Surveillance of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae: tracking molecular epidemiology and outcomes through a regional network.

Carbapenem resistance in Gram-negative bacteria is on the rise in the United States. A regional network was established to study microbiological and genetic determinants of clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with carbapenem-resistant (CR) Klebsiella pneumoniae in a prospective, multicenter, observational study. To this end, predefined clinical characteristics and outcomes were recorded and K. pneumoniae isolates were analyzed for strain typing and resistance mechanism determination. In a 14-month period, 251 patients were included. While most of the patients were admitted from long-term care settings, 28% of them were admitted from home. Hospitalizations were prolonged and complicated. Nonsusceptibility to colistin and tigecycline occurred in isolates from 7 and 45% of the patients, respectively. Most of the CR K. pneumoniae isolates belonged to repetitive extragenic palindromic PCR (rep-PCR) types A and B (both sequence type 258) and carried either blaKPC-2 (48%) or blaKPC-3 (51%). One isolate tested positive for blaNDM-1, a sentinel discovery in this region. Important differences between strain types were noted; rep-PCR type B strains were associated with blaKPC-3 (odds ratio [OR], 294; 95% confidence interval [CI], 58 to 2,552; P < 0.001), gentamicin nonsusceptibility (OR, 24; 95% CI, 8.39 to 79.38; P < 0.001), amikacin susceptibility (OR, 11.0; 95% CI, 3.21 to 42.42; P < 0.001), tigecycline nonsusceptibility (OR, 5.34; 95% CI, 1.30 to 36.41; P = 0.018), a shorter length of stay (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.00; P = 0.043), and admission from a skilled-nursing facility (OR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.26 to 8.08; P = 0.013). Our analysis shows that (i) CR K. pneumoniae is seen primarily in the elderly long-term care population and that (ii) regional monitoring of CR K. pneumoniae reveals insights into molecular characteristics. This work highlights the crucial role of ongoing surveillance of carbapenem resistance determinants.

Impact of Embedding a Venous Thromboembolism Risk Assessment Model in the Electronic Health Record Versus Usual Care: A Cluster-Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: There are multiple risk assessment models (RAMs) for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, but it is unknown whether they increase appropriate prophylaxis. METHODS: To determine the impact of a RAM embedded in the electronic health record, we conducted a stepped-wedge hospital-level cluster-randomized trial conducted from October 1, 2017 to February 28, 2019 at 10 Cleveland Clinic hospitals. We included consecutive general medical patients aged 18 years or older. Patients were excluded if they had a contraindication to prophylaxis, including anticoagulation for another condition, acute bleeding, or comfort-only care. A RAM was embedded in the general admission order set and physicians were encouraged to use it. The decisions to use the RAM and act on the results were reserved to the treating physician. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients receiving appropriate prophylaxis (high-risk patients with pharmacological thromboprophylaxis plus low-risk patients without prophylaxis) within 48 hours of hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included total patients receiving prophylaxis, venous thromboembolism among high-risk patients at 14 and 45 days, major bleeding, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and length of stay. Mixed-effects models were used to analyze the study outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 26 506 patients (mean age, 61; 52% female; 73% White) were analyzed, including 11 134 before and 15 406 after implementation of the RAM. After implementation, the RAM was used for 24% of patients, and the percentage of patients receiving appropriate prophylaxis increased from 43.1% to 48.8% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.11 [1.00-1.23]), while overall prophylaxis use decreased from 73.5% to 65.2% (adjusted odds ratio, 0.87 [0.78-0.97]). Rates of venous thromboembolism among high-risk patients (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72 [0.38-1.36]), rates of bleeding and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (adjusted odds ratio, 0.19 [0.02-1.47]), and length of stay were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a RAM for venous thromboembolism increased appropriate prophylaxis use, but the RAM was used for a minority of patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03243708?term=nct03243708&rank=1; Unique identifier: NCT03243708.

Derivation and Validation of a Risk Factor Model to Identify Medical Inpatients at Risk for Venous Thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized medical patients at high risk for VTE. Multiple risk assessment models exist, but few have been compared in large datasets. METHODS: We constructed a derivation cohort using 6 years of data from 12 hospitals to identify risk factors associated with developing VTE within 14 days of admission. VTE was identified using a complex algorithm combining administrative codes and clinical data. We developed a multivariable prediction model and applied it to three validation cohorts: a temporal cohort, including two additional years, a cross-validation, in which we refit the model excluding one hospital each time, applying the refitted model to the holdout hospital, and an external cohort. Performance was evaluated using the C-statistic. RESULTS: The derivation cohort included 155,026 patients with a 14-day VTE rate of 0.68%. The final multivariable model contained 13 patient risk factors. The model had an optimism corrected C-statistic of 0.79 and good calibration. The temporal validation cohort included 53,210 patients, with a VTE rate of 0.64%; the external cohort had 23,413 patients and a rate of 0.49%. Based on the C-statistic, the Cleveland Clinic Model (CCM) outperformed both the Padua (0.76 vs. 0.72, p = 0.002) and IMPROVE (0.68, p < 0.001) models in the temporal cohort. C-statistics for the CCM at individual hospitals ranged from 0.68 to 0.78. In the external cohort, the CCM C-statistic was similar to Padua (0.70 vs. 0.66, p = 0.17) and outperformed IMPROVE (0.59, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A new VTE risk assessment model outperformed recommended models.

Environmental cleaning and disinfection of hospital rooms: A nationwide survey.

BACKGROUND: As an important reservoir for hospital-acquired infections, environmental surfaces have long been targeted by interventions to improve cleaning and disinfection. Differences in disinfection practices across US hospitals, however, are still unclear. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide survey of environmental services (EVS) personnel in the United States regarding their environmental surface disinfection practices from January 2019 to June 2019. We developed and pilot tested the survey in conjunction with EVS specialists. Survey questions inquired about choices of disinfectants and cleaning equipment during daily and terminal disinfection of both contact isolation and non-contact isolation rooms. We contacted 273 EVS personnel by phone and email to participate in the survey. RESULTS: Fourty-seven EVS personnel representing different hospitals from 26 US states were included in the analysis. Hypochlorite (bleach) and quaternary ammonium compounds were the most frequently used disinfectants. Most respondents reported using microfiber-based cloths and mops to carry out disinfection. High-touch surfaces in contact isolation rooms were frequently disinfected using bleach (81%, n = 38); floors, however, were not disinfected as frequently in patient rooms. The vast majority of respondents reported use of sporicidal disinfectants for contact isolation rooms but not regular rooms. CONCLUSIONS: While frequently used to disinfectant contact isolation rooms, sporicidal agents are rarely used to disinfect regular rooms. Patient room floors are inconsistently disinfected compared to high-touch surfaces.

Monitoring the effectiveness of daily cleaning practices in an intensive care unit (ICU) setting using an adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence assay.

BACKGROUND: The degree to which daily intensive care unit (ICU) cleaning practices impacts bacterial burden is controversial. The study aimed to assess the utility of using adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence assays for monitoring effectiveness of daily cleaning in ICU environments. METHODS: We sampled 364 total samples from 57 patient rooms and 18 common areas in 3 medical ICUs over 12 weeks, before and after routine daily cleaning. Endpoints were ATP levels (relative light units, RLU) and bacterial bioburden (colony forming units, CFU). RESULTS: High-touch surfaces in ICU patient rooms and common areas were contaminated before and after cleaning. Routine cleaning significantly reduced bacterial burden in patient rooms (0.14 log10 CFU reduction, P = .008; 0.21 log10 RLU reduction, P < .001) and in ICU common areas (1.18 log10 CFU reduction, P < .001; 0.72 log10 RLU reduction, P < .001). Among sites with colony counts >20 CFUs, the proportion of sites with ATP readings >250 RLU was significantly higher than those with ATP readings ≤250 RLU (90.0% vs 10.0%, P < .05). CONCLUSION: Routine cleaning significantly reduced bacterial burden on ICU environment surfaces. Although not an alternative to culture methods, ATP assays may be a useful technique to provide rapid feedback on surface cleanliness in ICU settings.

Increasing Mobility via In-hospital Ambulation Protocol Delivered by Mobility Technicians: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ambulating medical inpatients may improve outcomes, but this practice is often overlooked by nurses who have competing clinical duties. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of dedicated mobility technician-assisted ambulation in older inpatients. DESIGN: This study was a single-blind randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Patients aged ≥60 years and admitted as medical inpatients to a tertiary care center were recruited. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized into two groups to participate in the ambulation protocol administered by a dedicated mobility technician. Usual care patients were not seen by the mobility technician but were not otherwise restricted in their opportunity to ambulate. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes were length of stay and discharge disposition. Secondary outcomes included change in mobility measured by six-clicks score, daily steps measured by Fitbit, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: Control (n = 52) and intervention (n = 50) groups were not significantly different at baseline. Of patients randomized to the intervention group, 74% participated at least once. Although the intervention did not affect the primary outcomes, the intervention group took nearly 50% more steps than the control group (P = .04). In the per protocol analysis, the six-clicks score significantly increased (P = .04). Patients achieving ≥400 steps were more likely to go home (71% vs 46%, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Attempted ambulation three times daily overseen by a dedicated mobility technician was feasible and increased the number of steps taken. A threshold of 400 steps was predictive of home discharge. Further studies are needed to establish the appropriate step goal and the effect of assisted ambulation on hospital outcomes.

Comparative Antimicrobial Efficacy of Two Hand Sanitizers in Intensive Care Units Common Areas: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE Contaminated hands of healthcare workers (HCWs) are an important source of transmission of healthcare-associated infections. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers, while effective, do not provide sustained antimicrobial activity. The objective of this study was to compare the immediate and persistent activity of 2 hand hygiene products (ethanol [61% w/v] plus chlorhexidine gluconate [CHG; 1.0% solution] and ethanol only [70% v/v]) when used in an intensive care unit (ICU). DESIGN Prospective, randomized, double-blinded, crossover study SETTING Three ICUs at a large teaching hospital PARTICIPANTS In total, 51 HCWs involved in direct patient care were enrolled in and completed the study. METHODS All HCWs were randomized 1:1 to either product. Hand prints were obtained immediately after the product was applied and again after spending 4-7 minutes in the ICU common areas prior to entering a patient room or leaving the area. The numbers of aerobic colony-forming units (CFU) were compared for the 2 groups after log transformation. Each participant tested the alternative product after a 3-day washout period. RESULTS On bare hands, use of ethanol plus CHG was associated with significantly lower recovery of aerobic CFU, both immediately after use (0.27 ± 0.05 and 0.88 ± 0.08 log10 CFU; P = .035) and after spending time in ICU common areas (1.81 ± 0.07 and 2.17 ± 0.05 log10 CFU; P<.0001). Both the antiseptics were well tolerated by HCWs. CONCLUSIONS In comparison to the ethanol-only product, the ethanol plus CHG sanitizer was associated with significantly lower aerobic bacterial counts on hands of HCWs, both immediately after use and after spending time in ICU common areas. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02258412 Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:267-271.