Secondary attack rate following on-site isolation of patients with suspected COVID-19 in multiple-bed rooms.

The implementation of isolation precautions for patients with suspected Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pending test results is resource intensive. Due to the limited availability of single-bed rooms at our institution, we isolated patients with suspected COVID-19 together with patients without suspected COVID-19 on-site in multiple-bed rooms until SARS-CoV-2-test results were available. We evaluated the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to individuals sharing the room with patients isolated on-site. This observational study was performed at the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland, from 03/20 - 11/20. Secondary attack rates were compared between patients hospitalized in multiple-bed rooms and exposed to individuals subjected to on-site isolation precautions (on-site isolation group), and patients exposed to individuals initially not identified as having COVID-19, and not placed under isolation precautions until the diagnosis was suspected (control group). Transmission events were confirmed by whole-genome sequencing. Among 1,218 patients with suspected COVID-19, 67 (5.5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Of these, 21 were isolated on-site potentially exposing 27 patients sharing the same room. Median contact time was 12 h (interquartile range 7-18 h). SARS-CoV-2 transmission was identified in none of the patients in the on-site isolation group vs. 10/63 (15.9%) in the control group (p = 0.03). Isolation on-site of suspected COVID-19-patients in multiple-bed rooms avoided single-room occupancy and subsequent in-hospital relocation for many patients without confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infection. The absence of secondary transmission among the exposed patients in the on-site isolation group allows for assessment of the risk/benefit ratio of this strategy given the limitation of a small sample size.

A systematic outbreak investigation of SARS-CoV-2 transmission clusters in a tertiary academic care center.

BACKGROUND: We sought to decipher transmission pathways in healthcare-associated infections with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within our hospital by epidemiological work-up and complementary whole genome sequencing (WGS). We report the findings of the four largest epidemiologic clusters of SARS-CoV-2 transmission occurring during the second wave of the pandemic from 11/2020 to 12/2020. METHODS: At the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland, systematic outbreak investigation is initiated at detection of any nosocomial case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as confirmed by polymerase chain reaction, occurring more than five days after admission. Clusters of nosocomial infections, defined as the detection of at least two positive patients and/or healthcare workers (HCWs) within one week with an epidemiological link, were further investigated by WGS on respective strains. RESULTS: The four epidemiologic clusters included 40 patients and 60 HCWs. Sequencing data was available for 70% of all involved cases (28 patients and 42 HCWs), confirmed epidemiologically suspected in house transmission in 33 cases (47.1% of sequenced cases) and excluded transmission in the remaining 37 cases (52.9%). Among cases with identical strains, epidemiologic work-up suggested transmission mainly through a ward-based exposure (24/33, 72.7%), more commonly affecting HCWs (16/24, 66.7%) than patients (8/24, 33.3%), followed by transmission between patients (6/33, 18.2%), and among HCWs and patients (3/33, 9.1%, respectively two HCWs and one patient). CONCLUSIONS: Phylogenetic analyses revealed important insights into transmission pathways supporting less than 50% of epidemiologically suspected SARS-CoV-2 transmissions. The remainder of cases most likely reflect community-acquired infection randomly detected by outbreak investigation. Notably, most transmissions occurred between HCWs, possibly indicating lower perception of the risk of infection during contacts among HCWs.

Early Target Attainment With Continuous Infusion Meropenem and Piperacillin/Tazobactam and Utilization of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study From 2017 to 2020.

Background: We analyzed the attainment of early pharmacological targets of continuous infusion meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam and the use and effect of a real-time therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) program on subsequent dosing and target attainment in patients who are critically ill. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective study among patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit in a Swiss tertiary care hospital from 2017 to 2020. The primary outcome was target attainment [100% tT ≥ 4xECOFF (Pseudomonas aeruginosa)] of continuous infusion meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam within 72 hours after initiation of treatment. Results: A total of 234 patients were included. Median first meropenem (n = 186 of 234) and piperacillin (n = 48 of 234) concentration was 21 mg/L (interquartile range [IQR], 15.6-28.6) and 100.7 mg/L (IQR, 64.0-160.2), respectively. Pharmacological target was attained in 95.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.7-98.1) of patients receiving meropenem and 77.0% (95% CI, 62.7-87.9) treated with piperacillin/tazobactam. In the univariable and multivariable logistic regression, body weight and estimated glomerular filtration rate were negatively associated with target attainment. Subsequently, meropenem dosage was decreased or stopped in 35 of 186 (18.8%) and 89 of 186 (47.9%) patients, respectively, and increased in 2 of 186 (1.1%) patients. Conclusions: Continuous infusion meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam yielded excellent and moderate early pharmacological target attainment in critically ill patients, respectively. The TDM was mainly used to decrease meropenem dosage.

A qualitative study on the perception of infection prevention and control measures among healthcare workers without patient contact during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

We conducted a qualitative interview-based study to examine the perception of infection prevention and control (IPC) measures implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic among healthcare workers (HCWs) without patient contact in a tertiary academic care center. We compared these findings to those derived from interviews of HCWs with patient contact from the same institution using the same study design. The following main four themes were identified: (1) As for HCWs with patient contact, transparent communication strongly contributes to employees' sense of security. (2) Information on personal protective equipment (PPE) usage needs to be stratified according to different educational backgrounds and professions. (3) Consistency of IPC measures was positively perceived yet a desire for constant reminders to counteract the fatigue effect played a more significant role for HCWs without patient contact. (4) As compared to HCWs with patient contact, HCWs without patient contact preferred uniform digital training resources rather than more face-to-face training. This study shows that the needs of HCWs with and without patient contact differ and need to be considered in pandemic management.

A qualitative study on safety perception among healthcare workers of a tertiary academic care center during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Protecting healthcare workers (HCWs) from exposure to SARS-CoV-2 during patient care is central to managing the current pandemic. Higher levels of trust in personal protective equipment (PPE) and infection prevention and control (IPC) strategies have been previously related to lower levels of emotional exhaustion, yet little is known on how to achieve such a perception of safety. We thus sought to identify institutional actions, strategies and policies related to HCWs' safety perception during the early phase of the pandemic at a tertiary care center in Switzerland by interviewing HCWs from different clinics, professions, and positions. METHODS: For this qualitative study, 36 face-to-face semi-structured interviews were performed. Interviews were based on a guide that addressed the perception of institutional strategies and policies during the first phase of the pandemic in March 2020. The participants included doctors (n = 19) and nurses (n = 17) in senior and non-senior positions from eight clinics in the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland, all involved in patient care. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis and organized using MAXQDA (VERBI Software GmbH, Berlin). FINDINGS: Five recurring themes were identified to affect HCWs' perception of their safety during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: (1) transparency and clarity of information, (2) communication on the availability of PPE (with the provision of information alone increasing the feeling of safety even if supplies of PPE were reported as low), (3) uniformity and consistency of guidelines, (4) digital resources to support face-to-face teaching (although personal information transfer is still being considered superior in terms of strengthening safety perception) and (5) support and appreciation for the work performed. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies institutional policies and actions influencing HCWs' safety perception during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the most important of which is the factor of transparent communication. This knowledge reveals potential areas of action critical to improving preparedness and management in hospitals faced with an infectious disease threat.

Possible Reactivation of SARS-CoV-2 in a Patient with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Undergoing Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: a Case Report.

Reactivation or reinfection cases of SARS-CoV-2 are known but there is scarce evidence about reactivation in immunocompromised patients. Here, we report the case of a 61-year-old male undergoing a conditioning regimen with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and 2-Gy total body irradiation in preparation of a haplo-identical allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). He received the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine 6 weeks prior allo-HSCT and was hospitalized a month prior because of a COVID-19 bilateral pneumonia. On discharge, he showed two negative SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal PCR swabs as well as a high SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer. On admission for allo-HSCT, he tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 again. Conditioning with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and 2-Gy total body irradiation was started and the patient developed lymphopenia. During his hospital stay, he tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in a PCR test twice but remained asymptomatic. The conditioning regimen was continued as planned. Later during his stay, the patient showed undetectable SARS-CoV-2 load four times. This case documents possible reactivation of SARS-CoV-2 and raises questions about reactivation risks among recipients of stem cell transplants and other immunocompromised patients.

Case report: when two and ½ men go camping .

BACKGROUND: In patients, rapid identification of bacterial species may help to guide treatment at early stages. New protocols for the identification directly from positive blood culture flasks significantly helped in the presented case report. CASE PRESENTATION: Two patients (a father and son) presented with diarrhea, malaise, and fever of 3 to 4 days duration. Blood cultures from both patients cultured short Gram-positive rods. MALDI-TOF based rapid identification protocol direct from positive blood culture identified Listeria monocytogenes as the cause of sepsis and could be confirmed with conventional methods. Listeria monocytogenes was identified 24 h later by conventional biochemical identification methods (VITEK 2). Antibiotic treatment was adjusted early in response to the MALDI-TOF based identification of bacteremia. Pulsed field gel electrophoresis confirmed the suspected relatedness of the father's and son's isolates. CONCLUSIONS: MALDI-TOF based may provide a rapid identification of bacterial species directly from positive blood culture.

Guidelines on the management of atrial fibrillation in the emergency department: a critical appraisal.

Several guidelines often exist on the same topic, sometimes offering divergent recommendations. For the clinician, it can be difficult to understand the reasons for this divergence and how to select the right recommendations. The aim of this study is to compare different guidelines on the management of atrial fibrillation (AF), and provide practical and affordable advice on its management in the acute setting. A PubMed search was performed in May 2014 to identify the three most recent and cited published guidelines on AF. During the 1-week school of the European School of Internal Medicine, the attending residents were divided in five working groups. The three selected guidelines were compared with five specific questions. The guidelines identified were: the European Society of Cardiology guidelines on AF, the Canadian guidelines on emergency department management of AF, and the American Heart Association guidelines on AF. Twenty-one relevant sub-questions were identified. For five of these, there was no agreement between guidelines; for three, there was partial agreement; for three data were not available (issue not covered by one of the guidelines), while for ten, there was complete agreement. Evidence on the management of AF in the acute setting is largely based on expert opinion rather than clinical trials. While there is broad agreement on the management of the haemodynamically unstable patient and the use of drugs for rate-control strategy, there is less agreement on drug therapy for rhythm control and no agreement on several other topics.