Characteristics of healthcare personnel with SARS-CoV-2 infection: 10 emerging infections program sites in the United States, April 2020-December 2021.

BACKGROUND: Understanding characteristics of healthcare personnel (HCP) with SARS-CoV-2 infection supports the development and prioritization of interventions to protect this important workforce. We report detailed characteristics of HCP who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from April 20, 2020 through December 31, 2021. METHODS: CDC collaborated with Emerging Infections Program sites in 10 states to interview HCP with SARS-CoV-2 infection (case-HCP) about their demographics, underlying medical conditions, healthcare roles, exposures, personal protective equipment (PPE) use, and COVID-19 vaccination status. We grouped case-HCP by healthcare role. To describe residential social vulnerability, we merged geocoded HCP residential addresses with CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) values at the census tract level. We defined highest and lowest SVI quartiles as high and low social vulnerability, respectively. RESULTS: Our analysis included 7,531 case-HCP. Most case-HCP with roles as certified nursing assistant (CNA) (444, 61.3%), medical assistant (252, 65.3%), or home healthcare worker (HHW) (225, 59.5%) reported their race and ethnicity as either non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic. More than one third of HHWs (166, 45.2%), CNAs (283, 41.7%), and medical assistants (138, 37.9%) reported a residential address in the high social vulnerability category. The proportion of case-HCP who reported using recommended PPE at all times when caring for patients with COVID-19 was lowest among HHWs compared with other roles. CONCLUSIONS: To mitigate SARS-CoV-2 infection risk in healthcare settings, infection prevention, and control interventions should be specific to HCP roles and educational backgrounds. Additional interventions are needed to address high social vulnerability among HHWs, CNAs, and medical assistants.

Characteristics of Patients With Initial Clostridioides difficile Infection (CDI) That Are Associated With Increased Risk of Multiple CDI Recurrences.

Background: Because interventions are available to prevent further recurrence in patients with recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (rCDI), we identified predictors of multiple rCDI (mrCDI) in adults at the time of presentation with initial CDI (iCDI). Methods: iCDI was defined as a positive C difficile test in any clinical setting during January 2018-August 2019 in a person aged ≥18 years with no known prior positive test. rCDI was defined as a positive test ≥14 days from the previous positive test within 180 days after iCDI; mrCDI was defined as ≥2 rCDI. We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: Of 18 829 patients with iCDI, 882 (4.7%) had mrCDI; 437 with mrCDI and 7484 without mrCDI had full chart reviews. A higher proportion of patients with mrCDI than without mrCDI were aged ≥65 years (57.2% vs 40.7%; P < .0001) and had healthcare (59.1% vs 46.9%; P < .0001) and antibiotic (77.3% vs 67.3%; P < .0001) exposures in the 12 weeks preceding iCDI. In multivariable analysis, age ≥65 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55-2.35), chronic hemodialysis (aOR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.48-3.51), hospitalization (aOR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.33-2.01), and nitrofurantoin use (aOR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.18-3.23) in the 12 weeks preceding iCDI were associated with mrCDI. Conclusions: Patients with iCDI who are older, on hemodialysis, or had recent hospitalization or nitrofurantoin use had increased risk of mrCDI and may benefit from early use of adjunctive therapy to prevent mrCDI. If confirmed, these findings could aid in clinical decision making and interventional study designs.

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 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.

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.

Comparison of the Risk of Recurrent Clostridioides Difficile Infections Among Patients in 2018 Versus 2013.

Among persons with an initial Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) across 10 US sites in 2018 compared with 2013, 18.3% versus 21.1% had ≥1 recurrent CDI (rCDI) within 180 days. We observed a 16% lower adjusted risk of rCDI in 2018 versus 2013 (P < .0001).

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.

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.

Antimicrobial Use in a Cohort of US Nursing Homes, 2017.

Importance: Controlling antimicrobial resistance in health care is a public health priority, although data describing antimicrobial use in US nursing homes are limited. Objective: To measure the prevalence of antimicrobial use and describe antimicrobial classes and common indications among nursing home residents. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional, 1-day point-prevalence surveys of antimicrobial use performed between April 2017 and October 2017, last survey date October 31, 2017, and including 15 276 residents present on the survey date in 161 randomly selected nursing homes from selected counties of 10 Emerging Infections Program (EIP) states. EIP staff reviewed nursing home records to collect data on characteristics of residents and antimicrobials administered at the time of the survey. Nursing home characteristics were obtained from nursing home staff and the Nursing Home Compare website. Exposures: Residence in one of the participating nursing homes at the time of the survey. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prevalence of antimicrobial use per 100 residents, defined as the number of residents receiving antimicrobial drugs at the time of the survey divided by the total number of surveyed residents. Multivariable logistic regression modeling of antimicrobial use and percentages of drugs within various classifications. Results: Among 15 276 nursing home residents included in the study (mean [SD] age, 77.6 [13.7] years; 9475 [62%] women), complete prevalence data were available for 96.8%. The overall antimicrobial use prevalence was 8.2 per 100 residents (95% CI, 7.8-8.8). Antimicrobial use was more prevalent in residents admitted to the nursing home within 30 days before the survey date (18.8 per 100 residents; 95% CI, 17.4-20.3), with central venous catheters (62.8 per 100 residents; 95% CI, 56.9-68.3) or with indwelling urinary catheters (19.1 per 100 residents; 95% CI, 16.4-22.0). Antimicrobials were most often used to treat active infections (77% [95% CI, 74.8%-79.2%]) and primarily for urinary tract infections (28.1% [95% CI, 15.5%-30.7%]). While 18.2% (95% CI, 16.1%-20.1%) were for medical prophylaxis, most often use was for the urinary tract (40.8% [95% CI, 34.8%-47.1%]). Fluoroquinolones were the most common antimicrobial class (12.9% [95% CI, 11.3%-14.8%]), and 33.1% (95% CI, 30.7%-35.6%) of antimicrobials used were broad-spectrum antibiotics. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional survey of a cohort of US nursing homes in 2017, prevalence of antimicrobial use was 8.2 per 100 residents. This study provides information on the patterns of antimicrobial use among these nursing home residents.

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.

Association between Socioeconomic Status and Incidence of Community-Associated Clostridioides difficile Infection - United States, 2014-2015.

We evaluated the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and community-associated Clostridioides difficile infection (CA-CDI) incidence across 2474 census tracts in 10 states. Highly correlated community-level SES variables were transformed into distinct factors using factor analysis. We found low SES communities were associated with higher CA-CDI incidence.

Antimicrobial Use in US Hospitals: Comparison of Results From Emerging Infections Program Prevalence Surveys, 2015 and 2011.

BACKGROUND: In the 2011 US hospital prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use 50% of patients received antimicrobial medications on the survey date or day before. More hospitals have since established antimicrobial stewardship programs. We repeated the survey in 2015 to determine antimicrobial use prevalence and describe changes since 2011. METHODS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Emerging Infections Program sites in 10 states each recruited ≤25 general and women's and children's hospitals. Hospitals selected a survey date from May-September 2015. Medical records for a random patient sample on the survey date were reviewed to collect data on antimicrobial medications administered on the survey date or day before. Percentages of patients on antimicrobial medications were compared; multivariable log-binomial regression modeling was used to evaluate factors associated with antimicrobial use. RESULTS: Of 12 299 patients in 199 hospitals, 6084 (49.5%; 95% CI, 48.6-50.4%) received antimicrobials. Among 148 hospitals in both surveys, overall antimicrobial use prevalence was similar in 2011 and 2015, although the percentage of neonatal critical care patients on antimicrobials was lower in 2015 (22.8% vs 32.0% [2011]; P = .006). Fluoroquinolone use was lower in 2015 (10.1% of patients vs 11.9% [2011]; P < .001). Third- or fourth-generation cephalosporin use was higher (12.2% vs 10.7% [2011]; P = .002), as was carbapenem use (3.7% vs 2.7% [2011]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall hospital antimicrobial use prevalence was not different in 2011 and 2015; however, differences observed in selected patient or antimicrobial groups may provide evidence of stewardship impact.

Assessment of Health Care Exposures and Outcomes in Adult Patients With Sepsis and Septic Shock.

Importance: Current information on the characteristics of patients who develop sepsis may help in identifying opportunities to improve outcomes. Most recent studies of sepsis epidemiology have focused on changes in incidence or have used administrative data sets that provided limited patient-level data. Objective: To describe sepsis epidemiology in adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study reviewed the medical records, death certificates, and hospital discharge data of adult patients with sepsis or septic shock who were discharged from the hospital between October 1, 2014, and September 30, 2015. The convenience sample was obtained from hospitals in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Emerging Infections Program in 10 states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Tennessee). Patients 18 years and older with discharge diagnosis codes for severe sepsis or septic shock were randomly selected. Data were analyzed between May 1, 2018, and January 31, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The population's demographic characteristics, health care exposures, and sepsis-associated infections and pathogens were described, and risk factors for death within 30 days after sepsis diagnosis were assessed. Results: Among 1078 adult patients with sepsis (569 men [52.8%]; median age, 64 years [interquartile range, 53-75 years]), 973 patients (90.3%) were classified as having community-onset sepsis (ie, sepsis diagnosed within 3 days of hospital admission). In total, 654 patients (60.7%) had health care exposures before their hospital admission for sepsis; 260 patients (24.1%) had outpatient encounters in the 7 days before admission, and 447 patients (41.5%) received medical treatment, including antimicrobial drugs, chemotherapy, wound care, dialysis, or surgery, in the 30 days before admission. A pathogen associated with sepsis was found in 613 patients (56.9%); the most common pathogens identified were Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Clostridioides difficile. After controlling for other factors, an association was found between underlying comorbidities, such as cirrhosis (odds ratio, 3.59; 95% CI, 2.03-6.32), immunosuppression (odds ratio, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.81-3.52), vascular disease (odds ratio, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.10-2.15), and 30-day mortality. Conclusions and Relevance: Most adults experienced sepsis onset outside of the hospital and had recent encounters with the health care system. A sepsis-associated pathogen was identified in more than half of patients. Future efforts to improve sepsis outcomes may benefit from examination of health maintenance practices and recent health care exposures as potential opportunities among high-risk patients.

Epidemiology of Antibiotic Use for Urinary Tract Infection in Nursing Home Residents.

OBJECTIVES: Describe antibiotic use for urinary tract infection (UTI) among a large cohort of US nursing home residents. DESIGN: Analysis of data from a multistate, 1-day point prevalence survey of antimicrobial use performed between April and October 2017. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Residents of 161 nursing homes in 10 US states of the Emerging Infections Program (EIP). METHODS: EIP staff reviewed nursing home medical records to collect data on systemic antimicrobial drugs received by residents, including therapeutic site, rationale for use, and planned duration. For drugs with the therapeutic site documented as urinary tract, pooled mean and nursing home-specific prevalence rates were calculated per 100 nursing home residents, and proportion of drugs by selected characteristics were reported. Data were analyzed in SAS, version 9.4. RESULTS: Among 15,276 residents, 407 received 424 antibiotics for UTI. The pooled mean prevalence rate of antibiotic use for UTI was 2.66 per 100 residents; nursing home-specific rates ranged from 0 to 13.6. One-quarter of antibiotics were prescribed for UTI prophylaxis, with a median planned duration of 111 days compared with 7 days when prescribed for UTI treatment (P < .001). Fluoroquinolones were the most common (18%) drug class used. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: One in 38 residents was receiving an antibiotic for UTI on a given day, and nursing home-specific prevalence rates varied by more than 10-fold. UTI prophylaxis was common with a long planned duration, despite limited evidence to support this practice among older persons in nursing homes. The planned duration was ≥7 days for half of antibiotics prescribed for treatment of a UTI. Fluoroquinolones were the most commonly used antibiotics, despite their association with significant adverse events, particularly in a frail and older adult population. These findings help to identify priority practices for nursing home antibiotic stewardship.

Treatment of Clostridioides difficile Infection and Non-compliance with Treatment Guidelines in Adults in 10 US Geographical Locations, 2013-2015.

BACKGROUND: Infectious Diseases Society of America/Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (IDSA/SHEA) guidelines describe recommended therapy for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). OBJECTIVE: To describe CDI treatment and, among those with severe CDI, determine predictors of adherence to the 2010 IDSA/SHEA treatment guidelines. DESIGN: We analyzed 2013-2015 CDI treatment data collected through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Emerging Infections Program. Generalized linear mixed models were used to identify predictors of guideline-adherent therapy. PATIENTS: A CDI case was defined as a positive stool specimen in a person aged ≥ 18 years without a positive test in the prior 8 weeks; severe CDI cases were defined as having a white blood cell count ≥ 15,000 cells/µl. MAIN MEASURES: Prescribing and predictors of guideline-adherent CDI therapy for severe disease. KEY RESULTS: Of 18,243 cases, 14,257 (78%) were treated with metronidazole, 7683 (42%) with vancomycin, and 313 (2%) with fidaxomicin. The median duration of therapy was 14 (interquartile range, 11-15) days. Severe CDI was identified in 3250 (18%) cases; of 3121 with treatment data available, 1480 (47%) were prescribed guideline-adherent therapy. Among severe CDI cases, hospital admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.90, 3.24), age ≥ 65 years (aOR 1.37; 95% CI 1.10, 1.71), Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 3 (aOR 1.27; 95% CI 1.04, 1.55), immunosuppressive therapy (aOR 1.21; 95% CI 1.02, 1.42), and inflammatory bowel disease (aOR 1.56; 95% CI 1.13, 2.17) were associated with being prescribed guideline-adherent therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Provider adherence to the 2010 treatment guidelines for severe CDI was low. Although the updated 2017 CDI guidelines, which expand the use of oral vancomycin for all CDI, might improve adherence by removing the need to apply severity criteria, other efforts to improve adherence are likely needed, including educating providers and addressing barriers to prescribing guideline-adherent therapy, particularly in outpatient settings.

Changes in Prevalence of Health Care-Associated Infections in U.S. Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: A point-prevalence survey that was conducted in the United States in 2011 showed that 4% of hospitalized patients had a health care-associated infection. We repeated the survey in 2015 to assess changes in the prevalence of health care-associated infections during a period of national attention to the prevention of such infections. METHODS: At Emerging Infections Program sites in 10 states, we recruited up to 25 hospitals in each site area, prioritizing hospitals that had participated in the 2011 survey. Each hospital selected 1 day on which a random sample of patients was identified for assessment. Trained staff reviewed medical records using the 2011 definitions of health care-associated infections. We compared the percentages of patients with health care-associated infections and performed multivariable log-binomial regression modeling to evaluate the association of survey year with the risk of health care-associated infections. RESULTS: In 2015, a total of 12,299 patients in 199 hospitals were surveyed, as compared with 11,282 patients in 183 hospitals in 2011. Fewer patients had health care-associated infections in 2015 (394 patients [3.2%; 95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.9 to 3.5]) than in 2011 (452 [4.0%; 95% CI, 3.7 to 4.4]) (P<0.001), largely owing to reductions in the prevalence of surgical-site and urinary tract infections. Pneumonia, gastrointestinal infections (most of which were due to Clostridium difficile [now Clostridioides difficile]), and surgical-site infections were the most common health care-associated infections. Patients' risk of having a health care-associated infection was 16% lower in 2015 than in 2011 (risk ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.95; P=0.005), after adjustment for age, presence of devices, days from admission to survey, and status of being in a large hospital. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of health care-associated infections was lower in 2015 than in 2011. To continue to make progress in the prevention of such infections, prevention strategies against C. difficile infection and pneumonia should be augmented. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).

Risk Factors for Community-Associated Clostridium difficile Infection in Adults: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: An increasing proportion of Clostridium difficile infections (CDI) in the United States are community-associated (CA). We conducted a case-control study to identify CA-CDI risk factors. METHODS: We enrolled participants from 10 US sites during October 2014-March 2015. Case patients were defined as persons age ≥18 years with a positive C. difficile specimen collected as an outpatient or within 3 days of hospitalization who had no admission to a health care facility in the prior 12 weeks and no prior CDI diagnosis. Each case patient was matched to one control (persons without CDI). Participants were interviewed about relevant exposures; multivariate conditional logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: Of 226 pairs, 70.4% were female and 52.2% were ≥60 years old. More case patients than controls had prior outpatient health care (82.1% vs 57.9%; P < .0001) and antibiotic (62.2% vs 10.3%; P < .0001) exposures. In multivariate analysis, antibiotic exposure-that is, cephalosporin (adjusted matched odds ratio [AmOR], 19.02; 95% CI, 1.13-321.39), clindamycin (AmOR, 35.31; 95% CI, 4.01-311.14), fluoroquinolone (AmOR, 30.71; 95% CI, 2.77-340.05) and beta-lactam and/or beta-lactamase inhibitor combination (AmOR, 9.87; 95% CI, 2.76-340.05),-emergency department visit (AmOR, 17.37; 95% CI, 1.99-151.22), white race (AmOR 7.67; 95% CI, 2.34-25.20), cardiac disease (AmOR, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.20-19.80), chronic kidney disease (AmOR, 12.12; 95% CI, 1.24-118.89), and inflammatory bowel disease (AmOR, 5.13; 95% CI, 1.27-20.79) were associated with CA-CDI. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotics remain an important risk factor for CA-CDI, underscoring the importance of appropriate outpatient prescribing. Emergency departments might be an environmental source of CDI; further investigation of their contribution to CDI transmission is needed.