To evaluate whether incorporating mandatory prior authorization for Clostridioides difficile testing into antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist workflow could reduce testing in patients with alternative etiologies for diarrhea.

Single center, quasi-experimental before-and-after study.

Tertiary-care, academic medical center in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Adult and pediatric patients admitted between September 11, 2019 and December 10, 2019 were included if they had an order placed for 1 of the following: (1) C. difficile enzyme immunoassay (EIA) in patients hospitalized >72 hours and received laxatives, oral contrast, or initiated tube feeds within the prior 48 hours, (2) repeat molecular multiplex gastrointestinal pathogen panel (GIPAN) testing, or (3) GIPAN testing in patients hospitalized >72 hours.

A best-practice alert prompting prior authorization by the antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) for EIA or GIPAN testing was implemented. Approval required the provider to page the ASP pharmacist and discuss rationale for testing. The provider could not proceed with the order if ASP approval was not obtained.

An average of 2.5 requests per day were received over the 3-month intervention period. The weekly rate of EIA and GIPAN orders per 1,000 patient days decreased significantly from 6.05 ± 0.94 to 4.87 ± 0.78 (IRR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56–0.93; P = .010) and from 1.72 ± 0.37 to 0.89 ± 0.29 (IRR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37–0.77; P = .001), respectively.

We identified an efficient, effective C. difficile and GIPAN diagnostic stewardship approval model.

To assess the impact of major interventions targeting infection control and diagnostic stewardship in efforts to decrease Clostridioides difficile hospital onset rates over a 6-year period.

Interrupted time series.

The study was conducted in an 865-bed academic medical center.

Monthly hospital-onset C. difficile infection (HO-CDI) rates from January 2013 through January 2019 were analyzed around 5 major interventions: (1) a 2-step cleaning process in which an initial quaternary ammonium product was followed with 10% bleach for daily and terminal cleaning of rooms of patients who have tested positive for C. difficile (February 2014), (2) UV-C device for all terminal cleaning of rooms of C. difficile patients (August 2015), (3) “contact plus” isolation precautions (June 2016), (4) sporicidal peroxyacetic acid and hydrogen peroxide cleaning in all patient areas (June 2017), (5) electronic medical record (EMR) decision support tool to facilitate appropriate C. difficile test ordering (March 2018).

Environmental cleaning interventions and enhanced “contact plus” isolation did not impact HO-CDI rates. Diagnostic stewardship via EMR decision support decreased the HO-CDI rate by 6.7 per 10,000 patient days (P = .0079). When adjusting rates for test volume, the EMR decision support significance was reduced to a difference of 5.1 case reductions per 10,000 patient days (P = .0470).

Multiple aggressively implemented infection control interventions targeting CDI demonstrated a disappointing impact on endemic CDI rates over 6 years. This study adds to existing data that outside of an outbreak situation, traditional infection control guidance for CDI prevention has little impact on endemic rates.

Most clinical microbiology laboratories have replaced toxin immunoassay (EIA) alone with multistep testing (MST) protocols or nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) alone for the detection of C. difficile.

Study the effect of changing testing strategies on C. difficile detection and strain diversity.

Retrospective study.

A Veterans’ Affairs hospital.

Initially, toxin EIA testing was replaced by an MST approach utilizing a glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin EIA followed by tcdB NAAT for discordant results. After 18 months, MST was replaced by a NAAT-only strategy. Available patient stool specimens were cultured for C. difficile. Restriction endonuclease analysis (REA) strain typing and quantitative in vitro toxin testing were performed on recovered isolates.

Before MST (toxin EIA), 79 of 708 specimens (11%) were positive, and after MST (MST-A), 121 of 517 specimens (23%) were positive (P < .0001). Prior to NAAT-only testing (MST-B), 80 of the 490 specimens (16%) were positive by MST, and after NAAT-only testing was implemented, 67 of the 368 specimens (18%) were positive (P = nonsignificant). After replacing toxin EIA testing, REA strain group diversity increased (8, 13, 13, and 10 REA groups in the toxin EIA, MST-A, MST-B, and NAAT-only periods, respectively) and in vitro toxin concentration decreased. The average log10 toxin concentration of the isolates were 2.08, 1.88, 1.20 and 1.55 ng/mL for the same periods, respectively.

MST and NAAT had similar detection rates for C. difficile. Compared to toxin testing alone, they detected increased diversity of C. difficile strains, many of which were low toxin producing.

To compare risk factors and outcome of patients colonized with carbapenemase-producing (CP) carbapenem-resistant Enterobactereaceae (CRE) and non–CP-CRE.

A comparative historical study.

A 1,000-bed tertiary-care university hospital.

Adults with CP-CRE positive rectal swab cultures, non–CP-CRE positive rectal swab cultures, and negative rectal swab cultures (non-CRE).

CP-CRE and non–CP-CRE colonized adult patients versus patients not colonized with CRE hospitalized during 24 months were included. We identified patients retrospectively through the microbiology laboratory, and we reviewed their files for demographics, underlying diseases, Charlson Index, treatment, and outcome.

This study included 447 patients for whom a rectal swab for CRE was obtained: 147 positive for CP-CRE, 147 positive for non–CP-CRE, and 147 negative for both. Patients with CP-CRE and non–CP-CRE versus no CRE more frequently resided in nursing homes (P<0.001), received antibiotics 3 months prior to admission (P < .001), and received glucocorticosteroids 3 months prior to admission (P = .047 and P < .001, respectively). Risk factors unique for non–CP-CRE versus CP-CRE colonization included mechanical ventilation and patient movement between hospital departments. Non–CP-CRE was a predictor for mechanical ventilation 2.5 that of CP-CRE colonization. In-hospital mortality was highest among non–CP-CRE–colonized patients. On COX multivariate regression for mortality prediction age, Charlson index and steroid treatment 3 months before admission influenced mortality (P = .027, P = .023, and P = .013, respectively).

Overlapping and unique risk factors are associated with CP-CRE and non–CP-CRE colonization. Non–CP-CRE colonized patients had a higher in-hospital mortality rate.

Cohorting patients who are colonized or infected with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) protects uncolonized patients from acquiring MDROs in healthcare settings. The potential for cross transmission within the cohort and the possibility of colonized patients acquiring secondary isolates with additional antibiotic resistance traits is often neglected. We searched for evidence of cross transmission of KPC+ Klebsiella pneumoniae (KPC-Kp) colonization among cohorted patients in a long-term acute-care hospital (LTACH), and we evaluated the impact of secondary acquisitions on resistance potential.

Genomic epidemiological investigation.

A high-prevalence LTACH during a bundled intervention that included cohorting KPC-Kp–positive patients.

Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and location data were analyzed to identify potential cases of cross transmission between cohorted patients.

Secondary KPC-Kp isolates from 19 of 28 admission-positive patients were more closely related to another patient’s isolate than to their own admission isolate. Of these 19 cases, 14 showed strong genomic evidence for cross transmission (<10 single nucleotide variants or SNVs), and most of these patients occupied shared cohort floors (12 patients) or rooms (4 patients) at the same time. Of the 14 patients with strong genomic evidence of acquisition, 12 acquired antibiotic resistance genes not found in their primary isolates.

Acquisition of secondary KPC-Kp isolates carrying distinct antibiotic resistance genes was detected in nearly half of cohorted patients. These results highlight the importance of healthcare provider adherence to infection prevention protocols within cohort locations, and they indicate the need for future studies to assess whether multiple-strain acquisition increases risk of adverse patient outcomes.

To assess the effect of a multimodal intervention on hand hygiene compliance (HHC) in nursing homes.

HHC was evaluated using direct, unobtrusive observation in a cluster randomized controlled trial at publicly funded nursing homes in the Netherlands. In total, 103 nursing home organizations were invited to participate; 18 organizations comprising 33 nursing homes (n = 66 nursing home units) participated in the study. Nursing homes were randomized into a control group (no intervention, n = 30) or an intervention group (multimodal intervention, n = 36). The primary outcome measure was HHC of nurses. HHC was appraised at baseline and at 4, 7, and 12 months after baseline. Observers and nurses were blinded.

Audits regarding hand hygiene (HH) materials and personal hygiene rules, 3 live lessons, an e-learning program, posters, and a photo contest. We used a new method to teach the nurses the WHO-defined 5 moments of HH: Room In, Room Out, Before Clean, and After Dirty.

HHC increased in both arms. The increase after 12 months was larger for units in the intervention arm (from 12% to 36%) than for control units (from 13% to 21%) (odds ratio [OR], 2.10; confidence interval [CI], 1.35–3.28). The intervention arm exhibited a statistically significant increase in HHC at 4 of the 5 WHO-defined HH moments. At follow-up, HHC in the intervention arm remained statistically significantly higher (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.59–2.34) for indications after an activity (from 37% to 39%) than for indications before an activity (from 14% to 27%).

The HANDSOME intervention is successful in improving HHC in nursing homes.

Pancreas transplantation is employed for the treatment of type I diabetes mellitus. It is postulated that surgical site infection (SSI), particularly organ-space infections, after pancreas transplantation may arise from microbial contamination arising from the donor duodenal segment. Therefore, some centers have adopted the practice of culturing the donor duodenal segment and subsequently administering antimicrobial therapy to the recipient directed at the microorganisms isolated to prevent SSI.

In this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated the correlation between positive donor duodenal-segment cultures and SSIs in the recipients. Data were recorded and analyzed to assess the correlation of the organisms isolated in the donor duodenal cultures with those producing SSI in the recipients.

We evaluated 379 consecutive pancreas transplant recipients from January 2000 to December 2015. Donor duodenal swab cultures were performed at the time of pancreas transplantation, and 206 (54.3%) were positive. SSIs occurred in 51 of the 206 recipients (24.8%) with positive duodenal-segment cultures and in 41 of 173 individuals (23.7%) with negative cultures (P = .81; r = 0.00). Notably, deep and organ-space SSIs were observed in 27 of 206 of the positive duodenal culture groups (13.1%) versus 29 of 173 of the negative duodenal culture groups (16.8%; P = 0.31; r = −0.059). No differences were detected in the pathogens producing SSIs between the group with a positive duodenal swab versus the group with a negative swab. Microorganisms producing SSIs matched those found in the positive donor duodenal cultures in only 15 patients (7.8%).

Although positive cultures from the donor duodenal segment prompted the administration of antimicrobial therapy in the recipient directed against the pathogen isolated, this practice did not reduce SSIs compared with those transplant recipients with culture-negative duodenal swabs. In addition, the organisms isolated from the donor duodenal segment were not predictive of subsequent SSI.

To assess the prevalence of influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in adults hospitalized for a respiratory infection in the winter months and to evaluate the impact of a viral diagnosis on empirical antimicrobial management (antibiotics and antivirals).

Observational cohort study.

Acute-care university hospital.

The study included 963 adult patients hospitalized over a 4-year surveillance period.

Annual surveillance timelines were defined according to epidemiological criteria related to the circulation of RSV and influenza viruses in the general population. Patients were screened following a severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) case definition at the emergency department and were enrolled for molecular assay targeting influenza/RSV viruses after oral informed consent. Epidemiological and clinical data were recorded prospectively, microbiological investigations, antimicrobial management, and outcome data were reviewed retrospectively.

An influenza or RSV virus was documented in 316 of 963 patients (33%). Optimization of antimicrobial management (AM) was achieved in 162 of 265 patients (61%) with a positive viral diagnosis and no bacterial infection at admission (AM treatment not initiated, n = 111; discontinued, n = 51). In contrast, only 128 of 462 patients (28%) with negative microbiological investigations did not have AM treatment initiated (n = 116) or had such treatment discontinued (n = 12). Early, targeted antiviral treatment was prescribed in 235 of 253 patients (93%) confirmed with influenza. Epidemiological, clinical, and outcome data were similar in both groups.

Epidemiological surveillance associated with influenza/RSV molecular diagnosis in adults hospitalized for severe winter respiratory infections dramatically enhanced antimicrobial management.

In the current absence of a vaccine for COVID-19, public health responses aim to break the chain of infection by focusing on the mode of transmission. We reviewed the current evidence on the transmission dynamics and on pathogenic and clinical features of COVID-19 to critically identify any gaps in the current infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines.

In this study, we reviewed global COVID-19 IPC guidelines by organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Guidelines from 2 high-income countries (Australia and United Kingdom) and from 1 middle-income country (China) were also reviewed. We searched publications in English on ‘PubMed’ and Google Scholar. We extracted information related to COVID-19 transmission dynamics, clinical presentations, and exposures that may facilitate transmission. We then compared these findings with the recommended IPC measures.

Nosocomial transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare settings occurs through droplets, aerosols, and the oral–fecal or fecal–droplet route. However, the IPC guidelines fail to cover all transmission modes, and the recommendations also conflict with each other. Most guidelines recommend surgical masks for healthcare providers during routine care and N95 respirators for aerosol-generating procedures. However, recommendations regarding the type of face mask varied, and the CDC recommends cloth masks when surgical masks are unavailable.

IPC strategies should consider all the possible routes of transmission and should target all patient care activities involving risk of person-to-person transmission. This review may assist international health agencies in updating their guidelines.