Minimizing Low-Value, Uncompensated Work in Academic Infectious Diseases: A 6-Step Program.

Uncompensated work in academic infectious diseases (ID) may be high value (eg, important for academic promotion or necessary for advancement to leadership roles) or low value (eg, not aligning with or contributing to professional goals and aspirations). "Curbside" consultations, participation in hospital committees outside of professional interests, and other "citizenship" tasks are common examples of threats to our valuable time as ID providers. Herein, we define the scope of the problem of low-value uncompensated work in academic ID and outline a 6-step program to minimize these threats. Collaboration with professional sponsors, such as division chiefs, to align individual and team goals and use of a "value-versus-compensation" matrix to prioritize activities may help us establish our own agendas and reclaim our professional autonomy.

Contact precautions as a barrier to hand hygiene: The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) framework to improve compliance with gloved hand hygiene.

In an identified quality improvement effort, nurses were observed regarding their workflow while in contact precaution rooms. Multiple opportunities for hand hygiene were missed while nurses were in gloves, predominantly while moving between "dirty" and "clean" tasks. An education initiative afterward did not show improvement in hand hygiene rates.

Confronting the Disruption of the Infectious Diseases Workforce by Artificial Intelligence: What This Means for Us and What We Can Do About It.

With the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI), the field of infectious diseases (ID) faces both innovation and disruption. AI and its subfields including machine learning, deep learning, and large language models can support ID clinicians' decision making and streamline their workflow. AI models may help ensure earlier detection of disease, more personalized empiric treatment recommendations, and allocation of human resources to support higher-yield antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention strategies. AI is unlikely to replace the role of ID experts, but could instead augment it. However, its limitations will need to be carefully addressed and mitigated to ensure safe and effective implementation. ID experts can be engaged in AI implementation by participating in training and education, identifying use cases for AI to help improve patient care, designing, validating and evaluating algorithms, and continuing to advocate for their vital role in patient care.

Five steps to high quality antimicrobial stewardship research.

The escalating threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) necessitates impactful, reproducible, and scalable antimicrobial stewardship strategies. This review addresses the critical need to enhance the quality of antimicrobial stewardship intervention research. We propose five considerations for authors planning and evaluating antimicrobial stewardship initiatives. Antimicrobial stewards should consider the following mnemonic ABCDE: (A) plan Ahead using implementation science; (B) Be clear and thoroughly describe the intervention by using the TidIER checklist; (C) Use a Checklist to comprehensively report study components; (D) Select a study Design carefully; and (E) Assess Effectiveness and implementation by selecting meaningful outcomes. Incorporating these recommendations will help strengthen the evidence base of antimicrobial stewardship literature and support optimal implementation of strategies to mitigate AMR.

Are reporting guidelines used in infectious diseases publications? An analysis of more than 1,000 articles.

Objective: To assess whether 16 reporting guidelines of Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of Health Research (EQUATOR) were used in infectious diseases research publications. Design: This cross-sectional, audit-type study assessed articles published in five infectious diseases journals in 2019. Methods: All articles were manually reviewed to assess if a reporting guideline was advisable and searched for the names and acronyms of 16 reporting guidelines. An "advisable use rate" was calculated. Results: We reviewed 1,251 manuscripts across five infectious diseases journals. Guideline use was advisable for 973 (75%) articles. Reporting guidelines were used in 85 articles, 6.1% of total articles, and 8% (95% CI 6%-9%) of articles for which guidelines were advised. The advisable use rate ranged from 0.06 to 0.17 for any guideline, 0-0.08 for CONSORT, 0.53-1 for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and 0-0.66 for Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD) : The TRIPOD statement. No trends were observed across the five journals. Conclusions: The use of EQUATOR-related reporting guidelines is infrequent, despite journals and publishers promoting their usage. Whether this finding is attributable to knowledge, acceptance, or perceived usefulness of the guidelines still needs to be clarified.