Stakeholder Engagement In a Comparative Effectiveness/Implementation Study to Prevent Staphylococcus Aureus Infection Recurrence: CA-MRSA Project (CAMP2).

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant or methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft tissue infections pose serious clinical and public health challenges. Few protocols exist for outpatient education, decolonization and decontamination. OBJECTIVES: This trial implemented infection prevention protocols in homes via community health workers/Promotoras. METHODS: We engaged clinicians, patient stakeholders, clinical and laboratory researchers, New York-based federally qualified health centers and community hospital emergency departments. The Clinician and Patient Stakeholder Advisory Committee (CPSAC) convened in person and remotely for shared decision-making and trial oversight. RESULTS: The intervention trial consented participants with skin and soft tissue infections from Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, completed home visits, obtained surveillance cultures from index patients and household members and sampled household environmental surfaces at baseline and three months. LESSONS LEARNED: The retention of the CPSAC during the trial demonstrated high levels of engagement. CONCLUSIONS: CPSAC was highly effective throughout design and execution by troubleshooting recruitment and home visit challenges.

The impact and efficiency of medical screening exams in forward treatment areas at New York City public hospitals during the initial COVID-19 surge.

BACKGROUND: New York City (NYC) emergency departments (EDs) experienced a surge of patients because of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in March 2020. NYC Health and Hospitals established rapid medical screening exams (MSE) and each hospital designated areas to perform their MSE. Five of the 11 hospitals created a forward treatment area (FTA) external to the ED to disposition patients before entering who presented with COVID-like symptoms. Three hospitals used paper-based, and 2 used an electronic medical record (EMR)-based MSE. This study evaluated the effectiveness of safely discharging patients home from the FTA while also evaluating the efficiency of using paper-based versus EMR-based MSEs. METHODS: Charts were reviewed using standardized data extraction templates. Patients discharged from the FTA were contacted by phone, and a structured interview captured additional data regarding subsequent clinical courses. Chi-square tests were used to compare proportions of patients hospitalized, as well as proportions of patients with vital signs recorded. Mortality rates were compared with Fisher exact test. A logistic regression model with fixed effects to account for clustering at hospitals was used to compare the odds of being sent to the ED for further evaluation based on vital signs and adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: Across 5 EDs, 3335 patients were evaluated in their FTAs from March 17, 2020, to April 27, 2020. A total of 970 (29.1%) patients were referred for further evaluation into the ED, of which 203 (20.9%) were hospitalized and 19 (2.0%) died. Of 2302 patients discharged from the FTA, 182 (7.9%) returned to the ED within 7 days, resulting in 42 (1.8%) hospitalizations and 7 (0.3%) deaths. Facilities using EMR-MSE discharged more patients from their FTA (81.9% vs 65.3%, P < 0.001) and had similar 7-day return (9.3% vs 7.1%, P = 0.055) and mortality rates (0.49% vs 0.20%, P = 0.251). CONCLUSION: MSEs in an FTA are an effective process to disposition patients safely in a high-volume situation. Differences exist in paper- versus EMR-based approaches, suggesting EMR-MSEs provide better data, efficiency, and effectiveness. This suggests prioritizing an EMR-based MSE should be considered in future circumstances.