Literature review of physiological strain of personal protective equipment on personnel in the high-consequence infectious disease isolation environment.

BACKGROUND: Heat strain and dehydration can affect an individual's physical and mental performance. The purpose of this review was to examine the literature for the impact of heat strain on health care workers (HCWs) who care for patients with high-consequence infectious diseases (HCIDs) while wearing personal protective equipment (PPE), discuss the risks of impaired safety caused by heat strain and dehydration in HCID environments, identify attempts to combat PPE-related heat strain, recognize limitations, and provide suggestions for further research. METHODS: A literature search was performed in PubMed or MEDLINE and Google Scholar. Authors screened abstracts for inclusion criteria and reviewed articles if the abstracts were considered to include information relevant to the aim. RESULTS: The search terms yielded 30 articles that were sorted based on environment setting, physiological impact, and interventions. DISCUSSION: The safety of the HCWs and patients can be enhanced through the development and usage of cooler, more comfortable PPE materials and ensembles to help slow the rate of dehydration and support the regulation of core body temperature. CONCLUSIONS: Heat strain caused by wearing PPE is an occupational health concern for HCWs in the high-risk environment, that is, HCID care. Future studies are needed to develop innovative PPE ensembles that can reduce heat strain and improve well-being.

The Challenge of Emerging Resistant Gram-Positive Pathogens in Hip and Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infections.

➤: An increase in resistant bacterial pathogens has occurred over the last 4 decades. ➤: Careful patient selection and improving or correcting risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) before elective surgical treatment are strongly recommended. ➤: Appropriate microbiological methods, including those used to detect and grow Cutibacterium acnes, are recommended. ➤: Antimicrobial agents used in the prevention or management of infection should be selected appropriately and the duration of therapy should be carefully considered in order to mitigate the risk of developing bacterial resistance. ➤: Molecular methods including rapid polymerase chain reaction (PCR) diagnostics, 16S sequencing, and/or shotgun and/or targeted whole-genome sequencing are recommended in culture-negative cases of PJI. ➤: Expert consultation with an infectious diseases specialist (if available) is recommended to assist with the appropriate antimicrobial management and monitoring of patients with PJI.

The utility and sustainability of US Ebola treatment centers during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: In response to the 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) designated 56 US hospitals as Ebola treatment centers (ETCs) with high-level isolation capabilities. We sought to determine the ongoing sustainability of ETCs and to identify how ETC capabilities have affected hospital, local, and regional coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) readiness and response. DESIGN: An electronic survey included both qualitative and quantitative questions and was structured into 2 sections: operational sustainability and role in the COVID-19 response. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The survey was distributed to site representatives from the 56 originally designated ETCs, and 37 (66%) responded. METHODS: Data were coded and analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of the 37 responding ETCs, 33 (89%) reported that they were still operating, and 4 had decommissioned. ETCs that maintain high-level isolation capabilities incurred a mean of $234,367 in expenses per year. All but 1 ETC reported that existing capabilities (eg, trained staff, infrastructure) before COVID-19 positively affected their hospital, local, and regional COVID-19 readiness and response (eg, ETC trained staff, donated supplies, and shared developed protocols). CONCLUSIONS: Existing high-level isolation capabilities and expertise developed following the 2014-2016 EVD epidemic were leveraged by ETCs to assist hospital-wide readiness for COVID-19 and to support responses by other local and regional hospitals However, ETCs face continued challenges in sustaining those capabilities for high-consequence infectious diseases.

Adjunctive Rifampin Following Debridement and Implant Retention for Staphylococcal Prosthetic Joint Infection: Is it Effective if not Combined With a Fluoroquinolone?

Whether rifampin benefits retained staphylococcal prosthetic joint infection is unsettled. In a meta-analysis of 8 studies, we found greater clinical cure with fluoroquinolone-rifampin vs all other regimens (odds ratio [OR], 2.68; 95% CI, 1.43-5.02), but no greater cure with other rifampin combinations vs regimens without rifampin (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.79-1.88).

Excellent Outcomes With the Selective Use of Oral Antibiotic Therapy for Bone and Joint Infections: A Single-Center Experience.

Background and objective Recent studies have challenged the notion that prolonged intravenous (IV) antibiotics are preferable to oral antibiotics for treating musculoskeletal infections. Our institution's orthopedic surgery and orthopedic infectious disease (ID) groups have established consensus criteria for the use of oral antibiotics in musculoskeletal infections. In this study, we examine one-year and two-year outcomes of the selective use of oral antibiotics for musculoskeletal infections in a real-world setting. Methods We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis of adults seen in our orthopedic ID clinic over a six-month period for the first episode of surgically managed osteomyelitis, native joint septic arthritis (NJSA), prosthetic joint infection (PJI), or other musculoskeletal hardware infection with an established microbiologic etiology who received surgical interventions and >2 weeks of antimicrobial treatment. Patients were evaluated for treatment failure at one year and two years following their index surgery, which we defined as death, unplanned surgery, or the initiation of chronic antibiotic suppression. Results One-year treatment failure rates were 0/23 (0%) in patients who switched to oral therapy versus 6/17 (35%) in patients who remained on IV treatment. Two-year treatment failure rates were 0/23 (0%) in patients who switched to oral therapy versus 8/17 (47%) in patients who remained on IV treatment. Conclusions Our consensus criteria for the switch to oral antibiotics for musculoskeletal infections identified patients who went on to have excellent outcomes at one year and two years, suggesting that these criteria can effectively identify patients at low risk for treatment failure. Collaboration between ID specialists and orthopedic surgeons to select antimicrobial regimens can avoid significant burdens, costs, and complications associated with prolonged IV therapy.

Leveraging a Preexisting Global Infectious Disease Network for Local Decision Making During a Pandemic.

Emerging infectious disease epidemics require a rapid response from health systems; however, evidence-based consensus guidelines are generally absent early in the course of events. Formed in 2017 by 5 high-level isolation units spanning 3 continents, the experience of the Global Infectious Disease Preparedness Network (GIDPN) early in the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides a model for accelerating best practice development and improving decision-making in health emergencies. The network served as a platform for real-time, open and transparent information-sharing during unknowns of an active outbreak by clinicians caring for patients, by researchers conducting clinical trials and transmission and infection prevention studies, and by teams advising local and national policy makers. Shared knowledge led to earlier adoption of some treatment modalities as compared to most peer institutions and to implementation of protocols prior to incorporation into national guidelines. GIDPN and similar networks are integral in enhancing preparedness for and response to future epidemics/pandemics.

A pilot study of core body temperatures in healthcare workers wearing personal protective equipment in a high-level isolation unit.

Personal protective equipment used by healthcare workers to mitigate disease transmission risks while caring for patients with high-consequence infectious diseases can impair normal body cooling mechanisms and exacerbate physiological strain. Symptoms of heat strain (e.g., cognitive impairment, confusion, muscle cramping) are especially harmful in the high-risk environment of high-consequence infectious disease care. In this pilot study, the core body temperatures of healthcare workers were assessed using an ingestible, wireless-transmission thermometer while performing patient care tasks common to a high-level isolation unit setting in powered air purifying respirator (PAPR)-level. The objective was to determine the potential for occupational health hazard due to heat stress in an environmentally controlled unit. Maximum core temperatures of the six participants ranged from 37.4 °C (99.3 °F) to 39.9 °C (103.8°F) during the 4-hr shift; core temperatures of half (n = 3) of the participants exceeded 38.5 °C (101.3 °F), the upper core temperature limit. Future investigations are needed to identify other heat stress risks both in and outside of controlled units. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic offers unique opportunities for field-based research on risks of heat stress related to personal protective equipment in healthcare workers that can lead to both short- and long-term innovations in this field.

Antibacterial use in the age of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: Balancing the use of antibacterial therapy against selection for resistance in this pandemic era has introduced both questions and guidelines. In this project, we explored how prescription of empirical antibacterial therapy differs between those with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether COVID-19 status and other factors play a role in the prescription of antibacterial therapy in an inpatient setting at a large referral academic medical centre. Further analysis was conducted to determine whether these factors differ between those testing positive and negative for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Of 405 patients in the cohort, 175 received antibacterial therapy and 296 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. A positive SARS-CoV-2 test carried an OR of 0.3 (95% CI: 0.19, 0.49) for receiving antibacterial treatment in the first 48 h after admission (P < 0.0001) adjusting for age and procalcitonin results. Patients were 1% and 3% less likely to receive antibacterials for every year increase in age in the overall group and among those testing negative for SARS-CoV-2, respectively. Younger age was found to impact use of antibacterial therapy in both the overall analysis as well as the SARS-CoV-2 negative subgroup (P = 0.03 and P = 0.01). High procalcitonin values were found to be associated with increased antibacterial therapy use in both the overall and stratified analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Antibacterial therapy prescription differs by COVID-19 disease status, and procalcitonin results are most highly associated with antibacterial use across strata.

Long-Term Assessment of the Effects of COVID-19 and Isolation Care on Survivor Disability and Anxiety.

We conducted an assessment of disability, anxiety, and other life impacts of COVID-19 and isolation care in a unique cohort of individuals. These included both community admissions to a university hospital as well as some of the earliest international aeromedical evacuees. Among an initial 16 COVID-19 survivors that were interviewed 6-12 months following their admission into isolation care, perception of their isolation care experience was related to their reporting of long-term consequences. However, anxiety and disability assessed with standard scores had no relationship with each other. Both capture of the isolation care experience and caution relying on single scoring systems for assessing long-term consequences in survivors are important considerations for on-going and future COVID-19 and other pandemic survivor research.

Emergency preparedness: What is the future?

Emergency preparedness programs have evolved over the last several decades as communities have responded to natural, intentional, and accidental disasters. This evolution has resulted in a comprehensive all-hazards approach centered around 4 fundamental phases spanning the entire disaster life cycle: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. Increasing frequency of outbreaks and epidemics of emerging and reemerging infectious diseases in the last decade has emphasized the significance of healthcare emergency preparedness programs, but the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has tested healthcare facilities' emergency plans and exposed vulnerabilities in healthcare emergency preparedness on a scale unexperienced in recent history. We review the 4 phases of emergency management and explore the lessons to be learned from recent events in enhancing health systems capabilities and capacities to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from biological threats or events, whether it be a pandemic or a single case of an unknown infectious disease. A recurring cycle of assessing, planning, training, exercising, and revising is vital to maintaining healthcare system preparedness, even in absence of an immediate, high probability threat. Healthcare epidemiologists and infection preventionists must play a pivotal role in incorporating lessons learned from the pandemic into emergency preparedness programs and building more robust preparedness plans.

Utility of repeat testing for COVID-19: Laboratory stewardship when the stakes are high.

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to circulate, testing strategies are of the utmost importance. Given national shortages of testing supplies, personal protective equipment, and other hospital resources, diagnostic stewardship is necessary to aid in resource management. We report the low utility of serial testing in a low-prevalence setting.

Can You Catch It? Lessons Learned and Modification of ED Triage Symptom- and Travel-Screening Strategy.

INTRODUCTION: Efficient identification and isolation of patients with communicable diseases limits exposure to health care workers, other patients, and visitors. In August 2014, our team developed and implemented an algorithm to triage suspected cases of Ebola virus disease in a midwestern United States emergency department and outpatient clinics based on patient travel history and symptoms. Here, we present the lessons learned and modifications to update the tool. METHODS: Two strategies were developed and utilized to properly identify, isolate, and inform on patients with suspected highly hazardous communicable diseases: 1) a robust electronic symptom and travel screen with decision support tools in the electronic medical record, and 2) the availability of workflow protocols for Ebola virus disease, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) once a person under investigation is identified. After action reports provided opportunities to modify the algorithm and improve the identification and isolation processes. RESULTS: Since our screening and travel electronic medical record inception 5 years ago, modifications changed iteratively to further enhance the screening process. Since 2018, staff have identified 5 patients at risk for MERS; in all cases, identification occurred during the check-in process. Exposure investigations in the emergency department decreased significantly after algorithm implementation in January 2019, from 30 in 2018 to 0 in 2019. DISCUSSION: Although highly hazardous communicable diseases like Ebola virus disease and MERS are of concern due to their mortality rates and limited treatment options, these same concepts may be applied to the early identification and isolation of patients suspected of having more common communicable diseases like measles and influenza, emphasizing the importance of protocol-based screening in the healthcare environment.

Advanced Preparation Makes Research in Emergencies and Isolation Care Possible: The Case of Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19).

The optimal time to initiate research on emergencies is before they occur. However, timely initiation of high-quality research may launch during an emergency under the right conditions. These include an appropriate context, clarity in scientific aims, preexisting resources, strong operational and research structures that are facile, and good governance. Here, Nebraskan rapid research efforts early during the 2020 coronavirus disease pandemic, while participating in the first use of U.S. federal quarantine in 50 years, are described from these aspects, as the global experience with this severe emerging infection grew apace. The experience has lessons in purpose, structure, function, and performance of research in any emergency, when facing any threat.

Update on Ebola Treatment Center Costs and Sustainability, United States, 2019.

We surveyed 56 Ebola treatment centers (ETCs) in the United States and identified costs incurred since 2014 ($1.76 million/ETC) and sustainability strategies. ETCs reported heavy reliance on federal funding. It is uncertain if, or for how long, ETCs can maintain capabilities should federal funding expire in 2020.

An update on US Ebola treatment center personnel management and training.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, 56 US hospitals were designated as Ebola treatment centers (ETCs). ETCs had minimum augmented capability requirements for Ebola virus disease care, including for staffing and training. We sought to identify current ETC staffing challenges and frequency of staff retraining. METHODS: In May 2019, an electronic survey was distributed to representatives of the 56 ETCs. RESULTS: Sixty-six percent (37/56) of ETCs responded. Registered nurses comprised the majority of ETC staff. All responding units required orientation training (average = 15.21 hours) and all but one required retraining. Among the top challenges that ETCs reported to maintaining high-level isolation capabilities were staff training time, staff recruitment, staff retention, and training costs. DISCUSSION: Five years after ETC designation, units face staffing challenges. Research is lacking on the effective number of hours and optimal frequency of staff training. ETCs reported smaller staffing teams compared to our 2016 assessment, but team composition remains similar. As units continue to maintain capabilities with decreasing external support and attention, the need for retraining must be balanced with logistical constraints and competing demands for staff time. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that US preparedness capabilities are reduced. More research, support, and funding are needed to sustain the unique knowledge and proficiency acquired by ETC teams to ensure domestic preparedness for highly hazardous communicable diseases.

A Methodology for Determining Which Diseases Warrant Care in a High-Level Containment Care Unit.

Although the concept of high-level containment care (HLCC or 'biocontainment'), dates back to 1969, the 2014-2016 outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) brought with it a renewed emphasis on the use of specialized HLCC units in the care of patients with EVD. Employment of these units in the United States and Western Europe resulted in a significant decrease in mortality compared to traditional management in field settings. Moreover, this employment appeared to significantly lessen the risk of nosocomial transmission of disease; no secondary cases occurred among healthcare workers in these units. While many now accept the wisdom of utilizing HLCC units and principles in the management of EVD (and, presumably, of other transmissible and highly hazardous viral hemorrhagic fevers, such as those caused by Marburg and Lassa viruses), no consensus exists regarding additional diseases that might warrant HLCC. We propose here a construct designed to make such determinations for existing and newly discovered diseases. The construct examines infectivity (as measured by the infectious dose needed to infect 50% of a given population (ID50)), communicability (as measured by the reproductive number (R0)), and hazard (as measured by morbidity and mortality). Diseases fulfilling all three criteria (i.e., those that are highly infectious, communicable, and highly hazardous) are considered candidates for HLCC management if they also meet a fourth criterion, namely that they lack effective and available licensed countermeasures.

Ebola Virus Disease: Clinical Challenges, Recognition, and Management.

The 2014 to 2016 Ebola outbreak response resulted in many lessons learned about biocontainment patient care, leading to enhanced domestic capabilities for highly infectious and hazardous communicable diseases. However, additional opportunities for improvement remain. The article identifies and describes key considerations and challenges for laboratory analysis, clinical management, transportation, and personnel management during the care of patients infected with Ebola or other special pathogens. Dedication to maintaining preparedness enables biocontainment patient care teams to perform at the highest levels of safety and confidence.