Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(10): 1748-1754, 2022 05 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34370014

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The profound changes wrought by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on routine hospital operations may have influenced performance on hospital measures, including healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). We aimed to evaluate the association between COVID-19 surges and HAI and cluster rates. METHODS: In 148 HCA Healthcare-affiliated hospitals, from 1 March 2020 to 30 September 2020, and a subset of hospitals with microbiology and cluster data through 31 December 2020, we evaluated the association between COVID-19 surges and HAIs, hospital-onset pathogens, and cluster rates using negative binomial mixed models. To account for local variation in COVID-19 pandemic surge timing, we included the number of discharges with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis per staffed bed per month. RESULTS: Central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI), and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia increased as COVID-19 burden increased. There were 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 23-108%) more CLABSI, 43% (95% CI: 8-90%) more CAUTI, and 44% (95% CI: 10-88%) more cases of MRSA bacteremia than expected over 7 months based on predicted HAIs had there not been COVID-19 cases. Clostridioides difficile infection was not significantly associated with COVID-19 burden. Microbiology data from 81 of the hospitals corroborated the findings. Notably, rates of hospital-onset bloodstream infections and multidrug resistant organisms, including MRSA, vancomycin-resistant enterococcus, and Gram-negative organisms, were each significantly associated with COVID-19 surges. Finally, clusters of hospital-onset pathogens increased as the COVID-19 burden increased. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 surges adversely impact HAI rates and clusters of infections within hospitals, emphasizing the need for balancing COVID-related demands with routine hospital infection prevention.


Assuntos
Bacteriemia , COVID-19 , Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter , Infecção Hospitalar , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente à Meticilina , Pneumonia Associada à Ventilação Mecânica , Infecções Urinárias , Enterococos Resistentes à Vancomicina , Bacteriemia/epidemiologia , Bacteriemia/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Teste para COVID-19 , Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter/prevenção & controle , Infecção Hospitalar/microbiologia , Atenção à Saúde , Humanos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Associada à Ventilação Mecânica/microbiologia , Infecções Urinárias/epidemiologia
2.
NEJM Evid ; 3(5): EVIDoa2300342, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38815164

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Detection and containment of hospital outbreaks currently depend on variable and personnel-intensive surveillance methods. Whether automated statistical surveillance for outbreaks of health care-associated pathogens allows earlier containment efforts that would reduce the size of outbreaks is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial in 82 community hospitals within a larger health care system. All hospitals followed an outbreak response protocol when outbreaks were detected by their infection prevention programs. Half of the hospitals additionally used statistical surveillance of microbiology data, which alerted infection prevention programs to outbreaks. Statistical surveillance was also applied to microbiology data from control hospitals without alerting their infection prevention programs. The primary outcome was the number of additional cases occurring after outbreak detection. Analyses assessed differences between the intervention period (July 2019 to January 2022) versus baseline period (February 2017 to January 2019) between randomized groups. A post hoc analysis separately assessed pre-coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and Covid-19 pandemic intervention periods. RESULTS: Real-time alerts did not significantly reduce the number of additional outbreak cases (intervention period versus baseline: statistical surveillance relative rate [RR]=1.41, control RR=1.81; difference-in-differences, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 1.52; P=0.46). Comparing only the prepandemic intervention with baseline periods, the statistical outbreak surveillance group was associated with a 64.1% reduction in additional cases (statistical surveillance RR=0.78, control RR=2.19; difference-in-differences, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.99). There was no similarly observed association between the pandemic versus baseline periods (statistical surveillance RR=1.56, control RR=1.66; difference-in-differences, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.92). CONCLUSIONS: Automated detection of hospital outbreaks using statistical surveillance did not reduce overall outbreak size in the context of an ongoing pandemic. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04053075. Support for HCA Healthcare's participation in the study was provided in kind by HCA.).


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Infecção Hospitalar , Surtos de Doenças , Humanos , Surtos de Doenças/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Infecção Hospitalar/epidemiologia , Infecção Hospitalar/prevenção & controle , Controle de Infecções/métodos , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitais Comunitários
3.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 41(9): 1016-1021, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32519624

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of an automated, statistically-based outbreak detection system to identify clusters of hospital-acquired microorganisms. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The study included 43 hospitals using a common infection prevention surveillance system. METHODS: A space-time permutation scan statistic was applied to hospital microbiology, admission, discharge, and transfer data to identify clustering of microorganisms within hospital locations and services. Infection preventionists were asked to rate the importance of each cluster. A convenience sample of 10 hospitals also provided information about clusters previously identified through their usual surveillance methods. RESULTS: We identified 230 clusters in 43 hospitals involving Gram-positive and -negative bacteria and fungi. Half of the clusters progressed after initial detection, suggesting that early detection could trigger interventions to curtail further spread. Infection preventionists reported that they would have wanted to be alerted about 81% of these clusters. Factors associated with clusters judged to be moderately or highly concerning included high statistical significance, large size, and clusters involving Clostridioides difficile or multidrug-resistant organisms. Based on comparison data provided by the convenience sample of hospitals, only 9 (18%) of 51 clusters detected by usual surveillance met statistical significance, and of the 70 clusters not previously detected, 58 (83%) involved organisms not routinely targeted by the hospitals' surveillance programs. All infection prevention programs felt that an automated outbreak detection tool would improve their ability to detect outbreaks and streamline their work. CONCLUSIONS: Automated, statistically-based outbreak detection can increase the consistency, scope, and comprehensiveness of detecting hospital-associated transmission.


Assuntos
Infecção Hospitalar , Surtos de Doenças , Análise por Conglomerados , Infecção Hospitalar/epidemiologia , Infecção Hospitalar/prevenção & controle , Hospitais , Humanos , Controle de Infecções , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa