Sex-disaggregated data for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reported higher hospitalized fatality rates among men than women.

To determine whether the risk factors for in-hospital mortality from COVID-19, present at the time of hospital admission, differed by patient sex.

Single-center, retrospective cohort study at a tertiary-care urban academic center.

We reviewed the electronic medical records of patients positive for COVID-19 via qualitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay, admitted between March 8 and June 14, 2020. Patients were stratified by sex to assess the association of variables present on admission with in-hospital mortality.

The overall inpatient case fatality rate (CFR) was 30.4% (172 of 565). The CFR among male patients was higher than among female patients: 99 (33.7%) versus 73 (26.9%), respectively (P = .08). Among males, comorbid conditions associated with in-hospital mortality were chronic pulmonary disease (P = .02) and connective tissue disease (P = .03). Among females, these comorbid conditions were congestive heart failure (P = .03), diabetes with complication (P = .05), and hemiplegia (P = .02). Variables that remained independently associated with death in males included age >70 years, public insurance, incremental increase in quick sepsis-related organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and C-reactive protein (CRP), lymphocytopenia, and thrombocytopenia. Among females, variables that remained independently associated with mortality included public insurance, incremental increase in Charlson weighted index of comorbidity (CWIC) score, qSOFA, and CRP.

Risk factors for in-hospital mortality by sex included public insurance type, incremental increase in qSOFA and CRP in both sexes. For male patients, older age, lymphocytopenia and thrombocytopenia were also associated with mortality, whereas a higher Charlson score was associated with in-hospital mortality in female patients.

Although multiple studies revealed high vaccine effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines within 3 months after the completion of vaccines, long-term vaccine effectiveness has not been well established, especially after the δ (delta) variant became prominent. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of long-term vaccine effectiveness.

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science from December 2019 to November 15, 2021, for studies evaluating the long-term vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or COVID-19 hospitalization among individuals who received 2 doses of Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna, or AstraZeneca vaccines, or 1 dose of the Janssen vaccine. Long-term was defined as >5 months after the last dose. We calculated the pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with 95% confidence interval for COVID-19 between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as 100% × (1 − DOR).

In total, 16 studies including 17,939,172 individuals evaluated long-term vaccine effectiveness and were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled DOR for COVID-19 was 0.158 (95% CI: 0.157-0.160) with an estimated vaccine effectiveness of 84.2% (95% CI, 84.0- 84.3%). Estimated vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization was 88.7% (95% CI, 55.8%–97.1%). Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 during the δ variant period was 61.2% (95% CI, 59.0%–63.3%).

COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing COVID-19 and COVID-19 hospitalization across a long-term period for the circulating variants during the study period. More observational studies are needed to evaluate the vaccine effectiveness of third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, the vaccine effectiveness of mixing COVID-19 vaccines, COVID-19 breakthrough infection, and vaccine effectiveness against newly emerging variants.

Prevention of healthcare-associated infective endocarditis (HAIE) is based on characterization of underlying factors. Our object was to describe the source of infection, microbiological etiology, and healthcare-related risk factors for HAIE.

Retrospective population-based study.

Adult patients diagnosed with HAIE during 2013–2017 who resided in the study area in Southern Finland with adult population of 0.9 million.

Ninety-five HAIE episodes were included. Ten episodes were related to cardiac surgery. Of the remaining 85 episodes, 11 were classified as nosocomial (ie, acquired and diagnosed during ongoing hospitalization) and 74 as non-nosocomial HAIE. Staphylococcus aureus caused 45% of nosocomial episodes, but only 16% of non-nosocomial episodes (P = 0.039). Most common sources of infection in non-nosocomial HAIE were previous hospitalization (24%), dialysis (18%), and urologic procedures (15%). Enterococcus spp. caused 23% of non-nosocomial HAIE, and more than half of them were associated with urologic or gastrointestinal procedures. Two-thirds of the non-nosocomial HAIE patients had recent hospitalization or invasive procedure. We counted previous healthcare-related risk factors for IE and those who had two or more of them had higher in-hospital and one-year mortality.

Our study indicates the importance of non-nosocomial acquisition of HAIE and S. aureus as the major pathogen in nosocomial episodes. Enterococcal infections dominate in non-nosocomial cases and further studies are needed to identify patients at risk for enterococcal IE after urological or gastrointestinal procedure.

To compare the long-term vaccine effectiveness between those receiving viral vector [Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1)] or inactivated viral (CoronaVac) primary series (2 doses) and those who received an mRNA booster (Pfizer/BioNTech) (the third dose) among healthcare workers (HCWs).

We conducted a retrospective cohort study among HCWs (aged ≥18 years) in Brazil from January 2021 to July 2022. To assess the variation in the effectiveness of booster dose over time, we estimated the effectiveness rate by taking the log risk ratio as a function of time.

Of 14,532 HCWs, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was confirmed in 56.3% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac vaccine versus 23.2% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac vaccine with mRNA booster (P < .001), and 37.1% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of ChAdOx1 vaccine versus 22.7% among HCWs receiving 2 doses of ChAdOx1 vaccine with mRNA booster (P < .001). The highest vaccine effectiveness with mRNA booster was observed 30 days after vaccination: 91% for the CoronaVac vaccine group and 97% for the ChAdOx1 vaccine group. Vacine effectiveness declined to 55% and 67%, respectively, at 180 days. Of 430 samples screened for mutations, 49.5% were SARS-CoV-2 delta variants and 34.2% were SARS-CoV-2 omicron variants.

Heterologous COVID-19 vaccines were effective for up to 180 days in preventing COVID-19 in the SARS-CoV-2 delta and omicron variant eras, which suggests the need for a second booster.

Ceftazidime/avibactam (C/A), ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T), imipenem/relebactam (I/R), and meropenem/vaborbactam (M/V) combine either a cephalosporin (C/T and C/A) or a carbapenem antibiotic (M/V and I/R) with a β-lactamase inhibitor. They are used to treat carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) and/or multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MDRPA).

We compared the pooled clinical success of these medications to older therapies.

PubMed and EMBASE were searched from January 1, 2012, through September 2, 2020, for C/A, C/T, I/R, and M/V studies. The main outcome was clinical success, which was assessed using random-effects models. Stratified analyses were conducted for study drug, sample size, quality, infection source, study design, and multidrug-resistant gram-negative organism (MDRGNO) population. Microbiological success and 28- and 30-day mortality were assessed as secondary outcomes. Heterogeneity was determined using I2 values.

Overall, 25 articles met the inclusion criteria; 8 observational studies and 17 randomized control trials. We detected no difference in clinical success comparing new combination antibiotics with standard therapies for all included organisms (pooled OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.96–1.51). We detected a moderate level of heterogeneity among the included studies I2 = 56%. Studies that focused on patients with CRE or MDRPA infections demonstrated a strong association between treatment with new combination antibiotics and clinical success (pooled OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.60–3.57).

C/T, C/A, I/R, and M/V are not inferior to standard therapies for treating various complicated infections, but they may have greater clinical success for treating MDRPA and CRE infections. More studies that evaluate the use of these antibiotics for drug-resistant infections are needed to determine their effectiveness.

Determine the impact of limited implementation of a rapid blood culture identification (BCID) panel.

Retrospective cohort study.

From February to April 2022, positive blood cultures identified via e-Plex BCID (Roche, Carlsbad, CA) were compared to those identified using standard microbial identification techniques. The primary outcomes assessed were time to optimal therapy, time to de-escalation of anti-MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) agents, and time to de-escalation of anti-pseudomonal agents. Additional analysis investigated the impact of the availability of antimicrobial stewardship program support. This study was conducted at Grady Health System, a large metropolitan safety-net hospital in the southeastern United States.

A total of 253 blood cultures were included in this study (153 BCID and 100 standard). Blood culture identification use was associated with a reduction in median time to optimal antimicrobial therapy (43.4 vs 72.1 h, P < .001) and median time to de-escalation of anti-MRSA agents (27.7 vs 46.7 h, P = .006), and a trend towards reduction of median time to de-escalation of anti-pseudomonal agents (38.8 vs 54.8 h, P = .07). These reductions persisted when controlling for patient age, sex, intensive care unit status, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and antimicrobial stewardship program availability.

Despite restricted use and lack of 24/7 antimicrobial stewardship program availability, BCID panel utilization was associated with earlier initiation of optimal therapy and pathogen identification with subsequent de-escalation of broad-spectrum antimicrobials, as compared to standard antimicrobial techniques. This suggests the potential for benefit from adopting novel diagnostic technologies outside of idealized fully-resourced settings.

Acinetobacter baumannii is a causative agent of healthcare-associated infections, and the introduction and spread of A. baumannii that has acquired drug resistance within a hospital are serious healthcare problems. We investigated the transition of epidemic clones and the occurrence of outbreaks by molecular epidemiological analysis to understand the long-term behavior of A. baumannii within a single facility.

A. baumannii isolates collected from blood-culture–positive patients between January 2009 and December 2020 were subjected to PCR-based open reading frame typing (POT) for species identification, clonal typing, and homology searches.

Of the strains isolated from blood cultures, 49 were identified as A. baumannii and analyzed with POT. The POT#1=122 clones had different antimicrobial resistance profiles to the other POT clones, and strains belonging to this clone were dominant during outbreaks of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter. Although the clonal diversity of A. baumannii decreased and its antimicrobial resistance increased during the outbreaks, clonal diversity and the in-hospital antibiogram improved at the end of the outbreaks. The POT#1=122 clone was not eliminated from the hospital during the study period.

POT is a simple and suitable method for molecular epidemiological monitoring and can show the introduction, outbreak, and subsequent transition of an epidemic clone of A. baumannii.

The 2022 SHEA/IDSA/APIC guidance for surgical site infection (SSI) prevention recommends reserving vancomycin prophylaxis to patients who are methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonized. Unfortunately, vancomycin prophylaxis remains common due to the overestimation of MRSA risk and the desire to cover MRSA in patients with certain healthcare-associated characteristics. To optimize vancomycin prophylaxis, we sought to identify risk factors for MRSA SSI.

This was a single-center, case-control study of patients with a postoperative SSI after undergoing a National Healthcare Safety Network operative procedure over eight years. MRSA SSI cases were compared to non-MRSA SSI controls. Forty-two demographic, medical, and surgical characteristics were evaluated.

Of the 441 patients included, 23 developed MRSA SSIs (rate = 5.2 per 100 SSIs). In the multivariable model, we identified two independent risk factors for MRSA SSI: a history of MRSA colonization or infection (OR, 9.0 [95% CI, 1.9–29.6]) and hip or knee replacement surgery (OR, 3.8 [95% CI, 1.3–9.9]). Hemodialysis, previous hospitalization, and prolonged hospitalization prior to the procedure had no measurable association with odds of MRSA SSI.

Patients with prior MRSA colonization or infection had 9–10 times greater odds of MRSA SSI and patients undergoing hip and knee replacement had 3–4 times greater odds of MRSA SSI. Healthcare-associated characteristics, such as previous hospitalization or hemodialysis, were not associated with MRSA SSI. Our findings support national recommendations to reserve vancomycin prophylaxis for patients who are MRSA colonized, as well as those undergoing hip and knee replacement, in the absence of routine MRSA colonization surveillance.

Antimicrobial administration is necessary before specific dental procedures to prevent postprocedural infections and complications and antimicrobials are sometimes indicated for the treatment of odontogenic infections. However, antimicrobials are commonly misused by dentists.

This cross-sectional study was conducted at 4 public, tertiary-care hospitals in Tokyo, Japan, from June to July 2019. We included patients who received an antimicrobial prescription at the outpatient dentistry center or clinic at each participating hospital. The indications for antimicrobial prescription were (1) antimicrobial prescriptions for prophylaxis (APPs) or (2) antimicrobial prescriptions for treatment (APTs). Prescribing patterns were described in terms of antimicrobial choice, timing, and dosages for APPs and APTs.

During the study period, 1,772 patients received an antimicrobial prescription. Among them 1,439 (81.2%) were APPs and 333 (18.8%) were APTs. The most common aim of APP was to prevent local infections and complications following tooth extraction (n = 1,244, 86.4%). The proportion of appropriate APPs was only 0.8% (12 of 1,439). Among 1,439 total APPs, 171 (11.9%) were unnecessary, 32 (2.2%) were inappropriate, and 1,224 (85.1%) were suboptimal. Whereas 101 (30.3%) of 333 APTs were appropriate, the remaining 97 instances (29.1%) were unnecessary, 86 (26.7%) were inappropriate, and 46 (13.8%) were suboptimal.

Inappropriate antimicrobial prescriptions were common among dentists in Japan. Understanding the differences in the current antimicrobial prescribing patterns for prophylaxis and treatment is critically important for implementing an effective antimicrobial stewardship program in dentistry.

This study aimed to examine the clinical risk factors for cephalosporin resistance in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia caused by Escherichia coli (EC), Klebsiella pneumoniae (KP), Enterobacter cloacae (ENC), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PS).

This retrospective cohort study included 400 adults with Gram-negative bacteremia. The goal was to review 100 cases involving each species and approximately half resistant and half susceptible to first-line cephalosporins, ceftriaxone (EC or KP), or cefepime (ENC or PS). Logistic regression was used to identify factors predictive of resistance.

A total of 378 cases of Gram-negative bacteremia were included in the analysis. Multivariate analysis identified significant risk factors for resistance, including admission from a chronic care hospital, skilled nursing facility, or having a history of infection within the prior 6 months (OR 3.00, P < .0001), requirement for mechanical ventilation (OR 3.76, P < .0001), presence of hemiplegia (OR 3.54, P = .0304), and presence of a connective tissue disease (OR 3.77, P = .0291).

Patients without the identified risk factors should be strongly considered for receiving ceftriaxone or cefepime rather than carbapenems and newer broad-spectrum agents.

To assess the effect of individual compared to clinic-level feedback on guideline-concordant care for 3 acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) among family medicine clinicians caring for pediatric patients.

Cluster randomized controlled trial with a 22-month baseline, 26-month intervention period, and 12-month postintervention period.

In total, 26 family medicine practices (39 clinics) caring for pediatric patients in Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina were selected based upon performance on guideline-concordance for 3 ARTIs, stratified by practice size. These were randomly allocated to a control group (17 clinics in 13 practices) or to an intervention group (22 clinics in 13 practices).

All clinicians received an education session and baseline then monthly clinic-level rates for guideline-concordant antibiotic prescribing for ARTIs: upper respiratory tract infection (URI), acute bacterial sinusitis (ABS), and acute otitis media (AOM). For the intervention group only, individual clinician performance was provided.

Both intervention and control groups demonstrated improvement from baseline, but the intervention group had significantly greater improvement compared with the control group: URI (odds ratio [OR], 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37–1.92; P < 0.01); ABS (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.11–1.88; P < 0.01); and AOM (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.24–2.03; P < 0.01). The intervention group also showed significantly greater reduction in broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing percentage (BSAP%): odds ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.74-0.87, P < 0.01. During the postintervention year, gains were maintained in the intervention group for each ARTI and for URI and AOM in the control group.

Monthly individual peer feedback is superior to clinic-level only feedback in family medicine clinics for 3 pediatric ARTIs and for BSAP% reduction.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04588376, Improving Antibiotic Prescribing for Pediatric Respiratory Infection by Family Physicians with Peer Comparison.

To evaluate infectious pathogen transmission data visualizations in outbreak publications.

Scoping review.

Medline was searched for outbreak investigations of infectious diseases within healthcare facilities that included ≥1 data visualization of transmission using data observable by an infection preventionist showing temporal and/or spatial relationships. Abstracted data included the nature of the cluster(s) (pathogen, scope of transmission, and individuals involved) and data visualization characteristics including visualization type, transmission elements, and software.

From 1,957 articles retrieved, we analyzed 30 articles including 37 data visualizations. The median cluster size was 20.5 individuals (range, 7–1,963) and lasted a median of 214 days (range, 12–5,204). Among the data visualization types, 10 (27%) were floor-plan transmission maps, 6 (16%) were timelines, 11 (30%) were transmission networks, 3 (8%) were Gantt charts, 4 (11%) were cluster map, and 4 (11%) were other types. In addition, 26 data visualizations (70%) contained spatial elements, 26 (70%) included person type, and 19 (51%) contained time elements. None of the data visualizations contained contagious periods and only 2 (5%) contained symptom-onset date.

The data visualizations of healthcare-associated infectious disease outbreaks in the systematic review were diverse in type and visualization elements, though no data visualization contained all elements important to deriving hypotheses about transmission pathways. These findings aid in understanding the visualizing transmission pathways by describing essential elements of the data visualization and will inform the creation of a standardized mapping tool to aid in earlier initiation of interventions to prevent transmission.