Background: The 2014 US National Strategy for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria aimed to reduce inappropriate inpatient antibiotic use by 20% for monitored conditions, such as community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), by 2020. Clinical guidelines recommend treating uncomplicated CAP with a minimum of 5 days of antibiotic therapy. Total length of therapy (LOT) >7 days or >3 days after clinical improvement is rarely necessary. In a previous study estimating LOT in uncomplicated CAP patients, 71% of patients ≥65 years exceeded recommended duration of antibiotics in 2012–2013 (Yi et al, 2018). We evaluated annual trends in LOT in adults ≥65 years hospitalized with uncomplicated CAP from 2013 to 2020. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among patients in the CMS database with a primary diagnosis of bacterial or unspecified pneumonia using International Classification of Diseases 9th and 10th Revision codes, length of stay (LOS) of 2–10 days, discharged home with self-care, and not rehospitalized in the 3 days following discharge. Discharge home was used as a surrogate for clinical improvement. Because inpatient LOT is not available in CMS data, we used linear regression to model inpatient LOT as a function of LOS using data on CAP patients ≥65 years from the PINC AI healthcare database. Postdischarge LOT was based on prescriptions filled following discharge. Total LOT was calculated by summing estimated inpatient LOT and actual postdischarge LOT (Fig. 1). Total LOT >7 days and postdischarge LOT >3 days were considered indicators of likely excessive LOT. We reported trends in the proportion of patients with likely excessive LOT during the study period. Results: From 2013 through 2020, there were 400,928 uncomplicated CAP hospitalizations among patients aged ≥65 years. Patients were more likely to be female (55%), and they had a median age of 76 years and a median LOS of 3 days. The median total LOT decreased from 9.5 days in 2013 to 7.7 days in 2020. The proportion of patients with total LOT >7 days decreased from 68% in 2013 to 50% in 2020 (% change, −27%); the proportion with postdischarge LOT >3 days decreased from 73% in 2013 to 62% in 2020 (% change, −16%) (Fig. 2). Conclusions: Likely excessive total LOT for adults ≥65 years hospitalized with uncomplicated CAP decreased by 27% in 2020, a considerable improvement from 2013. However, the high proportion of patients with likely excessive postdischarge LOT in 2020 (62%) demonstrates the need for antibiotic stewardship to optimize prescribing at hospital discharge.

Disclosures: None

Objectives: The use of handwashing sinks for activities other than hand hygiene (HH) is associated with higher rates of β-lactamase–producing Enterobacteriaceae. However, little has been published about the handwashing sink activities in Singapore hospitals. We explored the handwashing sink activities in a tertiary-care hospital in Singapore. Methods: Five trained shadow observers conducted this observational study between December 18 and 21, 2018 (6 hours per day: 07:00–09:00, 09:30–11:30, and 12:30–14:30) in acute-care general wards. We divided the handwashing sink activities by healthcare workers (HCWs) and non-HCWs (ie, visitors, caregivers, and relatives) and by HH- and non–HH-related activities. We used Stata version 15 software for the analysis. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the National Healthcare Group, Singapore (DSRB no. 2020/01257). Results: In total, 657 handwashing sink activities were recorded [HCWs, 475 (72.3%) and non-HCWs, 182 (27.7%)]. Of the 475 HCW handwashing sink activities, 451 (94.9%) were HH-related, 10 (2.1%) were for patient nutrition, 7 (1.5%) were for environmental care, 6 (1.3%) were for medical equipment cleaning, and 1 (0.2%) was patient personal-item cleaning. Of the 182 handwashing sink activities by non-HCWs, 117 (64.3%) were HH related, 30 (16.5%) were for patient nutrition, 21 (11.5%) were for personal hygiene, 14 (7.7%) were patient personal-item cleaning. The distribution of handwashing sink activities differed significantly (P < .01) between HCWs and non-HCWs. The odds of non–HH-related handwashing sink activities among non-HCWs was 10× higher than among HCWs (OR, 10.44; 95% CI, 5.98–18.23; P < .01). Conclusions: Handwashing sinks use for non–HH-related activities is higher among non-HCWs than HCWs. Further studies are needed to understand the impact of non-HH handwashing sink activities on nosocomial infections and ways to reduce them.

Objectives: Ancillary staff members perform operational support functions and play an active role in enhancing the patient care experience. Infection prevention practices among ancillary staff play a critical role in preventing transmission of microorganisms, which ensures the safety of patients. Low hand hygiene compliance was found among porters in a cross-institutional hand hygiene audit in 2021. A quality improvement team was formed to improve hand hygiene compliance, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A focus-group discussion and survey were conducted to understand hand hygiene knowledge and challenges among porters. Using the findings, the team initiated Glo–germ education tools, pocket alcohol hand-rub agents, pocket moisturizer, poster display, and a toolbox messaging system via conversion of group roll call to satellite-area roll call. Respective satellite teams were sent hand hygiene reminders, and prompt corrective action was taken following noncompliance events. Analytic comparisons of pre- and postsurvey data were performed using the χ2 test, and P < .05 was regarded as statistically significant. Results: In total, 572 ancillary staff participated in the survey. Knowledge of hand hygiene practices improved significantly following the interventions, as shown in the comparison of pre- and postintervention results: knowledge of the hand hygiene steps (P < .001), knowledge of the duration of hand rub (P < .001), and knowledge of duration of handwashing (P < .001). Also, 295 staff members (97.68%) stated that implementation measures increased their awareness of the importance of hand hygiene. Moreover, the hand hygiene compliance rate improved from 77.8% to 100%. There were no significant differences related to sex (P = .089), age group (P = .355), years of working (P = .359), education level (P = .268), or difficulty in reading English (P = .906). Conclusions: Evaluating staff hand hygiene knowledge and understanding the challenges faced among porters helped toward the development of appropriate interventions and assurance of success in project.

Background: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a common indication for antibiotic prescribing in hospitalized patients. Professional societies’ clinical guidelines recommend specific antibiotics for empiric treatment of CAP based on clinical factors. Manual assessments of appropriateness are time-consuming and are often conducted on a smaller scale. We evaluated empiric antibiotic selection among a large cohort of adults hospitalized with CAP using electronic health records. Methods: In this study, we used the PINC-AI healthcare database to define a cohort of adults hospitalized with CAP from 2013 to 2020. CAP was identified by International Classification of Diseases (ICD) diagnosis codes. Exclusions were applied to identify uncomplicated CAP (Fig. 1). Treatment was only evaluated if a chest radiograph or computerized tomography (CT) scan was charged during the first 2 days of hospitalization, otherwise it was considered an inadequate CAP evaluation. Administrative billing data were used to identify antibiotics charged within the first 2 days of hospitalization. Empiric guideline-recommended treatment was determined based on 2019 CAP guidelines and more recent studies. Patients who received nonrecommended treatment were evaluated for antibiotic allergies in the current hospitalization or methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization or infection in the year prior or on admission using International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis codes. Results: We identified 4.47 million adult hospitalizations with CAP from 2013 to 2020; 32% (1.43 million) were included in this analysis (Fig. 1). Among discharges with adequate CAP evaluation (1.37 million), 59.7% received recommended antibiotics in the first 2 days of hospitalization, ranging from 62.6% in 2013 to 57.5% in 2019. Overall, 34.8% of our study population received a nonrecommended antibiotic without documentation of an antibiotic allergy or MRSA colonization (2013: 32.5%; 2018: 36.7%) (Fig. 2). Most patients in our study population received >1 antibiotic (92.3%) in the first 2 days of hospitalization. The most common antibiotics among patients receiving recommended treatment were ceftriaxone (74.2% of patients receiving recommended treatment), azithromycin (67.2%), and levofloxacin (31.8%) (Fig. 3a). The most common nonrecommended antibiotics were vancomycin (57.2% of patients receiving nonrecommended treatment), piperacillin-tazobactam (48.1%), and cefepime (25.7%) (Fig. 3b). From 2013 to 2020, cefepime charges consistently increased among CAP patients treated with nonrecommended antibiotics, whereas levofloxacin charges consistently decreased among CAP patients treated with only recommended antibiotics. Conclusions: Approximately one-third of patients with uncomplicated CAP received nonrecommended empiric antibiotics, and from 2013 to 2020 that proportion increased by 9%. Additional strategies are needed to help identify opportunities to optimize antibiotic selection among patients with CAP.

Disclosures: None

Objectives: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, global health authorities identified and emphasized the importance of practicing proper hand hygiene to reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and to diminish the chances of becoming infected. It is well established in the scientific literature that surfactants and alcohols are capable of inactivating enveloped viruses such as SARS-CoV-2. However, given the novel nature of the virus, Unilever adopted an evidence-based approach to demonstrate virucidal efficacy of marketed bar soaps, liquid handwashes, and alcohol-based hand sanitizers against the original and selected variants of SARS-CoV-2. Methods: High titers of clinically isolated and laboratory-propagated SARS-CoV-2 strains were subjected to a range of selected proprietary formulations from Unilever at end-user–relevant dilutions, temperature, and contact duration, and were tested according to the internationally recognized ASTM E-1052 test protocol. Results: All tested personal-care formulations were effective against the parental SARS-CoV-2 strain as well as the β (beta) and δ (delta) variants of concern. More specifically, bar soaps with a varying concentration of total fatty matter content and liquid handwashes with varying levels of total surfactants reduced the viral titer by >99.9% within 20 seconds. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers demonstrated >99.99% reduction of input viral load within 15 seconds of contact with the viral inoculum. Conclusions: In conclusion, we have provided empirical proof that well-designed personal-care formulations that act through generic physicochemical mechanism against the basic structure of the virus particle have high virucidal efficacy against the original and evolved SARS-CoV-2 variants. Furthermore, we argue that due to the broad-spectrum mode of action of these tested formulations, the continued practice of good hand hygiene practices with everyday products holds significant promise as an easily accessible, economic, and effective nontherapeutic public health intervention toward reducing the transmission of present and future variants of SARS-CoV-2 across communities and populations.

In this point-prevalence survey followed by prospective audit and feedback at 4 tertiary-care hospitals in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, we evaluated whether intravenous amoxicillin-clavulanate may be used as a narrower-spectrum alternative to intravenous piperacillin-tazobactam for patients admitted to general surgery services.

Background: In 2016, the CDC released the Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship, which extended the requirements previously released for hospital facilities and nursing homes to the outpatient setting. Several regulatory agencies focused on outpatient antimicrobial use. However, The Joint Commission and the Ambulatory Surgery Center (ASC) Leapfrog Group excluded ambulatory surgery centers from their medication management standards and questions. Due to the public health and patient safety benefits of implementing an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) and increasing regulatory interest in the matter, the Hospital Corporation of America (HCA) Ambulatory Surgery Division formally launched a nationwide ASP for its ambulatory surgery centers in March 2021. Methods: HCA is a large healthcare system with 146 ASCs in 16 states in 2021. The structure of the ASCs are local surgery centers with a medical director, a nurse responsible for infection prevention, and a pharmacist at a regional level. The types of surgeries vary based on location and ASC site. In 2019, a multidisciplinary team formed the corporate planning committee. The program was modeled after the CDC Core Elements and The Joint Commission’s requirements for an ASP. Each ASC was asked to build a local ASP team, led by a local physician and a regionally based pharmacist. In addition, a stewardship goal was established to update all preoperative antibiotic surgical-site infection prophylaxis order sets. The corporate committee provided educational resources, including evidence-based guidelines for appropriate antibiotic selection for surgical-site infections. They collected antibiotic cost per case as a baseline metric to track and analyze. Pediatric, ophthalmic, and gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures were excluded from the program. Results: From January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021, including only centers that were operational during this period and excluding single specialty endoscopy centers, antibiotic cost per case decreased annually from $2.38 to $1.84 (t = 4.157; P < .005), and the postoperative infection rate also declined from 0.370 to 0.304 (t = 2.079; P = .040). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that implementing a health-system–wide outpatient antibiotic stewardship program in the ambulatory surgery center setting is feasible and may contribute to decreased antibiotic cost per case and improved postoperative surgical site infection rates.

Disclosures: None

Objectives: Hand hygiene is widely recognized as the most effective practice for preventing healthcare-associated infections. Despite ongoing interventions and strategies implemented by the infection control committee, the compliance with and consistency in the hand hygiene practice remains a challenge. At times, staff are unaware when they are noncompliant with hand hygiene; therefore, a more robust strategic approach is needed. One such strategy is customized audit with real-time feedback. A literature review highlighted the effectiveness of audit coupled with specific feedback. This approach was also supported by several guidelines and regulatory bodies that recognized the importance of audit and feedback in hand hygiene improvement efforts. For example, the World Health Organization (WHO) has emphasized 5 core components of improving hand hygiene. One of these components is evaluation and feedback. We sought to provide feedback to healthcare personnel when they do not show compliance with the Five Moments of Hand Hygiene. We aimed to achieve >95% hand hygiene compliance among healthcare staff. Methods: Information on the use of the hand hygiene feedback card was provided to the auditors. The hand hygiene feedback card procedure began in all the wards in May 2020. This process first started with orientation of the auditors regarding the hand hygiene feedback card, followed by auditing hand hygiene practice. Staff who did not comply with hand hygiene procedures were given real-time feedback via a card that specified the missed hand hygiene movement. Results: Overall hand hygiene compliance among healthcare staff increased by 6% after the hand hygiene feedback card procedure was implemented. Conclusions: Overall, the hand hygiene feedback card was effective in improving hand hygiene. Through this quality improvement project, significant and sustained gains in hand hygiene compliance rates of >95% can be achieved.

Background: IDSA guidelines recommend withholding treatment in patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria in the absence of systemic signs of infection. However, some patients with bacteriuria may not be able to express symptoms either due to presence of indwelling catheter, underlying complicated urologic anatomy, dementia, or altered mental status (AMS). Clinicians frequently treat bacteriuria in this population with antimicrobial therapy due to concern for sepsis. To determine treatment need, we aimed to review prevalence and risk factors for bacteremic urinary tract infection (UTI) in a cohort of hospitalized inpatients without definitive signs and symptoms of a UTI. Methods: This retrospective cohort study of inpatients with a positive urine culture who presented without definitive signs or symptoms of a UTI was conducted between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2022, in 68 academic and community hospitals (Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium). Signs and symptoms were obtained from medical record review 3 days before and after urine-culture collection. Bacteremic UTI was defined as any positive blood culture growing at least 1 organism matching the urine culture. Risk factors for bacteremic UTI were assessed using multivariable logistic regression models with results expressed as odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous variables and relative risks (RRs) for continuous variables. Results: Of 11,793 patients meeting study criteria, 73.6% were female with a median age of 78.2 years. Overall, 41.8% had AMS, 33.8% had dementia, 15.6% had an indwelling urinary catheter, and 54.6% had complicated urologic history (eg, urologic surgery). Of these, 166 patients (1.4%) developed bacteremic UTI. On adjusted analysis, male sex, hypotension, heart rate >90, urinary retention, fatigue, log of serum leukocytosis [1 log increase in serum WBC = 2.718 × serum white blood cell count (WBC)], and pyuria with >25 WBC per high-powered field (WBC/hpf) on urinalysis were associated with bacteremic UTI (Table). Older age, presence of an indwelling catheter, complicated urologic history, functional decline, AMS, dementia, and change in urine were not associated with higher odds for bacteremic UTI (Table). Of patients with AMS and no definitive signs or symptoms of a UTI, only 89 (1.8%) of 4,932 developed a bacteremic UTI. Conclusions: Bacteremic UTI is relatively rare in hospitalized inpatients presenting with bacteriuria without symptoms of UTI. Predictors of bacteremic UTI included male sex, hypotension, tachycardia, urinary retention, fatigue, serum leukocytosis, and higher levels of pyuria (>25 WBC/hpf) on urinalysis. Our findings provide stewards a framework to risk stratify inpatients of older age who present with positive urine cultures but without (or are unable to express) signs or symptoms of UTI.

Disclosures: None

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the lack of agreement regarding the definition of aerosol-generating procedures and potential risk to healthcare personnel. We convened a group of Massachusetts healthcare epidemiologists to develop consensus through expert opinion in an area where broader guidance was lacking at the time.

Objectives: The past hand hygiene (HH) compliance rate has indicated the low number of opportunities for some healthcare workers (HCWs) because the infection control liaison officer (ICLO) tended to capture opportunities from nurses who were available, despite the proportional allocation of opportunities per HCW type based on the World Health Organization (WHO) HH methodology. Therefore, HH compliance rates may not have accurately represented the specific HCW type, which may have affected the overall HH compliance rate. We sought to determine an accurate baseline of HH compliance rate with consistent number of opportunities across all HCW categories. Methods: HH auditors were ICLOs trained in HH observation by the infection control nurse (ICN) according to the WHO “My Five Moments of Hand Hygiene.” HH observations were conducted bimonthly with assigned areas focusing only on 1 HCW category for each session: nursing, medical, clinical support services, or environmental services. A briefing session was given on the day of observation, with the goal of collecting 20 opportunities per area with HCW focus during their peak activities. Direct feedback and positive reinforcement were given to HCWs after observations were completed. Results: A survey of 96 ICLOs indicated that observations based on HCW focus allowed them to capture more HH opportunities and concentrate on their observations. The new approach showed a significant increase in number of opportunities across all HCW categories that was more representative. We also successfully determined a new baseline for all HCW categories, with further breakdown of HCW type. Conclusions: A new methodology of HH observation with a focus on HCW category has resulted in more HH opportunities across all HCW categories and improved representation of the HH compliance rate.

Background: Irrational antibiotic use among hospitalized patients can lead to antibiotic resistance. For rational use, the WHO introduced the Access, Watch, and Reserve (AWaRe) classification of antibiotics. We explored antibiotic use according to the AWaRe classification among patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) between the prepandemic and COVID-19 pandemic periods in Bangladesh. Methods: From June 2017 to November 2022, we analyzed SARI inpatient data from the hospital-based influenza surveillance platform at 9 tertiary-level hospitals in Bangladesh. We defined June 2017–February 2020 as the prepandemic period and March 2020–November 2022 as the pandemic period. Physicians identified inpatients meeting the WHO SARI case definition and recorded patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and antibiotics received during hospitalization. We used descriptive statistics to summarize the data. Results: We enrolled 20,640 SARI patients (median age, 20 years; IQR, 1.6–50; 63% male); and among them, 18,197 (88%) received antibiotics (26% of those received >1 different course of antibiotics). Compared to the prepandemic period, the proportion of antibiotic use among SARI patients was higher during the pandemic: 93% (9,887 of 10,655) versus 83% (8,310 of 9,985) (P < .001). According to AWaRe classification, Access, Watch, and Reserve groups accounted for 32% (n = 2,623), 86% (n = 7,158), and 0.05% (n = 4), respectively, before the pandemic and 32% (n = 3,194), 90% (n = 8,850), and 0.08% (n = 8), respectively, during the pandemic (Fig.). The most common antibiotic prescribed for children aged <5 years during the prepandemic was ceftriaxone (n = 1,940, 74%), followed by amikacin (n = 325, 13%) and flucloxacillin (n = 300, 12%); similarly, during the pandemic, most common antibiotic prescribed was ceftriaxone (n = 3,097, 79%), followed by amikacin (n = 723, 18%) and flucloxacillin (n = 348, 9%). The most common antibiotic prescribed for patients aged ≥5 years during the prepandemic period was ceftriaxone (n = 3,174, 54%), followed by amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (n = 1,304, 22%) and azithromycin (n = 1,038, 18%). During the pandemic, the most common antibiotic prescribed for patients aged ≥5 years was ceftriaxone (n = 3,793, 64%), followed by amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (n = 1,327, 22%) and clarithromycin (n = 797, 13%). Among children aged <5 years, use of the Watch group of antibiotics during the prepandemic and pandemic periods was similar: 94% (n = 3,688) versus 95% (n = 2,347) (P = .099). However, among patients aged ≥5 years, the use of Watch antibiotics was higher during the pandemic compared to the prepandemic period: 87% (n = 5,163) versus 82% (n = 4,811) (P < .001). Conclusions: Use of antibiotics in the Watch group was predominant among SARI patients both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, and it increased among SARI patients aged ≥5 years during the pandemic period in Bangladesh. Promoting antibiotic stewardship programs for physicians, including in-service training on antibiotic use, could reduce irrational antibiotic use, which might contribute to mitigating antibiotic resistance in the country.

Financial support: This study was funded by the CDC.

Disclosures: None

Background: Inappropriate antibiotic use for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is common. Although antibiotic stewardship activities require real-time, accurate identification of patients being treated for CAP, there are few reliable methods to identify such patients using the electronic health record (EHR). We conducted a retrospective study to assess the performance of provider-selected antibiotic indication in identifying patients being treated for CAP among a cohort of hospitalized adults. Methods: We randomly selected 440 patients from a cohort of patients who received at least 1 systemic antibiotic within 48 hours of admission between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2021, at 3 acute-care hospitals. The reference standard for treatment of CAP was defined as intention to treat for pneumonia by inpatient provider(s) within 48 hours of admission, as assessed by chart review of provider notes. Treatment for pneumonia using any terminology except with “hospital-acquired pneumonia” (HAP) or “ventilator-associated pneumonia” (VAP) were counted. Provider-selected indication of CAP (in an antibiotic order) was compared against this reference standard; sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. Performance characteristics of International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes for pneumonia in identifying CAP patients were assessed against the same reference standard. A secondary analysis including terms HAP and VAP in the reference standard was performed. Results: Provider-selected antibiotic indication for CAP had a sensitivity of 64.4%, specificity of 96.3%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 73.1%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.1%, giving comparable performance to ICD-10 codes (Table 1). Of those with 21 false-negative results, 13 (61.9%) had a healthcare-associated lower respiratory tract infection and 14 (66.7%) had sepsis indicated in at least 1 antibiotic order. Conclusions: Provider-selected antibiotic indication showed moderate sensitivity and high specificity for identifying CAP-treated cases. Importantly, use of this method can be deployed for real-time antibiotic stewardship interventions for CAP.

Disclosures: None

Objectives: To evaluate the tolerability and acceptability of 3 different alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) products, and to determine factors influencing hand hygiene (HH) behavior among healthcare workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Sarawak General Hospital, a 1,034-bed tertiary-care state hospital. A self-administered 7-point Likert scale questionnaire was adapted from the WHO ‘Protocol for Evaluation of Tolerability and Acceptability of ABHR.’ The study was conducted between November 12 and 26, 2021, based on 3 types of ABHR products. Participation in answering the questionnaire was voluntary, so consent was implied. The Student t test was used to determine the significant differences among the ABHR product. The χ2 distribution test was performed to evaluate the characteristics of ABHR products. Results: We received a response rate of 35% (1,598 of 4,628); 82% of respondents were female, and the overall cohort had a mean age of 35 years. Also, 972 (61%) of 1,598 respondents were nurses, and 1,490 (93%) of 1,598 respondents used ABHR at least 5 days every week. Of 1,598 respondents, 1,156 (72%) indicated that ABHR products were easily accessible at the point of patient care. Evaluation of ABHR products showed that respondents were receptive to all product colors (P < .0114) and had no color preference (P > .05). Comparison among ABHR products yielded no statistical difference (P > .05) for ‘smell,’ ‘stickiness,’ ‘irritation,’ or ‘drying speed.’ ‘Drying effect’ of all products was statistically significant (P < .0252). The overall satisfaction for all products was good (P < .0022). HCWs did not expect their HH compliance to improve even if they were provided with their preferred choice of ABHR. Of 1,598 respondents, 783 (49%) correctly used a palm-full of ABHR for HH, and 1, 275 (80%) indicated that hospital management should organize more HH-related awareness and continuous medical education on HH. Conclusions: A comparison among different ABHR characteristics mostly showed no statistically significant difference regarding tolerability and acceptability. These findings suggest that different ABHR products will not influence HH behavior during COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives: We evaluated the role of 12-hydroxystearic acid (12HSA) in upregulating skin antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) in in vitro and ex vivo assays, and 12HSA provides long-lasting germ protection in vivo through a handwash formulation. Methods: In vitro assays were performed by treating skin cells, maintained in cell-culture media, with 12HSA. After treatment, AMP gene-expression was measured in cells by RT-qPCR, and secreted AMPs in spent cell culture media were analyzed by ELISA. Skin explants were treated with 12HSA, and 3D-living skin equivalent (LSE) models were treated with 12HSA-containing handwash formulations. AMP levels were measured by immunohistochemical staining or RT-qPCR after treatment. In clinical studies, volunteer forearms were washed multiple times with 12HSA-containing handwash in an ethics-approved study in which participants provided informed consent. The washed forearms were challenged with E. coli at different time points after washing. The 12HSA deposition from the formulation was measured using tape strips. Results: Skin cells treated with 12HSA showed increased expression of several AMP genes in vitro, and higher psoriasin AMP secretion was measured in cell-culture media. An enhanced level of LL37 AMP was obtained from the skin epidermis of 12HSA-treated explant skin. AMP genes were also upregulated in the 3D-LSE model treated with a 12HSA-containing handwash formulation. A measurable level of 12HSA was deposited from handwash formulation in the in vivo clinical sample. E. coli recovery from challenged skin was significantly lower at 6 and 10 hours after washing compared to unwashed skin. Conclusions: These data demonstrate that 12HSA boosts skin-AMPs and that a handwash containing 12HSA provides long-lasting germ protection under in vivo test conditions by potentially enhancing skin’s natural immunity. With an emerging understanding of skin’s innate immunity and AMPs, designing cleansing products that strengthen these natural defenses will offer novel approaches to extend hygiene benefits beyond immediate in-wash protection.