Containment of COVID-19 outbreak at a veterans affairs community living center.

Asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic staff and residents likely contribute to widespread transmission of COVID-19 in long-term care settings. Here, we describe the successful containment of a COVID-19 outbreak on one floor of a 163-bed Veterans Affairs (VA) Community Living Center (CLC). Testing using nasopharyngeal swabs with a rapid turn-around-time identified 3 of 28 (11%) residents and 2 of 41 (5%) healthcare personnel (HCP) with COVID-19. Both HCP likely worked on the floor while pre-symptomatic. When one HCP reported a cough to the secondary (employee) screening clinic, she was erroneously advised to work. Protocols to limit the risk for HCP to import COVID-19 were reinforced with Community Living Center staff as well as with personnel in secondary screening. Further, the CLC implemented an expanded screening tool that assessed residents for typical and atypical symptoms of COVID-19. No further cases of COVID-19 were detected on the CLC floor in the subsequent 6 weeks. Swift recognition and response helped contain the outbreak and prevent further COVID-19 infections among other residents and staff.

Investigation of a cluster of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in a hospital administration building.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate a cluster of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in employees working on 1 floor of a hospital administration building. METHODS: Contact tracing was performed to identify potential exposures and all employees were tested for SARS-CoV-2. Whole-genome sequencing was performed to determine the relatedness of SARS-CoV-2 samples from infected personnel and from control cases in the healthcare system with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the same period. Carbon dioxide levels were measured during a workday to assess adequacy of ventilation; readings >800 parts per million (ppm) were considered an indication of suboptimal ventilation. To assess the potential for airborne transmission, DNA-barcoded aerosols were released, and real-time polymerase chain reaction was used to quantify particles recovered from air samples in multiple locations. RESULTS: Between December 22, 2020, and January 8, 2021, 17 coworkers tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, including 13 symptomatic and 4 asymptomatic individuals. Of the 5 cluster SARS-CoV-2 samples sequenced, 3 were genetically related, but these employees denied higher-risk contacts with one another. None of the sequences from the cluster were genetically related to the 17 control sequences of SARS-CoV-2. Carbon dioxide levels increased during a workday but never exceeded 800 ppm. DNA-barcoded aerosol particles were dispersed from the sites of release to locations throughout the floor; 20% of air samples had >1 log10 particles. CONCLUSIONS: In a hospital administration building outbreak, sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 confirmed transmission among coworkers. Transmission occurred despite the absence of higher-risk exposures and in a setting with adequate ventilation based on monitoring of carbon dioxide levels.

Airflow Patterns in Double-Occupancy Patient Rooms May Contribute to Roommate-to-Roommate Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients are at risk to acquire severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from roommates with unrecognized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We hypothesized that airflow patterns might contribute to SARS-CoV-2 transmission in double-occupancy patient rooms. METHODS: A device emitting condensed moisture was used to identify airflow patterns in double-occupancy patient rooms. Simulations were conducted to assess transfer of fluorescent microspheres, 5% sodium chloride aerosol, and aerosolized bacteriophage MS2 between patient beds 3 meters apart and to assess the effectiveness of privacy curtains and portable air cleaners in reducing transfer. RESULTS: Air flowed from inlet vents in the center of the room to an outlet vent near the door, resulting in air currents flowing toward the bed adjacent to the outlet vent. Fluorescent microspheres (212-250-µm diameter), 5% sodium chloride aerosol, and aerosolized bacteriophage MS2 released from the inner bed were carried on air currents toward the bed adjacent to the outlet vent. Closing curtains between the patient beds reduced transfer of each of the particles. Operation of a portable air cleaner reduced aerosol transfer to the bed adjacent to the outlet vent but did not offer a benefit over closing the curtains alone, and in some situations, resulted in an increase in aerosol exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Airflow patterns in double-occupancy patient rooms may contribute to risk for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 between roommates. Keeping curtains closed between beds may be beneficial in reducing risk.

Use of carbon dioxide measurements to assess ventilation in an acute care hospital.

Poorly ventilated indoor spaces pose a risk for airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2. We measured carbon dioxide levels in a multiple areas in an acute care hospital to assess the adequacy of ventilation. Carbon dioxide levels remained below 800 parts per million in most areas but exceeded this level in a small conference room with 8 occupants, an office with 3 occupants, and a bathroom with 2 occupants. Measuring carbon dioxide levels could provide a simple means for healthcare facilities to assess the adequacy of ventilation.

Use of whole-genome sequencing to investigate a cluster of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in emergency department personnel.

Several recent reports have raised concern that infected coworkers may be an important source of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) acquisition by healthcare personnel. In a suspected outbreak among emergency department personnel, sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 confirmed transmission among coworkers. The suspected 6-person outbreak included 2 distinct transmission clusters and 1 unrelated infection.

Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a Patient Transport Van.

We report 2 episodes of potential SARS-CoV-2 transmission from infected van drivers to passengers despite masking and physical distancing. Whole-genome sequencing confirmed relatedness of driver and passenger SARS-CoV-2. With the heater operating, fluorescent microspheres were transported by airflow >3 meters from the front to the back of the van.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Inpatient and Outpatient Settings in a Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: Health care personnel and patients are at risk to acquire severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in health care settings, including in outpatient clinics and ancillary care areas. METHODS: Between May 1, 2020, and January 31, 2021, we identified clusters of 3 or more coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases in which nosocomial transmission was suspected in a Veterans Affairs health care system. Asymptomatic employees and patients were tested for SARS-CoV-2 if they were identified as being at risk through contact tracing investigations; for 7 clusters, all personnel and/or patients in a shared work area were tested regardless of exposure history. Whole-genome sequencing was performed to determine the relatedness of SARS-CoV-2 samples from the clusters and from control employees and patients. RESULTS: Of 14 clusters investigated, 7 occurred in community-based outpatient clinics, 1 in the emergency department, 3 in ancillary care areas, and 3 on hospital medical/surgical wards that did not provide care for patients with known COVID-19 infection. Eighty-one of 82 (99%) symptomatic COVID-19 cases and 31 of 35 (89%) asymptomatic cases occurred in health care personnel. Sequencing analysis provided support for several transmission events between coworkers and in 2 cases supported transmission from health care personnel to patients. There were no documented transmissions from patients to personnel. CONCLUSIONS: Clusters of COVID-19 with nosocomial transmission predominantly involved health care personnel and often occurred in outpatient clinics and ancillary care areas. There is a need for improved measures to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by health care personnel in inpatient and outpatient settings.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid contamination of surfaces on a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ward and intensive care unit.

On coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) wards, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid was frequently detected on high-touch surfaces, floors, and socks inside patient rooms. Contamination of floors and shoes was common outside patient rooms on the COVID-19 wards but decreased after improvements in floor cleaning and disinfection were implemented.

What are the sources of exposure in healthcare personnel with coronavirus disease 2019 infection?

In our facility, 25% of personnel with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had a higher-risk exposure to an infected patient or co-worker and 14% reported a higher-risk exposure in the community. All higher-risk exposures to infected patients occurred on non-COVID-19 units, often when there was a delay in diagnosis because COVID-19 was not initially suspected. Higher-risk exposures to co-workers with COVID-19 often involved lapses in compliance with masking in nonpatient care areas such as nursing stations and staff work or break rooms.

Comparison of ethanol hand sanitizer versus moist towelette packets for mealtime patient hand hygiene.

To facilitate patient hand hygiene, there is a need for easy-to-use products. In a survey of 100 patients, a single-use ethanol hand sanitizer packet took less time to access than a single-use moist towelette packet (3 vs 23 seconds) and was preferred by 74% of patients for mealtime hand hygiene. Performance of patient hand hygiene increased when a reminder was provided at the time of meal tray delivery.

A randomized trial to determine the impact of a 5 moments for patient hand hygiene educational intervention on patient hand hygiene.

We conducted a randomized trial of a simple educational intervention encouraging patients to perform hand hygiene at 5 specific moments, including on entry of health care personnel into their room as a reminder of the importance of hand hygiene. The intervention resulted in a significant increase in patient hand hygiene.

Fluoroquinolone-Resistant Escherichia coli Infections After Transrectal Biopsy of the Prostate in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: Recent reports suggest that infections due to fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli (E. coli) are an increasingly common complication of transrectal biopsy of the prostate (TBP) in the United States. A better understanding of the magnitude and scope of these infections is needed to guide prevention efforts. Our objective is to determine whether the incidence of infections due to fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli after TBP has increased nationwide in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System and to identify risk factors for infection. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, observational cohort study and a nested case-control study within the US Deparment of Veterans Affairs Healthcare System. The primary outcomes were the incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) and bacteremia with E. coli and with fluoroquinolone- resistant E. coli strains within 30 days after TBP. Secondary endpoints focused on the correlation between fluoroquinolone-resistance in all urinary E. coli isolates and post-TBP infection and risk factors for infection due to fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli infection. RESULTS: 245 618 patients undergoing 302 168 TBP procedures from 2000 through 2013 were included in the cohort study, and 59 469 patients undergoing TBP from 2011 through 2013 were included in the nested case-control study. Between 2000 and 2013, there was a 5-fold increase in the incidence of E. coli UTI (0.18%-0.93%) and a 4-fold increase in the incidence of E. coli bacteremia (0.04%-0.18%) after TBP that was attributable to an increase in the incidence of fluoroquinolone- resistant E. coli UTI (0.03%-0.75%) and bacteremia (0.01%-0.14%). The increasing incidence of fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli infections after TBP occurred in parallel with increasing rates of fluoroquinolone-resistance in all urinary E. coli isolates. By multivariable logistic regression analysis, independent risk factors for fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli UTI after TBP included diabetes mellitus, fluoroquinolone exposure, prior hospitalization, and prior cultures with fluoroquinolone-resistant gram-negative bacilli. CONCLUSION: In the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, the incidence of E. coli infection after TBP has increased significantly since 2000 due to a dramatic rise in infections with fluoroquinolone- resistant E. coli.

Are health care personnel trained in correct use of personal protective equipment?

Effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE) is essential to protect personnel and patients in health care settings. However, in a survey of 222 health care personnel, PPE training was often suboptimal with no requirement for demonstration of proficiency. Fourteen percent of physicians reported no previous training in use of PPE.

Contamination of Health Care Personnel During Removal of Personal Protective Equipment.

IMPORTANCE: Contamination of the skin and clothing of health care personnel during removal of personal protective equipment (PPE) contributes to dissemination of pathogens and places personnel at risk for infection. OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency and sites of contamination on the skin and clothing of personnel during PPE removal and to evaluate the effect of an intervention on the frequency of contamination. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a point-prevalence study and quasi-experimental intervention from October 28, 2014, through March 31, 2015. Data analysis began November 17, 2014, and ended April 21, 2015. Participants included a convenience sample of health care personnel from 4 Northeast Ohio hospitals who conducted simulations of contaminated PPE removal using fluorescent lotion and a cohort of health care personnel from 7 study units in 1 medical center that participated in a quasi-experimental intervention that included education and practice in removal of contaminated PPE with immediate visual feedback based on fluorescent lotion contamination of skin and clothing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the frequency and sites of contamination on skin and clothing of personnel after removal of contaminated gloves or gowns at baseline vs after the intervention. A secondary end point focused on the correlation between contamination of skin with fluorescent lotion and bacteriophage MS2, a nonpathogenic, nonenveloped virus. RESULTS: Of 435 glove and gown removal simulations, contamination of skin or clothing with fluorescent lotion occurred in 200 (46.0%), with a similar frequency of contamination among the 4 hospitals (range, 42.5%-50.3%). Contamination occurred more frequently during removal of contaminated gloves than gowns (52.9% vs 37.8%, P = .002) and when lapses in technique were observed vs not observed (70.3% vs 30.0%, P < .001). The intervention resulted in a reduction in skin and clothing contamination during glove and gown removal (60.0% before the intervention vs 18.9% after, P < .001) that was sustained after 1 and 3 months (12.0% at both time points, P < .001 compared with before the intervention). During simulations of contaminated glove removal, the frequency of skin contamination was similar with fluorescent lotion and bacteriophage MS2 (58.0% vs 52.0%, P = .45). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Contamination of the skin and clothing of health care personnel occurs frequently during removal of contaminated gloves or gowns. Educational interventions that include practice with immediate visual feedback on skin and clothing contamination can significantly reduce the risk of contamination during removal of PPE.

Four Moments for Patient Hand Hygiene: A Patient-Centered, Provider-Facilitated Model to Improve Patient Hand Hygiene.

We found that a majority of hospitalized patients were aware of the importance of hand hygiene, but observations indicated that performance of hand hygiene was uncommon. An intervention in which healthcare personnel facilitated hand hygiene at specific moments significantly increased performance of hand hygiene by patients.

Sustained increase in resident meal time hand hygiene through an interdisciplinary intervention engaging long-term care facility residents and staff.

Hand hygiene by patients may prevent acquisition and dissemination of health care-associated pathogens, but limited efforts have been made to engage patients in hand hygiene interventions. In a long-term care facility, we found that residents were aware of the importance of hand hygiene, but barriers, such as inaccessible products or difficult to use products, limited compliance. A dramatic and sustained improvement in meal time hand hygiene was achieved through engagement of staff and residents.

Comparison of hand hygiene monitoring using the 5 Moments for Hand Hygiene method versus a wash in-wash out method.

BACKGROUND: One strategy to promote improved hand hygiene is to monitor health care workers' adherence to recommended practices and give feedback. For feasibility of monitoring, many health care facilities assess hand hygiene practices on room entry and exit (wash in-wash out). It is not known if the wash in-wash out method is comparable with a more comprehensive approach, such as the World Health Organization's My 5 Moments for Hand Hygiene method. METHODS: During a 1-month period, a surreptitious observer monitored hand hygiene compliance simultaneously using the wash in-wash out and My 5 Moments for Hand Hygiene methods. RESULTS: For 283 health care worker room entries, the methods resulted in similar rates of hand hygiene compliance (70% vs 72%, respectively). The wash in-wash out method required 148 hand hygiene events not required by the My 5 Moments for Hand Hygiene method (ie, before and after room entry with no patient or environmental contact) while not providing monitoring for 89 hand hygiene opportunities in patient rooms. CONCLUSION: The monitoring methods resulted in similar overall rates of hand hygiene compliance. Use of the wash in-wash out method should include ongoing education and intermittent assessment of hand hygiene before clean procedures and after body fluid exposure in patient rooms.