Effectiveness of a bivalent mRNA vaccine dose against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection among U.S. Healthcare personnel, September 2022-May 2023.

BACKGROUND: Bivalent mRNA vaccines were recommended since September 2022. However, coverage with a recent vaccine dose has been limited, and there are few robust estimates of bivalent VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19). We estimated VE of a bivalent mRNA vaccine dose against COVID-19 among eligible U.S. healthcare personnel who had previously received monovalent mRNA vaccine doses. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study in 22 U.S. states, and enrolled healthcare personnel with COVID-19 (case-participants) or without COVID-19 (control-participants) during September 2022-May 2023. Participants were considered eligible for a bivalent mRNA dose if they had received 2-4 monovalent (ancestral-strain) mRNA vaccine doses, and were ≥67 days after the most recent vaccine dose. We estimated VE of a bivalent mRNA dose using conditional logistic regression, accounting for matching by region and four-week calendar period. We adjusted estimates for age group, sex, race and ethnicity, educational level, underlying health conditions, community COVID-19 exposure, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and days since the last monovalent mRNA dose. RESULTS: Among 3,647 healthcare personnel, 1,528 were included as case-participants and 2,119 as control-participants. Participants received their last monovalent mRNA dose a median of 404 days previously; 1,234 (33.8%) also received a bivalent mRNA dose a median of 93 days previously. Overall, VE of a bivalent dose was 34.1% (95% CI, 22.6%-43.9%) against COVID-19 and was similar by product, days since last monovalent dose, number of prior doses, age group, and presence of underlying health conditions. However, VE declined from 54.8% (95% CI, 40.7%-65.6%) after 7-59 days to 21.6% (95% CI 5.6%-34.9%) after ≥60 days. CONCLUSIONS: Bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines initially conferred approximately 55% protection against COVID-19 among U.S. healthcare personnel. However, protection waned after two months. These findings indicate moderate initial protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection by remaining up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccines.

Residential social vulnerability among healthcare personnel with and without severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in Five US states, May-December 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize residential social vulnerability among healthcare personnel (HCP) and evaluate its association with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: This study analyzed data collected in May-December 2020 through sentinel and population-based surveillance in healthcare facilities in Colorado, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, and Oregon. PARTICIPANTS: Data from 2,168 HCP (1,571 cases and 597 controls from the same facilities) were analyzed. METHODS: HCP residential addresses were linked to the social vulnerability index (SVI) at the census tract level, which represents a ranking of community vulnerability to emergencies based on 15 US Census variables. The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection, confirmed by positive antigen or real-time reverse-transcriptase- polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test on nasopharyngeal swab. Significant differences by SVI in participant characteristics were assessed using the Fisher exact test. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between case status and SVI, controlling for HCP role and patient care activities, were estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Significantly higher proportions of certified nursing assistants (48.0%) and medical assistants (44.1%) resided in high SVI census tracts, compared to registered nurses (15.9%) and physicians (11.6%). HCP cases were more likely than controls to live in high SVI census tracts (aOR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.37-2.26). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that residing in more socially vulnerable census tracts may be associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection risk among HCP and that residential vulnerability differs by HCP role. Efforts to safeguard the US healthcare workforce and advance health equity should address the social determinants that drive racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic health disparities.

Effectiveness of a Messenger RNA Vaccine Booster Dose Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 Among US Healthcare Personnel, October 2021-July 2022.

Background: Protection against symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) can limit transmission and the risk of post-COVID conditions, and is particularly important among healthcare personnel. However, lower vaccine effectiveness (VE) has been reported since predominance of the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant. Methods: We evaluated the VE of a monovalent messenger RNA (mRNA) booster dose against COVID-19 from October 2021 to June 2022 among US healthcare personnel. After matching case-participants with COVID-19 to control-participants by 2-week period and site, we used conditional logistic regression to estimate the VE of a booster dose compared with completing only 2 mRNA doses >150 days previously, adjusted for multiple covariates. Results: Among 3279 case-participants and 3998 control-participants who had completed 2 mRNA doses, we estimated that the VE of a booster dose against COVID-19 declined from 86% (95% confidence interval, 81%-90%) during Delta predominance to 65% (58%-70%) during Omicron predominance. During Omicron predominance, VE declined from 73% (95% confidence interval, 67%-79%) 14-60 days after the booster dose, to 32% (4%-52%) ≥120 days after a booster dose. We found that VE was similar by age group, presence of underlying health conditions, and pregnancy status on the test date, as well as among immunocompromised participants. Conclusions: A booster dose conferred substantial protection against COVID-19 among healthcare personnel. However, VE was lower during Omicron predominance, and waning effectiveness was observed 4 months after booster dose receipt during this period. Our findings support recommendations to stay up to date on recommended doses of COVID-19 vaccines for all those eligible.

Occupational risk factors for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare personnel: A 6-month prospective analysis of the COVID-19 Prevention in Emory Healthcare Personnel (COPE) Study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare personnel (HCP) and to assess occupational risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: Prospective cohort of healthcare personnel (HCP) followed for 6 months from May through December 2020. SETTING: Large academic healthcare system including 4 hospitals and affiliated clinics in Atlanta, Georgia. PARTICIPANTS: HCP, including those with and without direct patient-care activities, working during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Incident SARS-CoV-2 infections were determined through serologic testing for SARS-CoV-2 IgG at enrollment, at 3 months, and at 6 months. HCP completed monthly surveys regarding occupational activities. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify occupational factors that increased the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: Of the 304 evaluable HCP that were seronegative at enrollment, 26 (9%) seroconverted for SARS-CoV-2 IgG by 6 months. Overall, 219 participants (73%) self-identified as White race, 119 (40%) were nurses, and 121 (40%) worked on inpatient medical-surgical floors. In a multivariable analysis, HCP who identified as Black race were more likely to seroconvert than HCP who identified as White (odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-14.2). Increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection was not identified for any occupational activity, including spending >50% of a typical shift at a patient's bedside, working in a COVID-19 unit, or performing or being present for aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs). CONCLUSIONS: In our study cohort of HCP working in an academic healthcare system, <10% had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection over 6 months. No specific occupational activities were identified as increasing risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Practices and activities among healthcare personnel with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection working in different healthcare settings-ten Emerging Infections Program sites, April-November 2020.

Healthcare personnel with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection were interviewed to describe activities and practices in and outside the workplace. Among 2,625 healthcare personnel, workplace-related factors that may increase infection risk were more common among nursing-home personnel than hospital personnel, whereas selected factors outside the workplace were more common among hospital personnel.

Occupational risk factors for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare personnel: A cross-sectional analysis of subjects enrolled in the COVID-19 Prevention in Emory Healthcare Personnel (COPE) study.

Among 353 healthcare personnel in a longitudinal cohort in 4 hospitals in Atlanta, Georgia (May-June 2020), 23 (6.5%) had severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. Spending >50% of a typical shift at the bedside (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.2-10.5) and black race (OR, 8.4; 95% CI, 2.7-27.4) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.

Risk Factors for SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among US Healthcare Personnel, May-December 2020.

To determine risk factors for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) among US healthcare personnel (HCP), we conducted a case-control analysis. We collected data about activities outside the workplace and COVID-19 patient care activities from HCP with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test results (cases) and from HCP with negative test results (controls) in healthcare facilities in 5 US states. We used conditional logistic regression to calculate adjusted matched odds ratios and 95% CIs for exposures. Among 345 cases and 622 controls, factors associated with risk were having close contact with persons with COVID-19 outside the workplace, having close contact with COVID-19 patients in the workplace, and assisting COVID-19 patients with activities of daily living. Protecting HCP from COVID-19 may require interventions that reduce their exposures outside the workplace and improve their ability to more safely assist COVID-19 patients with activities of daily living.

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.).

Molecular epidemiology of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales in Thailand, 2016-2018.

BACKGROUND: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) is a global threat. Enterobacterales develops carbapenem resistance through several mechanisms, including the production of carbapenemases. We aim to describe the prevalence of Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) with and without carbapenemase production and distribution of carbapenemase-producing (CP) genes in Thailand using 2016-2018 data from a national antimicrobial resistance surveillance system developed by the Thailand National Institute of Health (NIH). METHODS: CRE was defined as any Enterobacterales resistant to ertapenem, imipenem, or meropenem. Starting in 2016, 25 tertiary care hospitals from the five regions of Thailand submitted the first CRE isolate from each specimen type and patient admission to Thailand NIH, accompanied by a case report form with patient information. NIH performed confirmatory identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing and performed multiplex polymerase chain reaction testing to detect CP-genes. Using 2016-2018 data, we calculated proportions of CP-CRE, stratified by specimen type, organism, and CP-gene using SAS 9.4. RESULTS: Overall, 4,296 presumed CRE isolates were submitted to Thailand NIH; 3,946 (93%) were confirmed CRE. Urine (n = 1622, 41%) and sputum (n = 1380, 35%) were the most common specimen types, while blood only accounted for 323 (8%) CRE isolates. The most common organism was Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 2660, 72%), followed by Escherichia coli (n = 799, 22%). The proportion of CP-CRE was high for all organism types (range: 85-98%). Of all CRE isolates, 2909 (80%) had one CP-gene and 629 (17%) had > 1 CP-gene. New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase (NDM) was the most common CP-gene, present in 2392 (65%) CRE isolates. K. pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) and Verona integron-encoded metallo-ß-lactamase (VIM) genes were not detected among any isolates. CONCLUSION: CP genes were found in a high proportion (97%) of CRE isolates from hospitals across Thailand. The prevalence of NDM and OXA-48-like genes in Thailand is consistent with pattern seen in Southeast Asia, but different from that in the United States and other regions. As carbapenemase testing is not routinely performed in Thailand, hospital staff should consider treating all patients with CRE with enhanced infection control measures; in line with CDC recommendation for enhanced infection control measures for CP-CRE because of their high propensity to spread.

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.

Assessment of the Appropriateness of Antimicrobial Use in US Hospitals.

Importance: Hospital antimicrobial consumption data are widely available; however, large-scale assessments of the quality of antimicrobial use in US hospitals are limited. Objective: To evaluate the appropriateness of antimicrobial use for hospitalized patients treated for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) or urinary tract infection (UTI) present at admission or for patients who had received fluoroquinolone or intravenous vancomycin treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included data from a prevalence survey of hospitalized patients in 10 Emerging Infections Program sites. Random samples of inpatients on hospital survey dates from May 1 to September 30, 2015, were identified. Medical record data were collected for eligible patients with 1 or more of 4 treatment events (CAP, UTI, fluoroquinolone treatment, or vancomycin treatment), which were selected on the basis of common infection types reported and antimicrobials given to patients in the prevalence survey. Data were analyzed from August 1, 2017, to May 31, 2020. Exposure: Antimicrobial treatment for CAP or UTI or with fluoroquinolones or vancomycin. Main Outcomes and Measures: The percentage of antimicrobial use that was supported by medical record data (including infection signs and symptoms, microbiology test results, and antimicrobial treatment duration) or for which some aspect of use was unsupported. Unsupported antimicrobial use was defined as (1) use of antimicrobials to which the pathogen was not susceptible, use in the absence of documented infection signs or symptoms, or use without supporting microbiologic data; (2) use of antimicrobials that deviated from recommended guidelines; or (3) use that exceeded the recommended duration. Results: Of 12 299 patients, 1566 patients (12.7%) in 192 hospitals were included; the median age was 67 years (interquartile range, 53-79 years), and 864 (55.2%) were female. A total of 219 patients (14.0%) were included in the CAP analysis, 452 (28.9%) in the UTI analysis, 550 (35.1%) in the fluoroquinolone analysis, and 403 (25.7%) in the vancomycin analysis; 58 patients (3.7%) were included in both fluoroquinolone and vancomycin analyses. Overall, treatment was unsupported for 876 of 1566 patients (55.9%; 95% CI, 53.5%-58.4%): 110 of 403 (27.3%) who received vancomycin, 256 of 550 (46.6%) who received fluoroquinolones, 347 of 452 (76.8%) with a diagnosis of UTI, and 174 of 219 (79.5%) with a diagnosis of CAP. Among patients with unsupported treatment, common reasons included excessive duration (103 of 174 patients with CAP [59.2%]) and lack of documented infection signs or symptoms (174 of 347 patients with UTI [50.1%]). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that standardized assessments of hospital antimicrobial prescribing quality can be used to estimate the appropriateness of antimicrobial use in large groups of hospitals. These assessments, performed over time, may inform evaluations of the effects of antimicrobial stewardship initiatives nationally.

Rates and causative pathogens of surgical site infections attributed to liver transplant procedures and other hepatic, biliary, or pancreatic procedures, 2015-2018.

Liver transplant recipients are at high risk for surgical site infections (SSIs). Limited data are available on SSI epidemiology following liver transplant procedures (LTPs). We analyzed data on SSIs from 2015 to 2018 reported to CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network to determine rates, pathogen distribution, and antimicrobial resistance after LTPs and other hepatic, biliary, or pancreatic procedures (BILIs). LTP and BILI SSI rates were 5.7% and 5.9%, respectively. The odds of SSI after LTP were lower than after BILI (adjusted odds ratio = 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.57-0.85). Among LTP SSIs, 43.1% were caused by Enterococcus spp., 17.2% by Candida spp., and 15.0% by coagulase-negative Staphylococcus spp. (CNS). Percentages of SSIs caused by Enterococcus faecium or CNS were higher after LTPs than BILIs, whereas percentages of SSIs caused by Enterobacteriaceae, Enterococcus faecalis, or viridans streptococci were higher after BILIs. Antimicrobial resistance was common in LTP SSI pathogens, including E. faecium (69.4% vancomycin resistant); Escherichia coli (68.8% fluoroquinolone non-susceptible and 44.7% extended spectrum cephalosporin [ESC] non-susceptible); and Klebsiella pneumoniae and K. oxytoca (39.4% fluoroquinolone non-susceptible and 54.5% ESC non-susceptible). National LTP SSI pathogen and resistance data can help prioritize studies to determine effective interventions to prevent SSIs and reduce antimicrobial resistance in liver transplant recipients.

COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations Among Health Care Personnel - COVID-NET, 13 States, March 1-May 31, 2020.

Health care personnel (HCP) can be exposed to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), both within and outside the workplace, increasing their risk for infection. Among 6,760 adults hospitalized during March 1-May 31, 2020, for whom HCP status was determined by the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET), 5.9% were HCP. Nursing-related occupations (36.3%) represented the largest proportion of HCP hospitalized with COVID-19. Median age of hospitalized HCP was 49 years, and 89.8% had at least one underlying medical condition, of which obesity was most commonly reported (72.5%). A substantial proportion of HCP with COVID-19 had indicators of severe disease: 27.5% were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU), 15.8% required invasive mechanical ventilation, and 4.2% died during hospitalization. HCP can have severe COVID-19-associated illness, highlighting the need for continued infection prevention and control in health care settings as well as community mitigation efforts to reduce transmission.

Enhanced contact investigations for nine early travel-related cases of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first identified in Wuhan, China and has since become pandemic. In response to the first cases identified in the United States, close contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases were investigated to enable early identification and isolation of additional cases and to learn more about risk factors for transmission. Close contacts of nine early travel-related cases in the United States were identified and monitored daily for development of symptoms (active monitoring). Selected close contacts (including those with exposures categorized as higher risk) were targeted for collection of additional exposure information and respiratory samples. Respiratory samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Four hundred four close contacts were actively monitored in the jurisdictions that managed the travel-related cases. Three hundred thirty-eight of the 404 close contacts provided at least basic exposure information, of whom 159 close contacts had ≥1 set of respiratory samples collected and tested. Across all actively monitored close contacts, two additional symptomatic COVID-19 cases (i.e., secondary cases) were identified; both secondary cases were in spouses of travel-associated case patients. When considering only household members, all of whom had ≥1 respiratory sample tested for SARS-CoV-2, the secondary attack rate (i.e., the number of secondary cases as a proportion of total close contacts) was 13% (95% CI: 4-38%). The results from these contact tracing investigations suggest that household members, especially significant others, of COVID-19 cases are at highest risk of becoming infected. The importance of personal protective equipment for healthcare workers is also underlined. Isolation of persons with COVID-19, in combination with quarantine of exposed close contacts and practice of everyday preventive behaviors, is important to mitigate spread of COVID-19.

Infection prevention and control training and capacity building during the Ebola epidemic in Guinea.

BACKGROUND: During the 2014-2016 Ebola epidemic in West Africa, a key epidemiological feature was disease transmission within healthcare facilities, indicating a need for infection prevention and control (IPC) training and support. METHODS: IPC training was provided to frontline healthcare workers (HCW) in healthcare facilities that were not Ebola treatment units, as well as to IPC trainers and IPC supervisors placed in healthcare facilities. Trainings included both didactic and hands-on components, and were assessed using pre-tests, post-tests and practical evaluations. We calculated median percent increase in knowledge. RESULTS: From October-December 2014, 20 IPC courses trained 1,625 Guineans: 1,521 HCW, 55 IPC trainers, and 49 IPC supervisors. Median test scores increased 40% (interquartile range [IQR]: 19-86%) among HCW, 15% (IQR: 8-33%) among IPC trainers, and 21% (IQR: 15-30%) among IPC supervisors (all P<0.0001) to post-test scores of 83%, 93%, and 93%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: IPC training resulted in clear improvements in knowledge and was feasible in a public health emergency setting. This method of IPC training addressed a high demand among HCW. Valuable lessons were learned to facilitate expansion of IPC training to other prefectures; this model may be considered when responding to other large outbreaks.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa Outbreak in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Attributed to Hospital Tap Water.

OBJECTIVE To investigate an outbreak of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections and colonization in a neonatal intensive care unit. DESIGN Infection control assessment, environmental evaluation, and case-control study. SETTING Newly built community-based hospital, 28-bed neonatal intensive care unit. PATIENTS Neonatal intensive care unit patients receiving care between June 1, 2013, and September 30, 2014. METHODS Case finding was performed through microbiology record review. Infection control observations, interviews, and environmental assessment were performed. A matched case-control study was conducted to identify risk factors for P. aeruginosa infection. Patient and environmental isolates were collected for pulsed-field gel electrophoresis to determine strain relatedness. RESULTS In total, 31 cases were identified. Case clusters were temporally associated with absence of point-of-use filters on faucets in patient rooms. After adjusting for gestational age, case patients were more likely to have been in a room without a point-of-use filter (odds ratio [OR], 37.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.16-∞). Case patients had higher odds of exposure to peripherally inserted central catheters (OR, 7.20; 95% CI, 1.75-37.30) and invasive ventilation (OR, 5.79; 95% CI, 1.39-30.62). Of 42 environmental samples, 28 (67%) grew P. aeruginosa. Isolates from the 2 most recent case patients were indistinguishable by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis from water-related samples obtained from these case-patient rooms. CONCLUSIONS This outbreak was attributed to contaminated water. Interruption of the outbreak with point-of-use filters provided a short-term solution; however, eradication of P. aeruginosa in water and fixtures was necessary to protect patients. This outbreak highlights the importance of understanding the risks of stagnant water in healthcare facilities. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:801-808.

Infection Prevention and Control for Ebola in Health Care Settings - West Africa and United States.

The 2014-2016 Ebola virus disease (Ebola) epidemic in West Africa underscores the need for health care infection prevention and control (IPC) practices to be implemented properly and consistently to interrupt transmission of pathogens in health care settings to patients and health care workers. Training and assessing IPC practices in general health care facilities not designated as Ebola treatment units or centers became a priority for CDC as the number of Ebola virus transmissions among health care workers in West Africa began to affect the West African health care system and increasingly more persons became infected. CDC and partners developed policies, procedures, and training materials tailored to the affected countries. Safety training courses were also provided to U.S. health care workers intending to work with Ebola patients in West Africa. As the Ebola epidemic continued in West Africa, the possibility that patients with Ebola could be identified and treated in the United States became more realistic. In response, CDC, other federal components (e.g., Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response) and public health partners focused on health care worker training and preparedness for U.S. health care facilities. CDC used the input from these partners to develop guidelines on IPC for hospitalized patients with known or suspected Ebola, which was updated based on feedback from partners who provided care for Ebola patients in the United States. Strengthening and sustaining IPC helps health care systems be better prepared to prevent and respond to current and future infectious disease threats.The activities summarized in this report would not have been possible without collaboration with many U.S. and international partners (http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/partners.html).

Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Detection of Angiostrongylus cantonensis DNA in Cerebrospinal Fluid from Patients with Eosinophilic Meningitis.

Angiostrongylus cantonensis is the most common infectious cause of eosinophilic meningitis. Timely diagnosis of these infections is difficult, partly because reliable laboratory diagnostic methods are unavailable. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of a real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay for the detection of A. cantonensis DNA in human cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) specimens. A total of 49 CSF specimens from 33 patients with eosinophilic meningitis were included: A. cantonensis DNA was detected in 32 CSF specimens, from 22 patients. Four patients had intermittently positive and negative real-time PCR results on subsequent samples, indicating that the level of A. cantonensis DNA present in CSF may fluctuate during the course of the illness. Immunodiagnosis and/or supplemental PCR testing supported the real-time PCR findings for 30 patients. On the basis of these observations, this real-time PCR assay can be useful to detect A. cantonensis in the CSF from patients with eosinophilic meningitis.

Improved Phenotype-Based Definition for Identifying Carbapenemase Producers among Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae.

Preventing transmission of carbapenemase-producing, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CP-CRE) is a public health priority. A phenotype-based definition that reliably identifies CP-CRE while minimizing misclassification of non-CP-CRE could help prevention efforts. To assess possible definitions, we evaluated enterobacterial isolates that had been tested and deemed nonsusceptible to >1 carbapenem at US Emerging Infections Program sites. We determined the number of non-CP isolates that met (false positives) and CP isolates that did not meet (false negatives) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CRE definition in use during our study: 30% (94/312) of CRE had carbapenemase genes, and 21% (14/67) of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella isolates had been misclassified as non-CP. A new definition requiring resistance to 1 carbapenem rarely missed CP strains, but 55% of results were false positive; adding the modified Hodge test to the definition decreased false positives to 12%. This definition should be considered for use in carbapenemase-producing CRE surveillance and prevention.

Identify, isolate, inform: Background and considerations for Ebola virus disease preparedness in U.S. ambulatory care settings.

Public health activities to identify and monitor persons at risk for Ebola virus disease in the United States include directing persons at risk to assessment facilities that are prepared to safely evaluate for Ebola virus disease. Although it is unlikely that a person with Ebola virus disease will unexpectedly present to a nonemergency ambulatory care facility, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have provided guidance for this setting that can be summarized as identify, isolate, and inform.