To understand the transmission dynamics of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a hospital outbreak to inform infection control actions.

Retrospective cohort study.

General medical and elderly inpatient wards in a hospital in England.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients were classified as community or healthcare associated by time from admission to onset or positivity using European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control definitions. COVID-19 symptoms were classified as asymptomatic, nonrespiratory, or respiratory. Infectiousness was calculated from 2 days prior to 14 days after symptom onset or positive test. Cases were defined as healthcare-associated COVID-19 when infection was acquired from the wards under investigation. COVID-19 exposures were calculated based on symptoms and bed proximity to an infectious patient. Risk ratios and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were calculated from univariable and multivariable logistic regression.

Of 153 patients, 65 were COVID-19 patients and 45 of these were healthcare-associated cases. Exposure to a COVID-19 patient with respiratory symptoms was associated with healthcare-associated infection irrespective of proximity (aOR, 3.81; 95% CI, 1.6.3–8.87). Nonrespiratory exposure was only significant within 2.5 m (aOR, 5.21; 95% CI, 1.15–23.48). A small increase in risk ratio was observed for exposure to a respiratory patient for >1 day compared to 1 day from 2.04 (95% CI, 0.99–4.22) to 2.36 (95% CI, 1.44–3.88).

Respiratory exposure anywhere within a 4-bed bay was a risk, whereas nonrespiratory exposure required bed distance ≤2.5 m. Standard infection control measures required beds to be >2 m apart. Our findings suggest that this may be insufficient to stop SARS-CoV-2 transmission. We recommend improving cohorting and further studies into bed distance and transmission factors.

To evaluate the use of a perianal swab to detect CDI.

A perianal swab was collected from each inpatient with a positive stool sample for C. difficile (by polymerase chain reaction [PCR] test) and was tested for C. difficile by PCR and by culture. The variables evaluated included demographics, CDI severity, bathing before perianal swab collection, hours between stool sample and perianal swab, cycle threshold (Ct) to PCR positivity, and doses of CDI treatment before stool sample and before perianal swab.

Of 83 perianal swabs, 59 (71.1%) tested positive for C. difficile by PCR when perianal swabs were collected an average of 21 hours after the stool sample. Compared with the respective stool sample, the perianal sample was less likely to grow C. difficile (P=.005) and had a higher PCR Ct (P<.001). A direct, significant but weak correlation was detected between the Ct for a positive perianal sample and the respective stool sample (r=0.36; P=.006). An inverse dose relationship was detected between PCR positivity and CDI treatment doses before perianal swab collection (P=.27).

Perianal swabs are a simple method to detect C. difficile tcdB gene by PCR, with a sensitivity of 71%. These data were limited because stool samples and perianal swabs were not collected simultaneously. Compared with stool samples, the perianal Ct values and culture results were consistent with a lower bacterial load on the perianal sample due to the receipt of more CDI treatment before collection or unknown factors affecting perianal skin colonization.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:658–662

To determine the origin of grouped cases of Pneumocystis pneumonia in solid-organ transplant recipients at our institution.

A case series with clinical examinations, genotyping, and an epidemiological survey.

A university hospital in France.

We report 12 solid-organ transplant recipients with successive cases of Pneumocystis pneumonia that occurred over 3 years; 10 of these cases occurred in a single year.

We used molecular typing of P. jirovecii strains by multilocus sequence typing and clinical epidemiological survey to determine potential dates and places of transmission.

Between May 2014 and March 2015, 10 solid-organ transplant recipients (5 kidney transplants, 4 heart transplants, and 1 lung transplant) presented with Pneumocystis pneumonia. Molecular genotyping revealed the same P. jirovecii strain in at least 6 patients. This Pneumocystis strain was not identified in control patients (ie, nontransplant patients presenting with pulmonary pneumocystosis) during this period. The epidemiological survey guided by sequencing results provided information on the probable or possible dates and places of contamination for 5 of these patients. The mobile infectious diseases unit played a coordination role in the clinical management (adaptation of the local guidelines) and epidemiological survey.

Our cardiac and kidney transplant units experienced grouped cases of pulmonary pneumocystosis. Genotyping and epidemiological surveying results suggested interhuman contamination, which was quickly eliminated thanks to multidisciplinary coordination.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:179–185

There is controversy regarding whether the addition of cover gowns offers a substantial benefit over gloves alone in reducing personnel contamination and preventing pathogen transmission.

Simulated patient care interactions.

To evaluate the efficacy of different types of barrier precautions and to identify routes of transmission.

In randomly ordered sequence, 30 personnel each performed 3 standardized examinations of mannequins contaminated with pathogen surrogate markers (cauliflower mosaic virus DNA, bacteriophage MS2, nontoxigenic Clostridioides difficile spores, and fluorescent tracer) while wearing no barriers, gloves, or gloves plus gowns followed by examination of a noncontaminated mannequin. We compared the frequency and routes of transfer of the surrogate markers to the second mannequin or the environment.

For a composite of all surrogate markers, transfer by hands occurred at significantly lower rates in the gloves-alone group (OR, 0.02; P < .001) and the gloves-plus-gown group (OR, 0.06; P = .002). Transfer by stethoscope diaphragms was common in all groups and was reduced by wiping the stethoscope between simulations (OR, 0.06; P < .001). Compared to the no-barriers group, wearing a cover gown and gloves resulted in reduced contamination of clothing (OR, 0.15; P < .001), but wearing gloves alone did not.

Wearing gloves alone or gloves plus gowns reduces hand transfer of pathogens but may not address transfer by devices such as stethoscopes. Cover gowns reduce the risk of contaminating the clothing of personnel.