccination.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Personal de Salud , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , Suiza , Estudios Transversales , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/inmunología , Personal de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Masculino , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anticuerpos Antivirales/sangre , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto Joven , Adolescente , Inmunidad Humoral , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , AncianoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to a global increase in healthcare-associated infections (HAI) among intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Whether this increase is directly attributable to COVID-19 or whether the pandemic indirectly (via staff shortages or breaches in infection prevention measures) led to this increase, remains unclear. The objectives of this study were to assess HAI incidence and to identify independent risk factors for HAI in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ICU patients. METHODS: We established a monocentric prospective HAI surveillance in the medical ICU of our tertiary care center from September 1st 2021 until August 31st 2022, during circulation of the SARS-CoV-2 delta and omicron variants. We consecutively included patients ≥ 18 years of age with an ICU length of stay of > 2 calendar days. HAI were defined according to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control definitions. HAI rate was calculated per 1,000 patient-days or device-days; risk ratios (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) for COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 patients were calculated. We used multivariable Cox regression to identify independent risk factors for HAI. As a proxy for institutional COVID-19 burden, weekly COVID-19 density (i.e. percentage of COVID-19 patients among all ICU patients) was included in the model as time-dependent co-variable. RESULTS: We included 254 patients, 64 (25.1%) COVID-19 and 190 (74.9%) non-COVID-19 patients; 83 HAI in 72 patients were recorded, thereof 45 ventilator-associated lower respiratory tract infections (VA-LRTI) (54.2%) and 18 blood stream infections (BSI) (21.6%). HAI incidence rate was 49.1/1,000 patient-days in COVID-19 and 22.5/1,000 patient-days in non-COVID-19 patients (RR 2.2, 95%-CI 1.4-3.4). This result was mainly due to different VA-LRTI rates (40.3 vs. 11.7/1,000 ventilator days, p < 0.001), whereas BSI rates were not statistically different (9.4 vs. 5.6/1,000 patient days, p = 0.27). Multivariable analysis identified COVID-19 as main risk factor for HAI development, whereas age, mechanical ventilation and COVID-19 density were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: These data from the fourth and fifth wave of the pandemic show a higher HAI incidence in COVID-19 than in non-COVID-19 ICU patients, mainly due to an increase in pulmonary infections. A diagnosis of COVID-19 was independently associated with HAI development, whereas institutional COVID-19 burden was not.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres , Infección Hospitalaria , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador , Sepsis , Humanos , Recién Nacido , COVID-19/epidemiología , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/epidemiología , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador/epidemiología , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Sepsis/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In Switzerland, the national surgical site infection (SSI) surveillance program showed a modest decrease in SSI rates for different procedures over the last decade. The study aimed to determine whether a multimodal, targeted intervention program in addition to existing SSI surveillance is associated with decreased SSI rates in the participating hospitals. METHODS: Prospective multicenter pre- and postintervention study conducted in eight Swiss acute care hospitals between 2013 and 2020. All consecutive patients > 18 years undergoing cardiac, colon, or hip/knee replacement surgery were included. The follow-up period was 30 days and one year for implant-related surgery. Patients with at least one follow-up were included. The intervention was to optimize three elements of preoperative management: (i) hair removal; (ii) skin disinfection; and (iii) perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. We compared SSI incidence rates (main outcome measure) pre- and postintervention (three years each) adjusted for potential confounders. Poisson generalized linear mixed models fitted to quarter-yearly confirmed SSIs and adjusted for baseline differences between hospitals and procedures. Adherence was routinely monitored through on-site visits. RESULTS: A total of 10 151 patients were included, with a similar median age pre- and postintervention (69.6 and IQR 60.9, 76.8 years, vs 69.5 and IQR 60.4, 76.8 years, respectively; P = 0.55) and similar proportions of females (44.8% vs. 46.1%, respectively; P = 0.227). Preintervention, 309 SSIs occurred in 5 489 patients (5.6%), compared to 226 infections in 4 662 cases (4.8%, P = 0.09) postintervention. The adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) for overall SSI after intervention implementation was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.96, P = 0.02). For cardiac surgery (n = 2 927), the aIRR of SSI was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.72, P < 0.001). For hip/knee replacement surgery (n = 4 522), the aIRR was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.52 to 1.48, P = 0.63), and for colon surgery (n = 2 702), the aIRR was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.75 to 1.14, P = 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: The SSI intervention bundle was associated with a statistically significant decrease in SSI cases. A significant association was observed for cardiac surgery. Adding a specific intervention program can add value compared to routine surveillance only. Further prevention modules might be necessary for colon and orthopedic surgery.
Asunto(s)
Hospitales , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Estudios Prospectivos , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/epidemiología , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/prevención & control , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/tratamiento farmacológico , Suiza/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections in long-term care are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. While infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines are well-defined in the acute care setting, evidence of effectiveness for long-term care facilities (LTCF) is missing. We therefore performed a systematic literature review to examine the effect of IPC measures in the long-term care setting. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed and Cochrane libraries for articles evaluating the effect of IPC measures in the LTCF setting since 2017, as earlier reviews on this topic covered the timeframe up to this date. Cross-referenced studies from identified articles and from mentioned earlier reviews were also evaluated. We included randomized-controlled trials, quasi-experimental, observational studies, and outbreak reports. The included studies were analyzed regarding study design, type of intervention, description of intervention, outcomes and quality. We distinguished between non-outbreak and outbreak settings. RESULTS: We included 74 studies, 34 (46%) in the non-outbreak setting and 40 (54%) in the outbreak setting. The most commonly studied interventions in the non-outbreak setting included the effect of hand hygiene (N = 10), oral hygiene (N = 6), antimicrobial stewardship (N = 4), vaccination of residents (N = 3), education (N = 2) as well as IPC bundles (N = 7). All but one study assessing hand hygiene interventions reported a reduction of infection rates. Further successful interventions were oral hygiene (N = 6) and vaccination of residents (N = 3). In outbreak settings, studies mostly focused on the effects of IPC bundles (N = 24) or mass testing (N = 11). In most of the studies evaluating an IPC bundle, containment of the outbreak was reported. Overall, only four articles (5.4%) were rated as high quality. CONCLUSION: In the non-outbreak setting in LTCF, especially hand hygiene and oral hygiene have a beneficial effect on infection rates. In contrast, IPC bundles, as well as mass testing seem to be promising in an outbreak setting.
Asunto(s)
Infección Hospitalaria , Cuidados a Largo Plazo , Humanos , Instituciones de Salud , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Infección Hospitalaria/prevención & control , Control de Infecciones , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & controlRESUMEN
The effects of different types of pre-existing immunity on the frequency of clinical symptoms caused by the SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection were prospectively assessed in healthcare workers during the Omicron period. Among 518 participants, hybrid immunity was associated with symptom reduction for dizziness, muscle or limb pain and headache as compared to vaccination only. Moreover, the frequencies of dizziness, cough and muscle or limb pain were lower in participants who had received a booster vaccine dose. Thus, hybrid immunity appeared to be superior in preventing specific symptoms during breakthrough infection compared to vaccination alone. A booster vaccine dose conferred additional symptom reduction.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Infección Irruptiva , Mareo , Estudios Prospectivos , Vacunación , Personal de Salud , DolorRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To describe the burden of COVID-19 in Swiss long-term care facilities in 2020, to identify its influencing factors, and to assess vaccination rates among residents and healthcare workers at the end of the vaccine campaign in Switzerland in May 2021. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Long-term care facilities from two Swiss cantons (St. Gallen / Eastern Switzerland and Vaud / Western Switzerland). METHODS: We collected numbers of COVID-19 cases and related deaths and all-cause mortality for 2020, potential risk factors at the institutional level (e.g. size, infection prevention and control measures, and resident characteristics), and vaccination rates among residents and healthcare workers. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with resident mortality in 2020. RESULTS: We enrolled 59 long-term care facilities with a median of 46 (interquartile range [IQR]: 33-69) occupied beds. In 2020, the median COVID-19 incidence was 40.2 (IQR: 0-108.6) per 100 occupied beds, with higher rates in VD (49.9%) than in SG (32.5%; p = 0.037). Overall, 22.7% of COVID-19 cases died, of which 24.8% were COVID-19-related deaths. In the univariate analysis, higher resident mortality was associated with COVID-19 rates among residents (p < 0.001) and healthcare workers (p = 0.002) and age (p = 0.013). Lower resident mortality was associated with the proportion of single rooms (p = 0.012), isolation of residents with COVID-19 in single rooms (p = 0.003), symptom screening of healthcare workers (p = 0.031), limiting the number of visits per day (p = 0.004), and pre-scheduling visits (p = 0.037). In the multivariate analysis, higher resident mortality was only associated with age (p = 0.03) and the COVID-19 rate among residents (p = 0.013). Among 2936 residents, 2042 (69.9%) received ≥1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine before 31 May 2021. Vaccine uptake among healthcare workers was 33.8%. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: COVID-19 burden was high but also highly variable in Swiss long-term care facilities. severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare workers was a modifiable factor associated with increased resident mortality. Symptom screening of healthcare workers appeared to be an effective preventive strategy and should be included in routine infection prevention and control measures. Promoting COVID-19 vaccine uptake among healthcare workers should be a priority in Swiss long-term care facilities.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Estudios Transversales , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Suiza/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Disentangling the effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants and vaccination on the occurrence of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC) is crucial to estimate and reduce the burden of PASC. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis (May/June 2022) within a prospective multicenter healthcare worker (HCW) cohort in north-eastern Switzerland. HCWs were stratified by viral variant and vaccination status at time of their first positive SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab. HCWs without positive swab and with negative serology served as controls. The sum of 18 self-reported PASC symptoms was modeled with univariable and multivariable negative-binomial regression to analyze the association of mean symptom number with viral variant and vaccination status. RESULTS: Among 2912 participants (median age: 44 years; 81.3% female), PASC symptoms were significantly more frequent after wild-type infection (estimated mean symptom number: 1.12; P < .001; median time since infection: 18.3 months), after Alpha/Delta infection (0.67 symptoms; P < .001; 6.5 months), and after Omicron BA.1 infections (0.52 symptoms; P = .005; 3.1 months) versus uninfected controls (0.39 symptoms). After Omicron BA.1 infection, the estimated mean symptom number was 0.36 for unvaccinated individuals versus 0.71 with 1-2 vaccinations (P = .028) and 0.49 with ≥3 prior vaccinations (P = .30). Adjusting for confounders, only wild-type (adjusted rate ratio [aRR]: 2.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.08-3.83) and Alpha/Delta infections (aRR: 1.93; 95% CI: 1.10-3.46) were significantly associated with the outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Previous infection with pre-Omicron variants was the strongest risk factor for PASC symptoms among our HCWs. Vaccination before Omicron BA.1 infection was not associated with a clear protective effect against PASC symptoms in this population.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Femenino , Humanos , Adulto , Masculino , COVID-19/complicaciones , SARS-CoV-2 , Estudios Transversales , Estudios Prospectivos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , VacunaciónRESUMEN
In >100,000 observations across Swiss acute-care hospitals, hand hygiene (HH) adherence significantly increased during the first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) wave. However, despite persisting COVID-19 activity, HH adherence returned to prepandemic levels over a 2-year observation period. These results indicate that training and support remains challenging.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Infección Hospitalaria , Higiene de las Manos , Humanos , Higiene de las Manos/métodos , COVID-19/prevención & control , Pandemias/prevención & control , Suiza/epidemiología , Hospitales , Adhesión a Directriz , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Infección Hospitalaria/prevención & control , Control de Infecciones/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Knowledge about protection conferred by previous Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and/or vaccination against emerging viral variants allows clinicians, epidemiologists, and health authorities to predict and reduce the future Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) burden. We investigated the risk and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 (re)infection and vaccine breakthrough infection during the Delta and Omicron waves, depending on baseline immune status and subsequent vaccinations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this prospective, multicentre cohort performed between August 2020 and March 2022, we recruited hospital employees from ten acute/nonacute healthcare networks in Eastern/Northern Switzerland. We determined immune status in September 2021 based on serology and previous SARS-CoV-2 infections/vaccinations: Group N (no immunity); Group V (twice vaccinated, uninfected); Group I (infected, unvaccinated); Group H (hybrid: infected and ≥1 vaccination). Date and symptoms of (re)infections and subsequent (booster) vaccinations were recorded until March 2022. We compared the time to positive SARS-CoV-2 swab and number of symptoms according to immune status, viral variant (i.e., Delta-dominant before December 27, 2021; Omicron-dominant on/after this date), and subsequent vaccinations, adjusting for exposure/behavior variables. Among 2,595 participants (median follow-up 171 days), we observed 764 (29%) (re)infections, thereof 591 during the Omicron period. Compared to group N, the hazard ratio (HR) for (re)infection was 0.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22 to 0.50, p < 0.001) for V, 0.25 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.57, p = 0.001) for I, and 0.04 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.10, p < 0.001) for H in the Delta period. HRs substantially increased during the Omicron period for all groups; in multivariable analyses, only belonging to group H was associated with protection (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.52, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.77, p = 0.001); booster vaccination was associated with reduction of breakthrough infection risk in groups V (aHR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.85, p = 0.001) and H (aHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00, p = 0.048), largely observed in the early Omicron period. Group H (versus N, risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.97, p = 0.021) and participants with booster vaccination (versus nonboosted, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.88, p < 0.001) reported less symptoms during infection. Important limitations are that SARS-CoV-2 swab results were self-reported and that results on viral variants were inferred from the predominating strain circulating in the community at that time, rather than sequencing. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that hybrid immunity and booster vaccination are associated with a reduced risk and reduced symptom number of SARS-CoV-2 infection during Delta- and Omicron-dominant periods. For previously noninfected individuals, booster vaccination might reduce the risk of symptomatic Omicron infection, although this benefit seems to wane over time.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas Virales , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Estudios Prospectivos , Suiza/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunación/métodosRESUMEN
At our tertiary children's hospital, infections with newly detected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) among children attending primary (age 6-12 years) and secondary school (age 13-16 years) nearly doubled in 2018 compared to previous years. This observation initiated an epidemiological outbreak investigation including phenotypic (susceptibility testing) and genotypic (whole genome sequencing) characterization of the isolates. In addition, a cross-sectional study was conducted to determine source of the outbreak, colonization frequency and to identify risk factors for transmission using a questionnaire. As a result, 49 individuals were detected with 57 corresponding isolates. Based on the case definition combined with whole genome sequencing, a core cluster was identified that shared common genetic features and a similar antimicrobial susceptibility pattern (efflux-mediated macrolide resistance, tetracycline susceptibility along with presence of Panton-Valentine leukocidin). Epidemiologic evaluation identified a distinct school as a common risk factor. However, the source of the clustered infections within that school could not be further specified. No further cases could be detected after decolonization of infected and colonized children.
Asunto(s)
Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina , Humanos , Niño , Adolescente , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina/genética , Antibacterianos/farmacología , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Estudios Transversales , Suiza/epidemiología , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana , Macrólidos , Brotes de Enfermedades , Instituciones AcadémicasRESUMEN
As of December 2021, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has claimed millions of deaths and caused disruptions in health systems around the world. The short- and long-term effects of COVID-19 on antimicrobial resistance (AMR), which was already a global threat before the pandemic, are manifold and complex. In this expert review, we summarize how COVID-19 might be affecting AMR in the short term (by influencing the key determinants antibiotic use, infection control practices and international/local mobility) and which additional factors might play a role in the long term. Whereas reduced outpatient antibiotic use in high-income countries, increased awareness for hand hygiene, and reduced mobility have likely mitigated the emergence and spread of AMR in the short term, factors such as overuse of antibiotics in COVID-19 patients, shortage of personal protective equipment, lack of qualified healthcare staff, and patient overcrowding have presumably facilitated its propagation. Unsurprisingly, international and national AMR surveillance data for 2020 show ambiguous trends. Although disruptions in antibiotic stewardship programs, AMR surveillance and research might promote the spread of AMR, other developments could prove beneficial to the cause in the long term. These factors include the increased public awareness for infectious diseases and infection control issues, the strengthening of the One Health perspective as outlined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the unprecedented number of international research collaborations and platforms. These factors could even serve as leverage and provide opportunities to better combat AMR in the future.
RESUMEN
A secure web-based electronic tool was developed and implemented to record adherence to hand hygiene during routine care and to provide direct feedback including anonymized benchmarking. It was found suitable for documenting hand hygiene improvements in a local campaign and following rollout to other institutions in 2013, the tool is currently used in >100 hospitals in Switzerland and will play a major part in upcoming national hand hygiene campaigns.
RESUMEN
Objectives: During the COVID-19 pandemic, few scientific congresses have been held on-site. We prospectively evaluated the safety concept of the congress of the Swiss Societies of Infectious Diseases and Hospital Hygiene. Methods: The congress was held in Geneva (Switzerland) while local COVID-19 incidence (with SARS-CoV-2 wild type circulating) was 65/100,000 population (September 2020). A rigorous safety concept was implemented. Congress attendees filled out a questionnaire to assess risk perception, exposures, symptoms and diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 before, during and after the congress. Dried blood spots were taken on-site and 4 weeks later to detect SARS-CoV-2 seroconversions. Results: Of 365 congress attendees, 196 (54%) either answered the questionnaire (N = 150) or provided baseline and follow-up blood samples (N = 168). None of the participants reported a positive PCR in the 2 weeks after the congress. Five of 168 (3%) participants were seropositive at follow-up, all of which had already been positive at baseline. Conclusion: Findings indicate that congresses with a rigorous safety concept may take place, even in areas with moderately-high COVID-19 activity. Whether this holds true in vaccinated populations and with more transmissible viral variants circulating remains unclear.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Pandemias , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
This article reviews the available evidence on the effectiveness of gloves in preventing infection during care provided to patients under contact precautions, and analyses the risks and benefits of their systematic use. Although hand hygiene with alcohol-based handrub was shown to be effective in preventing nosocomial infections, many publications put the effectiveness and usefulness of gloves into perspective. Instead, literature and various unpublished experiences point towards reduced hand hygiene compliance and increased risk of spreading pathogens with routine glove use. Therefore, hospitals should emphasise hand hygiene in their healthcare staff and, instead of the routine use of gloves when caring for patients under contact precautions, limit their use to the indications of standard precautions, i.e., mainly for contact with body fluids. Wide and easy access to alcohol-based handrub and continual teaching are essential. If such conditions are met and adherence to hand hygiene is excellent and regularly assessed, the routine use of gloves for patients under contact precautions seems no longer indicated.
Asunto(s)
Infección Hospitalaria , Higiene de las Manos , Infección Hospitalaria/prevención & control , Guantes Protectores , Adhesión a Directriz , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Control de InfeccionesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is insufficient evidence regarding the role of respirators in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analysed the impact of filtering facepiece class 2 (FFP2) versus surgical masks on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition among Swiss healthcare workers (HCW). METHODS: Our prospective multicentre cohort enrolled HCW from June to August 2020. Participants were asked about COVID-19 risk exposures/behaviours, including preferentially worn mask type when caring for COVID-19 patients outside of aerosol-generating procedures. The impact of FFP2 on (1) self-reported SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal PCR/rapid antigen tests captured during weekly surveys, and (2) SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion between baseline and January/February 2021 was assessed. RESULTS: We enrolled 3259 participants from nine healthcare institutions, whereof 716 (22%) preferentially used FFP2. Among these, 81/716 (11%) reported a SARS-CoV-2-positive swab, compared to 352/2543 (14%) surgical mask users; seroconversion was documented in 85/656 (13%) FFP2 and 426/2255 (19%) surgical mask users. Adjusted for baseline characteristics, COVID-19 exposure, and risk behaviour, FFP2 use was non-significantly associated with decreased risk for SARS-CoV-2-positive swab (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-1.0) and seroconversion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0); household exposure was the strongest risk factor (aHR 10.1, 95% CI 7.5-13.5; aOR 5.0, 95% CI 3.9-6.5). In subgroup analysis, FFP2 use was clearly protective among those with frequent (> 20 patients) COVID-19 exposure (aHR 0.7 for positive swab, 95% CI 0.5-0.8; aOR 0.6 for seroconversion, 95% CI 0.4-1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Respirators compared to surgical masks may convey additional protection from SARS-CoV-2 for HCW with frequent exposure to COVID-19 patients.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/prevención & control , Personal de Salud , Máscaras , Dispositivos de Protección Respiratoria , Adolescente , Adulto , Aerosoles , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Control de Infecciones/métodos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Seroconversión , Suiza , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the adoption of strict infection prevention and control measures, many hospitals have reported outbreaks of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) during the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Following an outbreak of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) in our institution, we sought to systematically analyse characteristics of MDRO outbreaks in times of COVID-19, focussing on contributing factors and specific challenges in controlling these outbreaks. METHODS: We describe results of our own CRAB outbreak investigation and performed a systematic literature review for MDRO (including Candida auris) outbreaks which occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic (between December 2019 and March 2021). Search terms were related to pathogens/resistance mechanisms AND COVID-19. We summarized outbreak characteristics in a narrative synthesis and contrasted contributing factors with implemented control measures. RESULTS: The CRAB outbreak occurred in our intensive care units between September and December 2020 and comprised 10 patients (thereof seven with COVID-19) within two distinct genetic clusters (both ST2 carrying OXA-23). Both clusters presumably originated from COVID-19 patients transferred from the Balkans. Including our outbreak, we identified 17 reports, mostly caused by Candida auris (n = 6) or CRAB (n = 5), with an overall patient mortality of 35% (68/193). All outbreaks involved intensive care settings. Non-adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) or hand hygiene (n = 11), PPE shortage (n = 8) and high antibiotic use (n = 8) were most commonly reported as contributing factors, followed by environmental contamination (n = 7), prolonged critical illness (n = 7) and lack of trained HCW (n = 7). Implemented measures mainly focussed on PPE/hand hygiene audits (n = 9), environmental cleaning/disinfection (n = 9) and enhanced patient screening (n = 8). Comparing potentially modifiable risk factors and control measures, we found the largest discrepancies in the areas of PPE shortage (risk factor in 8 studies, addressed in 2 studies) and patient overcrowding (risk factor in 5 studies, addressed in 0 studies). CONCLUSIONS: Reported MDRO outbreaks during the COVID-19 pandemic were most often caused by CRAB (including our outbreak) and C. auris. Inadequate PPE/hand hygiene adherence, PPE shortage, and high antibiotic use were the most commonly reported potentially modifiable factors contributing to the outbreaks. These findings should be considered for the prevention of MDRO outbreaks during future COVID-19 waves.