We evaluated antibiotic use in a private health insurance network in Bolivia with two different healthcare plans. The Health Maintenance Organization plan had 29% lower antibiotic consumption and fewer broad-spectrum antibiotics prescribed than the Preferred Provider Organization. Furthermore, we identified potential targets for future antibiotic stewardship efforts.

Background: Previous analyses describing the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 infection and Staphylococcus aureus have focused on hospital-onset S. aureus infections occurring during COVID-19 hospitalizations. Because most invasive S. aureus (iSA) infections are community-onset (CO), we characterized CO iSA cases with a recent positive SARS-CoV-2 test (coinfection). Methods: We analyzed CDC Emerging Infections Program active, population- and laboratory-based iSA surveillance data among adults during March 1–December 31, 2020, from 11 counties in 7 states. The iSA cases (S. aureus isolation from a normally sterile site in a surveillance area resident) were considered CO if culture was obtained <3 days after hospital admission. Coinfection was defined as first positive SARS-CoV-2 test ≤14 days before the initial iSA culture.  We explored factors independently associated with SARS-CoV-2 coinfection versus no prior positive SARS-CoV-2 test among CO iSA cases through a multivariable logistic regression model (using demographic, healthcare exposure, and underlying condition variables with P<0.25 in univariate analysis) and examined differences in outcomes through descriptive analysis. Results: Overall, 3,908 CO iSA cases were reported, including 138 SARS-CoV-2 coinfections (3.5%); 58.0% of coinfections had iSA culture and the first positive SARS-CoV-2 test on the same day (Fig. 1). In univariate analysis, neither methicillin resistance (44.2% with coinfection vs 36.5% without; P = .06) nor race and ethnicity differed significantly between iSA cases with and without SARS-CoV-2 coinfection (P = .93 for any association between race and ethnicity and coinfection), although iSA cases with coinfection were older (median age, 72 vs 60 years , P<0.01) and more often female (46.7% vs 36.3%, P=0.01).  In multivariable analysis, significant associations with SARS-CoV-2 coinfection included older age, female sex, previous location in a long-term care facility (LTCF) or hospital, presence of a central venous catheter (CVC), and diabetes (Figure 2).  Two-thirds of co-infection cases had ≥1 of the following characteristics: age > 73 years, LTCF residence 3 days before iSA culture, and/or CVC present any time during the 2 days before iSA culture. More often, iSA cases with SARS-CoV-2 coinfection were admitted to the intensive care unit ≤2 days after iSA culture (37.7% vs 23.3%, P<0.01) and died (33.3% vs 11.3%, P<0.01). Conclusions: CO iSA patients with SARS-CoV-2 coinfection represent a small proportion of CO iSA cases and mostly involve a limited number of factors related to likelihood of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 and iSA. Although CO iSA patients with SARS-CoV-2 coinfection had more severe outcomes, additional research is needed to understand how much of this difference is related to differences in patient characteristics.

Disclosures: None

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a common etiology of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs). One strategy to reduce HAIs due to MRSA involves a multistep decolonization process. This often involves nasal application of mupirocin 2% ointment. In our institution, when individuals meet criteria for decolonization, we recommend 5 days of treatment given twice daily. High levels of mupirocin resistance have been reported in some hospital systems, with >80% of tested isolates being resistant. To better understand our resistance levels, we selected 238 MRSA isolates from blood cultures to be tested for mupirocin resistance to correlate the presence of resistance and use of mupirocin for decolonization. We choose to assess MRSA blood isolates rather than nasal swabs given that we aim to prevent invasive MRSA infections, including blood stream infections, with decolonization. The blood cultures were collected from 11 acute-care facilities within our system from March 2021 through June 2022. High-level resistance was defined as an MIC >1,024 μg/mL according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. Of those, 7.14% showed high level resistance, and 76.47% occurred in those who were exposed to mupirocin and 23.53% occurred in those without mupirocin exposure (P = .0094). On average, those with high-level resistance had had more recent exposure to mupirocin compared to those without resistance, which was statistically significant. Also, those with high resistance, on average, received more doses of mupirocin, although this was not statistically significant. Conclusions: More recent and higher number of doses of mupirocin were associated with the development of resistance, which is consistent with what we know from pharmacodynamics of antibiotic resistance with other agents. These findings may be particularly important for those patients who have frequent hospitalizations and often require decolonization. Understanding baseline mupirocin resistance levels in an institution can assist with determining decolonization strategies.

Disclosures: None

Advanced practice providers are a diverse and established group of antimicrobial prescribers in both ambulatory and inpatient settings. We outline important considerations for antimicrobial stewardship programs and stewards to consider when engaging this important group of providers.

Background: Directing COVID-19 diagnostic testing to healthcare workers (HCWs) who are likely to be infected has potential to reduce staffing shortages and decrease opportunity for in-hospital transmission; however, HCWs with COVID-19 may exhibit a range of symptoms. We assessed the burden of symptoms in relation to cycle threshold (Ct) values as a surrogate for viral shedding in vaccinated healthcare workers. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed employee health records of COVID-19–vaccinated employees who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between December 2020 and January 2022 at 2 academic hospital systems. We reviewed demographic data, reasons for testing including symptoms, exposure history, medical history, vaccination dates, Ct values, and genotypes when available. We compared mean Ct values between symptomatic and minimally symptomatic cases using independent sample t tests. Patients were defined as minimally symptomatic if they had no symptoms or a single symptom that is not cough, fever, or anosmia at the time of testing. Patients were defined as more symptomatic if they reported >1 symptom or cough, fever, or anosmia. Results: In total, 298 HCWs tested positive for COVID-19. Most positive cases were female (73%), white (78%), and had patient-facing roles (77%). Genotypic testing (n = 109) revealed that most genotypes belonged to the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant (AY lineages, B1.617.2). More cases were minimally symptomatic (62%) than were more symptomatic (38%). None required hospitalization during the study period. Mean Ct values (n = 141) showed no significant difference between more symptomatic and minimally symptomatic cases (19.8 vs 20.6; P = .40) (Fig. 1). Also, there was no significant difference in mean Ct value, comparing those with vaccination 90 days prior to positive (20.52 vs 19.88; P = .537). Conclusions: Our study shows no significant difference in cycle threshold values between minimally symptomatic and more symptomatic infections in vaccinated HCWs. In addition, HCWs exhibit high viral load even when infected within 90 days after vaccination. When considering whether to attend work, HCWs should be aware that mild symptoms and recent vaccination do not necessarily reflect low transmissibility and that they should follow CDC guidance regarding when to return to work.

Disclosures: None

Early in the pandemic, pre-print servers sped rapid evidence sharing. A collaborative of major medical journals supported their use to ensure equitable access to scientific advancements. In the intervening three years, we have made major advancements in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 and learned about the benefits and limitations of pre-prints as a mechanism for sharing and disseminating scientific knowledge.

Pre-prints increase attention, citations, and ultimately impact policy, often before findings are verified. Evidence suggests that pre-prints have more spin relative to peer-reviewed publications. Clinical trial findings posted on pre-print servers do not change substantially following peer-review, but other study types (e.g., modeling and observational studies) often undergo substantial revision or are never published.

Nuanced policies about sharing results are needed to balance rapid implementation of true and important advancements with accuracy. Policies recommending immediate posting of COVID-19-related research should be re-evaluated, and standards for evaluation and sharing of unverified studies should be developed. These may include specifications about what information is included in pre-prints and requirements for certain data quality standards (e.g., automated review of images and tables); requirements for code release and sharing; and limiting early postings to methods, results, and limitations sections.

Academic publishing needs to innovate and improve, but assessments of evidence quality remains a critical part of the scientific discovery and dissemination process.

Background: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is a widely used modality for safe and effective treatment of recurrent Clostridium difficile infections, and FMT is being explored for the treatment of additional indications including gastrointestinal diseases and neurological disorders. Although microbiota-based therapies like FMT utilize rigorous donor screening procedures, these procedures are limited in resolution and scope, and there remains a risk of transmission of FMT-associated infectious agents from donor stool to a FMT recipient. Critically, these health concerns led the FDA to issue a 2019 safety alert for the transmission risks associated with FMT and to update its guidelines for screening and reporting. In a suspected transmission event, there is uncertainty around the source of infection; thus, methods are needed to rapidly determine whether a patient’s infection is linked to the donor stool product. Methods: Here, we developed a laboratory service sequencing and bioinformatics pipeline within our CLIA-certified laboratory for investigating suspected FMT infection transmission by measuring genomic relatedness. Our pipeline performs deep sequencing of a metagenomic sample, whole-genome sequencing (WGS) of an isolate derived from the implicated patient infection and determines the genomic relatedness between the 2 using a SNP-based analysis. The workflow was validated in silico with synthetic metagenomic samples spiked-in with WGS of clinically relevant isolate strains at varying abundance. Results: The sample and sequencing library preparation workflow was optimized across a panel of metagenomic and mock fecal microbiome samples demonstrating reproducible and reduced-bias sequencing of metagenomic samples. Our pipeline demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity for clonality calls when a spiked in isolate genome achieves 5× depth for >50% of the genome. We also demonstrated an interplay between abundance rate and sequencing depth for determining a clonality limit of detection. Conclusions: Taken together, our pipeline represents a new method that can support the clinical efforts of FMT and other microbiota-based therapies. References: US Food and Drug Administration. Important safety alert regarding use of fecal microbiota for transplantation and risk of serious adverse reactions due to transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms. Rockville, MD: Food and Drug Administration, 2019. DeFilipp Z, Bloom PP, Torres Soto M, et al. Drug-resistant E. coli bacteremia transmitted by fecal microbiota transplant. N Engl J Med 2019;381:2043–2050.

Financial support: This study was funded by Day Zero Diagnostics.

Disclosures: None

Background: Academic publishing is not exempt from potential structural disparities. We assessed the sex representation among the editors and on editorial boards by their level of influence in the decision of a manuscript of the leading journals focused on infectious diseases and healthcare epidemiology. We also explored whether the sex of the first or last author correlates with the sex of the editors in a convenience sample of these journals. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, the 40 top infectious disease journals (Scimago Journal and Country Rank) and 4 healthcare epidemiology journals were selected. The names and positions of the editorial members were extracted from the journal’s website, and a decision-making level was assigned (ie, editor-in-chief as level 1, board members as level 3). Next, the first and corresponding authors’ names of all 2019 research articles published in a convenience sample of 15 of these journals were retrieved for the second aim. A digital gallery was used to assign one of the binary denominations of woman or man based on the probability that a name was culturally given to a woman or man. Differences were determined by χ2 and linear regression. Results: Overall, 2,416 names were retrieved from the editorial boards of 44 journals; 799 (33%) were assigned as women and 1,617 (67%) as men. The decision-making level showed 70 (3%) at the editor-in-chief level, 756 (31%) at the associate editor level, and 1,600 (66%) as editorial board members. The frequency distribution of assigned gender by decision-making level showed 21 (30%) women and 49 (70%) men at the editor-in-chief level; 263 (35%) women and 493 (65%) men at the associate editor level; 515 (32%) women and 1,075 (68%) men at the editorial board level. Some journals showed an even sex distribution, such as Clinical Infectious Disease or Microbiology Spectrum. However, others were significantly unbalanced. We retrieved 2,725 articles from the convenience sample of infectious disease–focused journals. Women were the first authors in 1,373 (50%) and the last authors in 974 (35%). Editorial board sex composition and sex of authors showed no significant correlation. Trends between infectious disease–focused and healthcare epidemiology–focused journals were similar. Conclusions: Although the data showed uneven sex representation on the editorial boards of infectious disease–focused and healthcare epidemiology–focused journals, there is no apparent vertical segregation or influence on publishing by sex. A generational transition seems to be occurring in editorship and authorship in the field.

Disclosures: None

Background: The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) serves as a national platform for infection prevention and antibiotic stewardship. Like many professional healthcare societies over the last decade, the SHEA has pledged to provide equitable opportunities to individuals in the organization. The impact of these efforts remains undetermined. This study evaluated trends in speaker demographics at the annual SHEA Spring Conference from 2019 to 2022. Methods: SHEA leadership or staff provided demographic information on SHEA members and Spring conference speakers (excluding poster sessions) from 2019 to 2022. We excluded 2020 due to conference cancellation. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics, and χ2 analysis was used to evaluate changes over time. Individual speakers were compared with member demographics. Self-reported SHEA speaker and member demographics were available for sex, race or ethnicity, age, primary practice setting, and professional degrees. Speaker professional degree was not available for 2022. Results: In total, 447 speaker slots were filled by 218 unique speakers over the 3-year period. The SHEA average annual membership between 2019 and 2022 with self-reported demographics included 55.2% female and 44.8% male members, with race reported as follows: 69.3% White, 21.4% Asian, 6.0% Hispanic or Latino, 2.9% Black, 0.4% American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (AIAN/NHPI). However, almost half of the members did not report a race or ethnicity. The SHEA speakers during the same period were 63.5% female and 36.5% male, with 68.2% White, 13.3% Asian, 3.8% Black, 3.4% Hispanic/Latino, and 0.8% AIAN/NHPI. Only 13.4% of speakers did not report race or ethnicity. Every year, there were fewer than 6 speakers in each of the Black, Hispanic or Latino, AIAN/NHPI race or ethnicity categories. In 2019, 49.2% of speakers were aged 41–50 years, compared with 28.6% of members in that age group (P = 0.0029). By 2022, 35.6% of speakers were aged 41–50 years, compared with 29.3% of members in that age group (P = .074). In 2021, pharmacists represented 11.9% of speakers compared with 2.9% of members, and members with nondoctoral degrees represented 11.1% of speakers compared with 21.4% of members (P < .0001). In each year, there was a statistically significant association between primary practice setting and speaker or member representation, with underrepresentation of community or private-practice speakers relative to their proportion of membership: 2019 (7.5% speakers vs 14.3% members), 2021 (6.5% speakers vs 15.2% members), 2022 (4.3% speakers vs 15.7% members) (P < .05) . Conclusions: Although there has been more equitable speaker age representation and an increase in pharmacist speakers at the SHEA Spring Conference over time, practitioners from community settings and those with nondoctoral degrees remain underrepresented relative to the SHEA membership. Racial or ethnic minoritized individuals remain underrepresented as members and speakers compared with the general US population. Intentional interventions are needed to consistently achieve equitable speaker representation across multiple demographic groups at the SHEA Spring Conference.

Disclosures: None

Background: Infection prevention and control (IPC) competency is critical for healthcare personnel (HCP) and patient safety. In collaboration with the CDC new national IPC training collaborative called Project Firstline, the Oregon Health Authority’s (OHA) Healthcare Associated Infection (HAI) Program established a state-level program in 2021. The goal of Oregon Project Firstline is to provide relevant, accessible, and engaging IPC training materials for our state’s HCP. We assessed the IPC learning needs of Oregon’s healthcare workforce, and to understand the preferred methods and formats of training across the various HCP roles. Methods: OHA’s HAI program recruited HCP by distributing electronic surveys through multiple healthcare, regulatory, and public health partners’ email listservs and HCP-targeted newsletters. Survey responses were recorded from September 23 to December 10, 2021. The HAI program assessed respondents’ IPC knowledge, online and in-person job training preferences, frequently used training devices, and trusted sources for IPC information. An individual’s understanding of an IPC topic was categorized based on their self-assessed confidence in their knowledge and ability to teach the topic to others. In total, 6,382 surveyed responses were analyzed. Results: The average understanding among HCP was lowest in IPC topics relating to triage and isolation of contagious patients and fit testing of respiratory protection devices. For these topics, 3,208 HCP (66.21%) and 3,657 HCP (75.48%) HCP, respectively, did not understand the topic well enough to teach others (Fig. 1). The highest number of HCP (n = 2,512, 39.36%) requested additional training in methods on how to educate others about IPC topics (ie, “train the trainer”). Surveyed respondents most frequently used personal computers for job trainings in both work and at-home settings (n = 4,603, 72.12%) and 3,437 HCP (53.85%) were open to either in-person or remote formats for job education. The CDC and OHA were the most frequented and trusted IPC sources among surveyed HCP: 4,124 HCP (64.62%) and 3,584 HCP (56.16%), respectively. Conclusions: IPC is a critical topic in HCP training across all healthcare facility types and employee roles. Effective educational planning includes understanding the learners’ knowledge needs and preferred methods of learning. Our learning needs assessment identified important IPC knowledge gaps and will help ensure that our training courses will be offered in effective educational formats for Oregon’s diverse HCP. Future training will include appropriate triage of potentially infectious patients, respiratory fit testing, and general IPC “train the trainer” sessions. Additionally, we will offer both in-person and remote options.

Disclosures: None

Background: Invasive mold infections (IMIs) in hospitalized patients can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Environmental factors, such as hospital construction and negative air-pressure rooms (NAPRs), have been associated with hospital-acquired IMI. Increased utilization of NAPRs during the COVID-19 pandemic created a unique opportunity to examine the impact of NAPRs on IMI risk. Methods: From 2018 to present, a new pavilion was being constructed adjacent to our hospital. The Theradoc platform was used to identify positive mold cultures among adult patients hospitalized at our institution between March 1, 2017, and October 15, 2022. We performed a retrospective chart review of 262 mold isolates to determine patient demographics, timing of IMI, and their relationship to hospital construction and exposure to NAPR. IMI incidence was compared across 3 observation periods: (A) before hospital construction; (B) during hospital construction alone; and (C) during hospital construction and NAPR enhancement during the COVID-19 surge. Hospital-acquired IMI was defined as an infection that occurred >72 hours after admission. A REDCap database was created for data storage and R software was used for data analysis. Results: Of the 262 mold isolates identified, 61 cases were classified as IMI, of which 29 were hospital-acquired IMI. The mean age of IMI patients was 51.8 years, and 55.2% were male. Among them, 20.7% were exposed to NAPR during admission; 65.5.% were immunocompromised; and 2 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19. The all-cause mortality rate among hospital-acquired IMI cases was 79.3% (23 of 29). Also, 82.8% of hospital-acquired IMI cases were respiratory in nature, with 83.3% of these cases due to Aspergillus spp. Yearly rates of hospital-acquired IMI were 3.0 before construction versus 5.6 during construction (periods B and C). Yearly rates of hospital-acquired IMI, respiratory IMI, and invasive pulmonary aspergillosis by period were as follows: Period A had 3 hospital-acquired IMI cases per year, 2 hospital-acquired respiratory IMI cases per year, and 3 hospital-acquired invasive pulmonary aspergillosis cases per year. Period B had 4.5 hospital-acquired IMI cases per year, 3.5 hospital-acquired respiratory IMI cases per year, and 3.0 hospital-acquired invasive pulmonary aspergillosis cases per year. Period C had 6.5 hospital-acquired IMI cases per year, 5.4 hospital-acquired respiratory IMI cases per year, and 5.0 hospital-acquired invasive pulmonary aspergillosis cases per year. Conclusions: Hospital-acquired IMI was associated with a high mortality. Our data demonstrate a >2-fold increase in yearly incidence of hospital-acquired IMI before construction compared with during construction in association with increased implementation of NAPR. We have now reversed the trend in NAPR at our hospital’s designated COVID-19 units.

Disclosures: None

Background: Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) is a gram-negative coccobacillus that has garnered notoriety as a formidable cause of nosocomial infection with significant mortality. This organism poses a significant threat due to its multitude of resistance mechanisms and ability to endure within the environment. In the summer of 2022, a 350-bed acute-care hospital identified an outbreak of CRAB among critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) and intensive nursing care unit (INCU). Here, we report actions taken to contain the outbreak and to identify a common environmental source. Methods: In total, 7 nosocomial CRAB infection cases were identified by the infection prevention team between July and September 2022. A multidisciplinary team reviewed the cases using relevant medical history and available microbial susceptibilities. Clinical culture sites include 1 PICC tip, 1 urine sample, 1 peritoneal fluid samples, 5 wounds, and 1 sputum sample. Of 7 infections, 6 met the criteria for hospital onset, with an average time to infection from admission of 61 days. We quickly initiated universal contact precautions in the ICU and INCU for 6 weeks, enhanced daily cleaning of high-touch surfaces, provided staff and visitor education, conducted adenosine triphosphate (ATP) testing, collected observations, and performed selective environmental culturing based on observations. Results: In total, 71 environmental specimens were collected for culture. All were negative with the exception of 1 isolate obtained from the fanny pack of a wound-care nurse that was positive for CRAB. Also, 4 available patient isolates and the environmental isolate were sent to New York State Department of Health Wadsworth Center (NYSDOH Wadsworth) for genome sequencing, and relation to the same cluster was confirmed. Of 7 isolates, 6 were confirmed to express the blaOXA-23 resistance mechanism (1 was not available for testing). Subsequently, chart review identified that a wound-care nurse had had contact with all 7 patients within 30 days of their infections. Conclusions: After initiation of the described action plan, no further transmission was identified in the ICU or INCU. Real-time observation and environmental culturing was critical in identifying the epidemiological link, and this finding speaks to the ability of this organism to persist on a surface for a substantial length of time. Fanny pack use for transport of patient-care supplies was identified as a high-risk practice due to the inability to be properly disinfected between rooms and limited laundering. Fanny packs are no longer permitted in clinical spaces at this facility.

Disclosures: None

Background: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is a gram-negative, biofilm-producing bacterium that is ubiquitous in water environments and often associated with healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Outbreaks of S. maltophilia bloodstream infections are a rare event and raise the suspicion of a common source. We used whole-genome sequencing (WGS) for an investigation of a cluster of S. maltophilia HAIs at a single hospital. Methods: A patient was defined as an intensive care unit (ICU) patient with fever and S. maltophilia isolated from a culture and who was treated for an HAI from May to October 2022. The response to the cluster included an epidemiologic investigation, water infection control risk assessments (WICRA), and environmental sampling. We also conducted WGS to characterize and assess relatedness between clinical and environmental S. maltophilia isolates. Results: From May 5 to October 1, 2022, we identified 11 HAIs due to S. maltophilia: 9 bloodstream infections and 2 ventilator-associated pneumonia cases. The initial epidemiological investigation did not identify common medical products, procedures, or personnel as an exposure source. The WICRA identified several breaches that may have exposed patients to contaminated water from sink backsplashes in the ICU, computerized tomography (CT) rooms, and the emergency department. In the CT rooms, saline bags were sometimes used for multiple patients, as were single-use intravenous contrast solution bottles. No additional cases were identified once infection control breaches were mitigated by installing sink splashguards, disinfecting drains, dedicating sink use for handwashing, and adhering to single-patient use of pharmaceutical products in the CT rooms. Of 46 environmental water samples, 19 were culture-positive for S. maltophilia. Isolates available for WGS included 7 clinical isolates (6 blood and 1 respiratory) and 17 environmental isolates. Among the 24 isolates sequenced, 16 unique multilocus sequence types (MLSTs) were identified. The 6 blood isolates sequenced were highly related (ST239, 0–4 high-quality, single-nucleotide variants [hqSNV] over 98.99% core genome), suggesting a common source. Two clusters of related environmental isolates were identified; however, overall MLST and hqSNV analyses suggested no relatedness between clinical and environmental isolates. Conclusions: An ICU cluster of S. maltophilia bloodstream infections was likely associated with water contamination of room surfaces and use of single-use intravenous products for multiple patients in the setting of a national pharmaceutical product shortage. This investigation highlights the importance of strong surveillance and water infection control, including routine assessment of ancillary areas in which intravenous products are administered and interdisciplinary collaboration to properly mitigate nosocomial transmission.

Disclosures: None