Transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in acute-care settings affects patients, healthcare workers, and the healthcare system. We conducted an analysis of risk factors associated with outbreak severity to inform prevention strategies.

This cross-sectional analysis of COVID-19 outbreaks was conducted at Fraser Health acute-care sites between March 2020 and March 2021. Outbreak severity measures included COVID-19 attack rate, outbreak duration, and 30-day case mortality. Generalized linear models with generalized estimating equations were used for all outcome measures. A P value of 0.05 indicated statistical significance. Analyses were performed using SAS version 3.8 software, R version 4.1.0 software, and Stata version 16.0 software.

Between March 2020 and March 2021, 54 COVID-19 outbreaks were declared in Fraser Health acute-care sites. Overall, a 10% increase in the hand hygiene rate during the outbreak resulted in an 18% decrease in the attack rate (P < .01), 1 fewer death (P = .03), and shorter outbreaks (P < .01). A 10-year increase in unit age was associated with 2.2 additional days of outbreak (P < 0.01) and increases in the attack rate (P < .05) and the number of deaths (P < .01).

We observed an inverse relationship between increased hand hygiene compliance during outbreaks and all 3 severity measures. Increased unit age was also associated with increases in each of the severity measures.

This study highlights the importance of hand hygiene practices during an outbreak and the difficulties faced by older facilities, many of which have infrastructural challenges. The latter reinforces the need to incorporate infection control standards into healthcare planning and construction.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been widely used in the care of patients with respiratory failure from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We characterized bloodstream infections (BSIs) and ventilator-associated pneumonias (VAPs) in COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO, and we investigated their impact on patient outcomes.

Retrospective cohort study from March 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021.

Academic tertiary-care referral center.

Consecutive adult patients admitted for COVID-19 who received ECMO.

We identified BSIs and VAPs and described their epidemiology and microbiology. Cumulative antimicrobial use and the specific management of BSIs were determined. Multivariate time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to evaluate the impact of BSIs and VAPs on mortality, controlling for age, receipt of COVID-19–specific therapeutics, and new renal replacement therapy.

We identified 136 patients who received ECMO for COVID-19 pneumonia during the study period. BSIs and VAPs occurred in 81 patients (59.6%) and 93 patients (68.4%), respectively. The incidence of BSIs was 29.5 per 1,000 ECMO days and increased with duration of ECMO cannulation. Enterococci, Enterobacterales, and Staphylococcus aureus were the most common causes of BSIs, whereas S. aureus, Klebsiella species, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa comprised the majority of VAPs. Mean antibiotic use comprised 1,031 days of therapy per 1,000 ECMO days (SD, 496). We did not detect an association between BSIs or VAPs and mortality.

BSIs and VAPs are common in COVID-19 ECMO-supported patients. Efforts to optimize their diagnosis, prevention, and management should be prioritized.

To determine whether the gender of clinicians making antimicrobial stewardship recommendations has an impact on intervention acceptance rate.

A retrospective, multivariable analysis of antimicrobial stewardship prospective audit and feedback outcomes.

A multisite healthcare system including Mayo Clinic Rochester (MN), Mayo Clinic Arizona, Mayo Clinic Florida and 17 health-system hospital sites, where prospective audit and feedback is performed and documented within an electronic tool embedded in the medical record.

The study included 143 Mayo Clinic clinicians (84 cisfemales and 59 cismales).

Outcomes were analyzed from July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2022, for intervention rates, communication methods, and intervention acceptance by clinician gender, profession, patient age, and intensive care unit (ICU) status of patient.

Of 81,927 rules, 71,729 rules met study inclusion. There were 18,175 (25%) rules associated with an intervention. Most of the rules were reviewed by pharmacists (86.2%) and stewardship staff (85.5%). Of 10,363 interventions with an outcome documented, 8,829 (85.2%) were accepted and 1,534 (14.8%) were rejected. Female clinicians had 6,782 (86.5%) of 7,843 interventions accepted, and male clinicians had 2,047 (81.2%) of 2,520 interventions accepted (P = .19). Female patients had more interventions than male patients (female vs male: 25.9% vs 24.9%; OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02–1.08; P = .001). Patients in the ICU had a significantly lower intervention acceptance rate (ICU vs non-ICU: 78.2% vs 86.7%; OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45–0.7; P < .001).

Female and male clinicians were equally effective at prospective audit and feedback in a multisite antimicrobial stewardship program. Patients in the ICU were less likely to have stewardship interventions accepted.

To provide comprehensive population-level estimates of the burden of healthcare-associated influenza.

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

US Influenza Hospitalization Surveillance Network (FluSurv-NET) during 2012–2013 through 2018–2019 influenza seasons.

Laboratory-confirmed influenza-related hospitalizations in an 8-county catchment area in Tennessee.

The incidence of healthcare-associated influenza was determined using the traditional definition (ie, positive influenza test after hospital day 3) in addition to often underrecognized cases associated with recent post-acute care facility admission or a recent acute care hospitalization for a noninfluenza illness in the preceding 7 days.

Among the 5,904 laboratory-confirmed influenza-related hospitalizations, 147 (2.5%) had traditionally defined healthcare-associated influenza. When we included patients with a positive influenza test obtained in the first 3 days of hospitalization and who were either transferred to the hospital directly from a post-acute care facility or who were recently discharged from an acute care facility for a noninfluenza illness in the preceding 7 days, we identified an additional 1,031 cases (17.5% of all influenza-related hospitalizations).

Including influenza cases associated with preadmission healthcare exposures with traditionally defined cases resulted in an 8-fold higher incidence of healthcare-associated influenza. These results emphasize the importance of capturing other healthcare exposures that may serve as the initial site of viral transmission to provide more comprehensive estimates of the burden of healthcare-associated influenza and to inform improved infection prevention strategies.

Morbidity and mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been significant among elderly residents of residential aged-care services (RACS). To prevent incursions of COVID-19 in RACS in Australia, visitors were banned and aged-care workers were encouraged to work at a single site. We conducted a review of case notes and a social network analysis to understand how workplace and social networks enabled the spread of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among RACS.

Retrospective outbreak review.

Staff involved in COVID-19 outbreaks in RACS in Victoria, Australia, May–October 2020.

The Victorian Department of Health COVID-19 case and contact data were reviewed to construct 2 social networks: (1) a work network connecting RACS through workers and (2) a household network connecting to RACS through households. Probable index cases were reviewed to estimate the number and size (number of resident cases and deaths) of outbreaks likely initiated by multisite work versus transmission via households.

Among 2,033 cases linked to an outbreak as staff, 91 (4.5%) were multisite staff cases. Forty-three outbreaks were attributed to multisite work and 35 were deemed potentially preventable had staff worked at a single site. In addition, 99 staff cases were linked to another RACS outbreak through their household contacts, and 21 outbreaks were attributed to staff–household transmission.

Limiting worker mobility through single-site policies could reduce the chances of SARS-CoV-2 spreading from one RACS to another. However, initiatives that reduce the chance of transmission via household networks would also be needed.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has required healthcare systems to meet new demands for rapid information dissemination, resource allocation, and data reporting. To help address these challenges, our institution leveraged electronic health record (EHR)–integrated clinical pathways (E-ICPs), which are easily understood care algorithms accessible at the point of care.

To describe our institution’s creation of E-ICPs to address the COVID-19 pandemic, and to assess the use and impact of these tools.

Urban academic medical center with adult and pediatric hospitals, emergency departments, and ambulatory practices.

Using the E-ICP processes and infrastructure established at our institution as a foundation, we developed a suite of COVID-19–specific E-ICPs along with a process for frequent reassessment and updating. We examined the development and use of our COVID-19–specific pathways for a 6-month period (March 1–September 1, 2020), and we have described their impact using case studies.

In total, 45 COVID-19–specific pathways were developed, pertaining to triage, diagnosis, and management of COVID-19 in diverse patient settings. Orders available in E-ICPs included those for isolation precautions, testing, treatments, admissions, and transfers. Pathways were accessed 86,400 times, with 99,081 individual orders were placed. Case studies demonstrate the impact of COVID-19 E-ICPs on stewardship of resources, testing optimization, and data reporting.

E-ICPs provide a flexible and unified mechanism to meet the evolving demands of the COVID-19 pandemic, and they continue to be a critical tool leveraged by clinicians and hospital administrators alike for the management of COVID-19. Lessons learned may be generalizable to other urgent and nonurgent clinical conditions.

It remains unclear whether a follow-up blood culture (FUBC) for gram-negative bacilli (GNB) bacteremia should be routinely or selectively performed. To evaluate the value of the practice, we analyzed the association between current FUBC practices and length of stay, antibiotic treatment duration, and in-hospital mortality.

Retrospective cohort study.

The study was conducted in 4 acute-care hospitals in New York City.

The study included hospitalized adults with GNB bacteremia between 2017 and 2018.

An FUBC was defined as a blood culture performed between 24 hours and 7 days after an initial blood culture positive for GNB. Using propensity scores for FUBCs performed, patients were matched 1:1 for outcome comparison.

In total, 376 hospitalized adults with GNB bacteremia met eligibility criteria. Among them, FUBCs were performed in 271 patients (72%). After propensity score matching, we analyzed 87 pairs of patients with and without an FUBC to compare outcomes. The median length of stay was longer among patients with FUBCs than patients without FUBCs (9 days vs 7 days; P = .017). The median duration of antibiotic treatment was also longer among patients with FUBCs than patients without FUBCs (8 vs 6 days; P = .007). No statistically significant difference was observed in in-hospital mortality between patients with and without an FUBC (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.08–1.36).

Current FUBC practices for GNB bacteremia were associated with prolonged length of stay and duration of antibiotic treatment. Further data to better inform selectivity criteria for FUBCs in GNB bacteremia are needed.

The true incidence and risk factors for secondary bacterial infections in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains poorly understood. Knowledge of risk factors for secondary infections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is necessary to optimally guide selective use of empiric antimicrobial therapy.

Single-center retrospective cohort study of symptomatic inpatients admitted for COVID-19 from April 15, 2020, through June 30, 2021.

Academic quaternary-care referral center in Portland, Oregon.

The study included patients who were 18 years or older with a positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) PCR test up to 10 days prior to admission.

Secondary infections were identified based on clinical, radiographic, and microbiologic data. Logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for secondary infection. We also assessed mortality, length of stay, and empiric antibiotics among those with and without secondary infections.

We identified 118 patients for inclusion; 31 (26.3%) had either culture-proven or possible secondary infections among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Mortality was higher among patients with secondary infections (35.5%) compared to those without secondary infection (4.6%). Empiric antibiotic use on admission was high in both the secondary and no secondary infection groups at 71.0% and 48.3%, respectively.

The incidence of secondary bacterial infection was moderate among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. However, a higher proportion of patients received empiric antibiotics regardless of an identifiable secondary infection. Transfer from an outside hospital, baseline immunosuppressant use, and corticosteroid treatment were independent risk factors for secondary infection. Additional studies are needed to validate risk factors and best guide antimicrobial stewardship efforts.

To develop and test a new automated surveillance system that can detect, define and characterize infection clusters, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) in Norway by combining existing national register data.

The numerous outbreaks in LTCFs during the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for accurate and timely outbreak surveillance. As traditional methods were inadequate, we used severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as a model to test automated surveillance.

We conducted a nationwide study using data from the Norwegian preparedness register (Beredt C19) and defined the study population as an open cohort from January 2020 to December 2021. We analyzed clusters (≥3 individuals with positive SARS-CoV-2 test ≤14 days) by 4-month periods including cluster size, duration and composition, and residents’ mortality associated with clusters.

The study population included 173,907 individuals; 78% employees and 22% residents. Clusters were detected in 427 (43%) of 993 LTCFs. The median cluster size was 4–8 individuals (maximum, 50) by 4-month periods, with a median duration of 9–17 days. Employees represented 60%–82% of cases in clusters and were index cases in 60%–90%. In the last 4-month period of 2020, we detected 107 clusters (915 cases) versus 428 clusters (2,998 cases) in the last period of 2021. The 14-day all-cause mortality rate was higher in resident cases from the clusters. Varying the cluster definitions changed the number of clusters.

Automated national surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 clusters in LTCFs is possible based on existing data sources and provides near real-time detailed information on size, duration, and composition of clusters. Thus, this system can assist in early outbreak detection and improve surveillance.

Multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) respiratory panels are rapid, highly sensitive tests for viral and bacterial pathogens that cause respiratory infections. In this study, we (1) described best practices in the implementation of respiratory panels based on expert perspectives and (2) identified tools for diagnostic stewardship to enhance the usefulness of testing.

We conducted a survey of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Research Network to explore current and future approaches to diagnostic stewardship of multiplex PCR respiratory panels.

In total, 41 sites completed the survey (response rate, 50%). Multiplex PCR respiratory panels were perceived as supporting accurate diagnoses at 35 sites (85%), supporting more efficient patient care at 33 sites (80%), and improving patient outcomes at 23 sites (56%). Thirteen sites (32%) reported that testing may support diagnosis or patient care without improving patient outcomes. Furthermore, 24 sites (58%) had implemented diagnostic stewardship, with a median of 3 interventions (interquartile range, 1–4) per site. The interventions most frequently reported as effective were structured order sets to guide test ordering (4 sites), restrictions on test ordering based on clinician or patient characteristics (3 sites), and structured communication of results (2 sites). Education was reported as “helpful” but with limitations (3 sites).

Many hospital epidemiologists and experts in infectious diseases perceive multiplex PCR respiratory panels as useful tests that can improve diagnosis, patient care, and patient outcomes. However, institutions frequently employ diagnostic stewardship to enhance the usefulness of testing, including most commonly clinical decision support to guide test ordering.