ABSTRACT
Experimental evidence suggests that Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains viable within aerosols with a half-life of approximately 3 hours; however, it remains unclear how long airborne SARS-CoV-2 can transmit infection. Whole genome sequencing during an outbreak suggested in-room transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to two patients admitted nearly 2 and 5 hours, respectively, after discharge of an asymptomatic infected patient. These findings suggest that airborne SARS-CoV-2 may transmit infection for over 4 hours, even in a hospital setting.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Whole Genome Sequencing , Humans , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Aerosols , Genome, Viral , Time Factors , Male , Cross Infection/transmission , Cross Infection/virology , Air Microbiology , Middle AgedABSTRACT
Importance: Although recent guidelines recommend against performance of preoperative urine culture before nongenitourinary surgery, many clinicians still order preoperative urine cultures and prescribe antibiotics for treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in an effort to reduce infection risk. Objective: To assess the association between preoperative urine culture testing and postoperative urinary tract infection (UTI) or surgical site infection (SSI), independent of baseline patient characteristics or type of surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed surgical procedures performed from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019, at any of 112 US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers. The cohort comprised VA enrollees who underwent major elective noncardiac, nonurological operations. Machine learning and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were used to balance the characteristics between those who did and did not undergo a urine culture. Data analyses were performed between January 2023 and January 2024. Exposures: Performance of urine culture within 30 days prior to surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 2 main outcomes were UTI and SSI occurring within 30 days after surgery. Weighted logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for postoperative infection based on treatment status. Results: A total of 250â¯389 VA enrollees who underwent 288â¯858 surgical procedures were included, with 88.9% (256 753) of surgical procedures received by males and 48.9% (141 340) received by patients 65 years or older. Baseline characteristics were well balanced among treatment groups after applying IPTW weights. Preoperative urine culture was performed for 10.5% of surgical procedures (30 384 of 288 858). The IPTW analysis found that preoperative urine culture was not associated with SSI (adjusted OR [AOR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90-1.10) or postoperative UTI (AOR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.98-1.40). In analyses limited to orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery as a proxy for prosthetic implants, the adjusted risks for UTI and SSI were also not associated with preoperative urine culture performance. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found no association between performance of a preoperative urine culture and lower risk of postoperative UTI or SSI. The results support the deimplementation of urine cultures and associated antibiotic treatment prior to surgery, even when using prosthetic implants.
Subject(s)
Orthopedic Procedures , Surgical Wound Infection , United States/epidemiology , Male , Humans , Propensity Score , Cohort Studies , Surgical Wound Infection/diagnosis , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology , Urinalysis , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Clinical guidelines recommend device removal for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection management. In this retrospective, nationwide cohort, 60.8% of CIED infections received guideline-concordant care. One-year mortality was higher among those without procedural management (25% vs 16%). Factors associated with receipt of device procedures included pocket infections and positive microbiology.
ABSTRACT
Importance: While current evidence has demonstrated a surgical site infection (SSI) prevention bundle consisting of preoperative Staphylococcus aureus screening, nasal and skin decolonization, and use of appropriate perioperative antibiotic based on screening results can decrease rates of SSI caused by S aureus, it is well known that interventions may need to be modified to address facility-level factors. Objective: To assess the association between implementation of an SSI prevention bundle allowing for facility discretion regarding specific component interventions and S aureus deep incisional or organ space SSI rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted among all patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting, cardiac valve replacement, or total joint arthroplasty (TJA) at 11 Veterans Administration hospitals. Implementation of the bundle was on a rolling basis with the earliest implementation occurring in April 2012 and the latest implementation occurring in July 2017. Data were collected from January 2007 to March 2018 and analyzed from October 2020 to June 2023. Interventions: Nasal screening for S aureus; nasal decolonization of S aureus carriers; chlorhexidine bathing; and appropriate perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis according to S aureus carrier status. Facility discretion regarding how to implement the bundle components was allowed. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was deep incisional or organ space SSI caused by S aureus. Multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equation (GEE) and interrupted time-series (ITS) models were used to compare SSI rates between preintervention and postintervention periods. Results: Among 6696 cardiac surgical procedures and 16â¯309 TJAs, 95 S aureus deep incisional or organ space SSIs were detected (25 after cardiac operations and 70 after TJAs). While the GEE model suggested a significant association between the intervention and decreased SSI rates after TJAs (adjusted odds ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.31-0.98), there was not a significant association when an ITS model was used (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.32-2.39). No significant associations after cardiac operations were found. Conclusions and Relevance: Although this quality improvement study suggests an association between implementation of an SSI prevention bundle and decreased S aureus deep incisional or organ space SSI rates after TJAs, it was underpowered to see a significant difference when accounting for changes over time.
Subject(s)
Staphylococcal Infections , Veterans , Humans , Staphylococcus aureus , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Surgical Wound Infection/etiology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Staphylococcal Infections/epidemiology , Staphylococcal Infections/prevention & controlABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Unconfirmed penicillin allergies are common and may contribute to adverse outcomes, especially in frail older patients. Evidence-based clinical pathways for evaluating penicillin allergies have been effectively and safely applied in selected settings, but not in nursing home populations. OBJECTIVE: To identify potential facilitators and barriers to implementing a strategy to verify penicillin allergies in Veterans Health Administration nursing homes, known as Community Living Centers (CLCs). METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with staff, patients, and family members at 1 CLC to assess their understanding of penicillin allergies and receptiveness to verifying the allergy. We also asked staff about the proposed allergy assessment strategy, including willingness to delabel by history and feasibility of performing oral challenges or skin testing on their unit. RESULTS: From 24 interviews (11 front-line staff, 4 leadership, 3 patients, 6 family members), we identified several facilitators or barriers. Staff recognized the importance of allergy verification and were willing to support and assist in implementing verification strategies. The CLC residents were willing to have their allergy status verified. However, some family members expressed reluctance to verifying their relative's allergy status owing to safety concerns. Front-line staff also expressed concern over having the necessary resources, including time and expertise, to implement the strategy. Staff suggested involving clinical pharmacists and educating staff, patients, and family members as ways to overcome these barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Concerns about safety and staff resources are important potential barriers to implementing verification strategies. Involvement of pharmacists and education of both staff and patients and family members will be important components of any successful intervention.
Subject(s)
Hypersensitivity , Veterans , Humans , Nursing Homes , Pharmacists , Penicillins/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Importance: Standardized processes for identifying when allergic-type reactions occur and linking reactions to drug exposures are limited. Objective: To develop an informatics tool to improve detection of antibiotic allergic-type events. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted from October 1, 2015, to September 30, 2019, with data analyzed between July 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022. The study was conducted across Veteran Affairs hospitals among patients who underwent cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures and received periprocedural antibiotic prophylaxis. The cohort was split into training and test cohorts, and cases were manually reviewed to determine presence of allergic-type reaction and its severity. Variables potentially indicative of allergic-type reactions were selected a priori and included allergies entered in the Veteran Affair's Allergy Reaction Tracking (ART) system (either historical [reported] or observed), allergy diagnosis codes, medications administered to treat allergic reactions, and text searches of clinical notes for keywords and phrases indicative of a potential allergic-type reaction. A model to detect allergic-type reaction events was iteratively developed on the training cohort and then applied to the test cohort. Algorithm test characteristics were assessed. Exposure: Preprocedural and postprocedural prophylactic antibiotic administration. Main Outcomes and Measures: Antibiotic allergic-type reactions. Results: The cohort of 36â¯344 patients included 34â¯703 CIED procedures with antibiotic exposures (mean [SD] age, 72 [10] years; 34â¯008 [98%] male patients); median duration of postprocedural prophylaxis was 4 days (IQR, 2-7 days; maximum, 45 days). The final algorithm included 7 variables: entries in the Veteran Affair's hospitals ART, either historic (odds ratio [OR], 42.37; 95% CI, 11.33-158.43) or observed (OR, 175.10; 95% CI, 44.84-683.76); PheCodes for "symptoms affecting skin" (OR, 8.49; 95% CI, 1.90-37.82), "urticaria" (OR, 7.01; 95% CI, 1.76-27.89), and "allergy or adverse event to an antibiotic" (OR, 11.84, 95% CI, 2.88-48.69); keyword detection in clinical notes (OR, 3.21; 95% CI, 1.27-8.08); and antihistamine administration alone or in combination (OR, 6.51; 95% CI, 1.90-22.30). In the final model, antibiotic allergic-type reactions were identified with an estimated probability of 30% or more; positive predictive value was 61% (95% CI, 45%-76%); and sensitivity was 87% (95% CI, 70%-96%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this retrospective cohort study of patients receiving periprocedural antibiotic prophylaxis, an algorithm with a high sensitivity to detect incident antibiotic allergic-type reactions that can be used to provide clinician feedback about antibiotic harms from unnecessarily prolonged antibiotic exposures was developed.
Subject(s)
Drug Hypersensitivity , Hypersensitivity , Humans , Male , Aged , Female , Retrospective Studies , Feedback , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Background: This project describes a Veterans Health Administration telehealth pilot to facilitate COVID-19 oral antiviral treatment as part of the national test-to-treat (T2T) strategy. The pilot was operationalized for two pilot VA medical centers by the regional clinical contact center (CCC) for a Veteran Integrated Service Network, which offers multiple services through several virtual modalities. Methods: Nurse triage and medical provider evaluation templates were developed for the CCC to standardize clinical interventions with veteran callers reporting positive home COVID-19 test results. When veterans were determined eligible and consented to treatment with an emergency use authorization (EUA) antiviral medication, CCC providers used secure direct messaging for synchronous communication with local pharmacy services to facilitate adjudication and dispensing. Templates for pharmacy documentation and primary care follow-up monitoring were also developed and disseminated. Results: In total, 198 veterans (mean age 65 years, 89% male, 88% non-Hispanic White) were evaluated through telehealth by regional CCC providers using the T2T process and 96% were prescribed an antiviral medication. Primary care follow-up occurred in 86% of cases, a median of 3 days after the telehealth evaluation. The 30-day all-cause hospitalization rate was 1.5% and there were no deaths within 30 days of treatment initiation. Conclusions: Veterans Integrated Service Network's CCC telehealth triage and evaluation processes enabled safe EUA-compliant care delivery, improved evaluator experience and efficiency, and augmented existing EUA processes in place by front-line pharmacy and primary care teams.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Telemedicine , Veterans , Humans , Male , Aged , Female , United States , Veterans Health , COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care , Antiviral Agents , United States Department of Veterans AffairsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Electronic consultations, or e-consults, which are requests for specialist advice without direct patient interaction, are becoming increasingly common across health systems. We sought to identify clinicians' perspectives on the quality of e-consult requests that they send and receive. STUDY DESIGN: A qualitative research study at the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) New England Healthcare System. METHODS: We interviewed a total of 73 clinicians, including 38 specialists across 3 specialties (cardiology, neurology, pulmonology) and 35 primary care clinicians (PCCs), between March and June 2019. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: VA specialists and PCCs generally agreed that e-consult requests should be focused and precise, not require lengthy chart review, and include adequate preliminary workup results. At the same time, specialists expressed frustration with what they perceived as suboptimal e-consult requests. Interviewees attributed this gap to 3 factors: limitations of the electronic health record user interface, divergence between PCCs and specialists in the areas of expertise, and organizational pressures on the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: VA clinicians' perspectives on suboptimal requests contain lessons that are broadly applicable to other health systems that seek to maximize the potential of e-consults to facilitate clinician collaboration and care coordination.
Subject(s)
Cardiology , Referral and Consultation , Humans , United States , Delivery of Health Care , Qualitative Research , United States Department of Veterans AffairsABSTRACT
Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is recommended for select patients with cirrhosis, but long-term antibiotic therapy has risks. We evaluated concordance with guideline recommendations in 179 veterans with cirrhosis; 55% received guideline-concordant management of SBP prophylaxis. Despite stable guideline recommendations since 2012, guideline adherence remains low.
ABSTRACT
Importance: With a large proportion of the US adult population vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, it is important to identify who remains at risk of severe infection despite vaccination. Objective: To characterize risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease in a vaccinated population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide, retrospective cohort study included US veterans who received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination series and later developed laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and were treated at US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals. Data were collected from December 15, 2020, through February 28, 2022. Exposures: Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, immunocompromised status, and vaccination-related variables. Main Outcomes and Measures: Development of severe vs nonsevere SARS-CoV-2 infection. Severe disease was defined as hospitalization within 14 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test and either blood oxygen level of less than 94%, receipt of supplemental oxygen or dexamethasone, mechanical ventilation, or death within 28 days. Association between severe disease and exposures was estimated using logistic regression models. Results: Among 110â¯760 patients with infections following vaccination (97â¯614 [88.1%] men, mean [SD] age at vaccination, 60.8 [15.3] years; 26â¯953 [24.3%] Black, 11â¯259 [10.2%] Hispanic, and 71â¯665 [64.7%] White), 10â¯612 (9.6%) had severe COVID-19. The strongest association with risk of severe disease after vaccination was age, which increased among patients aged 50 years or older with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.42 (CI, 1.40-1.44) per 5-year increase in age, such that patients aged 80 years or older had an aOR of 16.58 (CI, 13.49-20.37) relative to patients aged 45 to 50 years. Immunocompromising conditions, including receipt of different classes of immunosuppressive medications (eg, leukocyte inhibitor: aOR, 2.80; 95% CI, 2.39-3.28) or cytotoxic chemotherapy (aOR, 2.71; CI, 2.27-3.24) prior to breakthrough infection, or leukemias or lymphomas (aOR, 1.87; CI, 1.61-2.17) and chronic conditions associated with end-organ disease, such as heart failure (aOR, 1.74; CI, 1.61-1.88), dementia (aOR, 2.01; CI, 1.83-2.20), and chronic kidney disease (aOR, 1.59; CI, 1.49-1.69), were also associated with increased risk. Receipt of an additional (ie, booster) dose of vaccine was associated with reduced odds of severe disease (aOR, 0.50; CI, 0.44-0.57). Conclusions and Relevance: In this nationwide, retrospective cohort of predominantly male US Veterans, we identified risk factors associated with severe disease despite vaccination. Findings could be used to inform outreach efforts for booster vaccinations and to inform clinical decision-making about patients most likely to benefit from preexposure prophylaxis and antiviral therapy.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Veterans , Humans , Adult , United States/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitals, Veterans , Antiviral Agents , Dexamethasone , OxygenSubject(s)
Antiviral Agents , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Lactams , Leucine , Nitriles , Proline , Ritonavir , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Combinations , Humans , Lactams/adverse effects , Lactams/therapeutic use , Leucine/adverse effects , Leucine/therapeutic use , Nitriles/adverse effects , Nitriles/therapeutic use , Proline/adverse effects , Proline/therapeutic use , Recurrence , Ritonavir/adverse effects , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
IMPORTANCE AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this pragmatic, embedded, adaptive trial was to measure the effectiveness of the subcutaneous anti-IL-6R antibody sarilumab, when added to an evolving standard of care (SOC), for clinical management of inpatients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease. DESIGN: Two-arm, randomized, open-label controlled trial comparing SOC alone to SOC plus sarilumab. The trial used a randomized play-the-winner design and was fully embedded within the electronic health record (EHR) system. SETTING: 5 VA Medical Centers. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized patients with clinical criteria for moderate to severe COVID-19 but not requiring mechanical ventilation, and a diagnostic test positive for SARS-CoV-2. INTERVENTIONS: Sarilumab, 200 or 400 mg subcutaneous injection. SOC was not pre-specified and could vary over time, e.g., to include antiviral or other anti-inflammatory drugs. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was intubation or death within 14 days of randomization. All data were extracted remotely from the EHR. RESULTS: Among 162 eligible patients, 53 consented, and 50 were evaluated for the primary endpoint of intubation or death. This occurred in 5/20 and 1/30 of participants in the sarilumab and SOC arms respectively, with the majority occurring in the initial 9 participants (3/4 in the sarilumab and 1/5 in the SOC) before the sarilumab dose was increased to 400 mg and before remdesivir and dexamethasone were widely adopted. After interim review, the unblinded Data Monitoring Committee recommended that the study be stopped due to concern for safety: a high probability that rates of intubation or death were higher with addition of sarilumab to SOC (92.6%), and a very low probability (3.4%) that sarilumab would be found to be superior. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This randomized trial of patients hospitalized due to respiratory compromise from COVID-19 but not mechanical ventilation found no benefit from subcutaneous sarilumab when added to an evolving SOC. The numbers of patients and events were too low to allow definitive conclusions to be drawn, but this study contributes valuable information about the role of subcutaneous IL-6R inhibition in the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods developed and piloted during this trial will be useful in conducting future studies more efficiently. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov-NCT04359901; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04359901?cond=NCT04359901&draw=2&rank=1.
Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Previous studies evaluated the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine safety or compared adverse events following vaccination to those from infection. Limited data about the impact of prior infection on post-vaccine adverse events are available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection on outcomes shortly after vaccination using a longitudinal design. METHODS: Nationwide, multicenter, retrospective cohort study of hospitalization, death, and pre-specified adverse event rates among Veterans who received mRNA vaccines within the Veterans Health Administration between 12/11/2020 and 8/31/2021. Daily incidence rates were compared before and after vaccine doses, stratified by history of microbiologically-confirmed SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: 3,118,802 patients received a first dose and 2,979,326 a second, including 102,829 with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Daily incident hospitalization rates were unchanged before and after the second dose among patients without previous infection (28.8/100,000 post-dose versus 28.6/100,000 pre-dose, p = 0.92). In previously-infected patients, the hospitalization rate increased above baseline one day following vaccination (158.2/100,000 after dose 2 versus 57.3/100,000 pre-dose, p < 0.001), then returned to baseline. Chart review indicated vaccine side effects, such as fever, constitutional symptoms, weakness, or falls, as the definite (39%) or possible (18%) cause of hospitalization. Affected patients had mean age 75, and 90% had at least one serious comorbidity. Hospitalizations were brief (median 2 days), with rapid return to baseline health. Worse baseline health among previously-infected patients prevented conclusions about mortality risk. CONCLUSIONS: Two-dose mRNA vaccine regimens are safe in a population with many comorbidities. Transient increased risks of hospitalization were identified among patients with prior SARS-CoV-2, absolute risk â¼1:1000. Findings support additional study regarding the optimal dosing schedule in this population. FUNDING: None.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Aged , Hospitalization , Humans , Incidence , RNA, Messenger , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Vaccines, Synthetic , mRNA VaccinesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite a strong evidence base and clinical guidelines specifically recommending against prolonged post-procedural antimicrobial use, studies indicate that the practice is common following cardiac device procedures. Formative evaluations conducted by the study team suggest that inappropriate antimicrobial use may be driven by information silos that drive provider belief that antimicrobials are not harmful, in part due to lack of complete feedback about all types of clinical outcomes. De-implementation is recognized as an important area of research that can lead to reductions in unnecessary, wasteful, or harmful practices, such as excess antimicrobial use following cardiac device procedures; however, investigations into strategies that lead to successful de-implementation are limited. The overarching hypothesis to be tested in this trial is that a bundle of implementation strategies that includes audit and feedback about direct patient harms caused by inappropriate prescribing can lead to successful de-implementation of guideline-discordant care. METHODS: We propose a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation stepped-wedge intervention trial at three high-volume, high-complexity VA medical centers. The main study intervention (an informatics-based, real-time audit-and-feedback tool) was developed based on learning/unlearning theory and formative evaluations and guided by the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) Framework. Elements of the bundled and multifaceted implementation strategy to promote appropriate prescribing will include audit-and-feedback reports that include information about antibiotic harms, stakeholder engagement, patient and provider education, identification of local champions, and blended facilitation. The primary study outcome is adoption of evidence-based practice (de-implementation of inappropriate antimicrobial use). Clinical outcomes (cardiac device infections, acute kidney injuries and Clostridioides difficile infections) are secondary. Qualitative interviews will assess relevant implementation outcomes (acceptability, adoption, fidelity, feasibility). DISCUSSION: De-implementation theory suggests that factors that may have a particularly strong influence on de-implementation include strength of the underlying evidence, the complexity of the intervention, and patient and provider anxiety and fear about changing an established practice. This study will assess whether a multifaceted intervention mapped to identified de-implementation barriers leads to measurable improvements in provision of guideline-concordant antimicrobial use. Findings will improve understanding about factors that impact successful or unsuccessful de-implementation of harmful or wasteful healthcare practices. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05020418.
Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents , Defibrillators, Implantable , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Infective Agents/therapeutic use , Feedback , Humans , Inappropriate Prescribing/prevention & controlABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Injection drug use-associated bacterial and viral infections are increasing. Expanding access to harm reduction services, such as safe injection education, are effective prevention strategies. However, these strategies have had limited uptake. New tools are needed to improve provider capacity to facilitate dissemination of these evidence-based interventions. METHODS: The "Six Moments of Infection Prevention in Injection Drug Use" provider educational tool was developed using a global, rather than pathogen-specific, infection prevention framework, highlighting the prevention of invasive bacterial and fungal infections in additional to viral pathogens. The tool's effectiveness was tested using a short, paired pre/post survey that assessed provider knowledge and attitudes about harm reduction. RESULTS: Seventy-five respondents completed the paired surveys. At baseline, 17 respondents (22.6%) indicated that they had received no prior training in harm reduction and 28 (37.3%) reported discomfort counseling people who inject drugs (PWID). Sixty respondents (80.0%) reported they had never referred a patient to a syringe service program (SSP); of those, 73.3% cited lack of knowledge regarding locations of SSPs and 40.0% reported not knowing where to access information regarding SSPs. After the training, 66 (88.0%) reported that they felt more comfortable educating PWID (Pâ <â .0001), 65 respondents (86.6%) reported they planned to use the Six Moments model in their own practice, and 100% said they would consider referring patients to an SSP in the future. CONCLUSIONS: The Six Moments model emphasizes the importance of a global approach to infection prevention and harm reduction. This educational intervention can be used as part of a bundle of implementation strategies to reduce morbidity and mortality in PWID.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Infection Control , Mass Screening , Residential Facilities , Vaccination , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Carrier State/diagnosis , Carrier State/prevention & control , Humans , Incidence , Infection Control/methods , Massachusetts , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , United States Department of Veterans AffairsABSTRACT
Effective, low-cost therapeutics are needed to prevent and treat COVID-19. Severe COVID-19 disease is linked to excessive inflammation. Disulfiram is an approved oral drug used to treat alcohol use disorder that is a potent anti-inflammatory agent and an inhibitor of the viral proteases. We investigated the potential effects of disulfiram on SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease severity in an observational study using a large database of clinical records from the national US Veterans Affairs healthcare system. A multivariable Cox regression adjusted for demographic information and diagnosis of alcohol use disorder revealed a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection with disulfiram use at a hazard ratio of 0.66 (34% lower risk, 95% confidence interval 24-43%). There were no COVID-19 related deaths among the 188 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients treated with disulfiram, in contrast to 5-6 statistically expected deaths based on the untreated population (P = 0.03). Our epidemiological results suggest that disulfiram may contribute to the reduced incidence and severity of COVID-19. These results support carefully planned clinical trials to assess the potential therapeutic effects of disulfiram in COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Disulfiram/therapeutic use , Adult , Alcoholism/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/metabolism , Cohort Studies , Disulfiram/metabolism , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Severity of Illness Index , VeteransABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To explore Veterans Health Administration clinicians' perspectives on the idea of redesigning electronic consultation (e-consult) delivery in line with a hub-and-spoke (centralized) model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study in VA New England Healthcare System (VISN 1). Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with 35 primary care providers and 38 specialty care providers, including 13 clinical leaders, at 6 VISN 1 sites varying in size, specialist availability, and e-consult volume. Interviews included exploration of the hub-and-spoke (centralized) e-consult model as a system redesign option. Qualitative content analysis procedures were applied to identify and describe salient categories. RESULTS: Participants saw several potential benefits to scaling up e-consult delivery from a decentralized model to a hub-and-spoke model, including expanded access to specialist expertise and increased timeliness of e-consult responses. Concerns included differences in resource availability and management styles between sites, anticipated disruption to working relationships, lack of incentives for central e-consultants, dedicated staff's burnout and fatigue, technological challenges, and lack of motivation for change. DISCUSSION: Based on a case study from one of the largest integrated healthcare systems in the United States, our work identifies novel concerns and offers insights for healthcare organizations contemplating a scale-up of their e-consult systems. CONCLUSIONS: Scaling up e-consults in line with the hub-and-spoke model may help pave the way for a centralized and efficient approach to care delivery, but the success of this transformation will depend on healthcare systems' ability to evaluate and address barriers to leveraging economies of scale for e-consults.
Subject(s)
Medicine , Remote Consultation , Health Personnel , Humans , Qualitative Research , Specialization , United StatesABSTRACT
Among 3926 healthcare personnel in a multisite healthcare system, the minimal population prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was 4.4% (bootstrap 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.7%-5.0%), and the infection fatality rate was 0.6% (bootstrap 95% CI, 0.0%-1.7%). Rates reflected both local community prevalence and hospital exposures but not specifically exposure on COVID-19 units.