To investigate differences in the rate of firstline antibiotic prescribing for common pediatric infections in relation to different socioeconomic statuses and the impact of an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) in pediatric urgent-care clinics (PUCs).

Quasi-experimental.

Three PUCs within a Midwestern pediatric academic center.

Patients aged >60 days and <18 years with acute otitis media, group A streptococcal pharyngitis, community-acquired pneumonia, urinary tract infection, or skin and soft-tissue infections who received systemic antibiotics between July 2017 and December 2020. We excluded patients who were transferred, admitted, or had a concomitant diagnosis requiring systemic antibiotics.

We used national guidelines to determine the appropriateness of antibiotic choice in 2 periods: prior to (July 2017–July 2018) and following ASP implementation (August 2018–December 2020). We used multivariable regression analysis to determine the odds ratios of appropriate firstline agent by age, sex, race and ethnicity, language, and insurance type.

The study included 34,603 encounters. Prior to ASP implementation in August 2018, female patients, Black non-Hispanic children, those >2 years of age, and those who self-paid had higher odds of receiving recommended firstline antibiotics for all diagnoses compared to male patients, children of other races and ethnicities, other ages, and other insurance types, respectively. Although improvements in prescribing occurred after implementation of our ASP, the difference within the socioeconomic subsets persisted.

We observed socioeconomic differences in firstline antibiotic prescribing for common pediatric infections in the PUCs setting despite implementation of an ASP. Antimicrobial stewardship leaders should consider drivers of these differences when developing improvement initiatives.

In March 2020, New York City became the epicenter of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the United States. Because healthcare facilities were overwhelmed with patients, the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center was transformed into the nation’s largest alternate care site: Javits New York Medical Station (hereafter termed Javits). Protecting healthcare workers (HCWs) during a global shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) in a nontraditional healthcare setting posed unique challenges. We describe components of the HCW safety program implemented at Javits.

Javits, a large convention center transformed into a field hospital, with clinical staff from the US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps and the US Department of Defense.

Key strategies to ensure HCW safety included ensuring 1-way flow of traffic on and off the patient floor, developing a matrix detailing PPE required for each work activity and location, PPE extended use and reuse protocols, personnel training, and monitoring adherence to PPE donning/doffing protocols when entering or exiting the patient floor. Javits staff who reported COVID-19 symptoms were immediately isolated, monitored, and offered a severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test.

A well-designed and implemented HCW safety plan can minimize the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for HCWs. The lessons learned from operating the nation’s largest COVID-19 alternate care site can be adapted to other environments during public health emergencies.

To identify characteristics of antifungal prospective audit and feedback (PAF) and to compare rates of PAF recommendation and acceptance between antifungal and antibiotic agents.

Retrospective cohort study of antifungal and antibiotic audits by a children’s hospital antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) from November 1, 2020, to October 31, 2022.

Antimicrobial audit data were retrieved from the ASP data warehouse. We characterized antifungal PAF using descriptive statistics. We then compared the overall rates of PAF recommendation and recommendation acceptance between antifungals and antibiotics. We also compared the differences in antifungal and antibiotic PAF recommendation and acceptance rates across various factors, including infectious problem, medical service, and recommendation type.

Of 10,402 antimicrobial audits identified during the study period, 8,599 (83%) were for antibiotics and 1,803 (17%) were for antifungals. The highest antifungal recommendation rates were for liposomal amphotericin B, antifungals used for sepsis or respiratory tract infection, and antifungals prescribed in the cardiovascular intensive care unit. The rate of PAF recommendation was higher for antibiotics than for antifungals (29% vs 21%; P < .001); however, the rates of recommendation acceptance were similar. Recommendations to discontinue or for medication monitoring were more common for antifungals.

Our analysis of antifungal PAF identified key opportunities to improve antifungal use, including the optimized use of specific agents and targeted use by certain medical services. Moreover, antifungal PAF, despite identifying fewer recommendations compared to antibiotic PAF, were associated with similarly high rates of acceptance, highlighting a promising opportunity for antifungal stewardship.

To characterize experiences, beliefs, and perceptions of risk related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), infection prevention practices, and COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare personnel (HCP) at nonacute care facilities.

Anonymous survey.

Three non–acute-care facilities in St. Louis, Missouri.

In total, 156 HCP responded to the survey, for a 25.6% participation rate). Among them, 32% had direct patient-care roles.

Anonymous surveys were distributed between April-May 2021. Data were collected on demographics, work experience, COVID-19 exposure, knowledge, and beliefs about infection prevention, personal protective equipment (PPE) use, COVID-19 vaccination, and the impact of COVID-19.

Nearly all respondents reported adequate knowledge of how to protect oneself from COVID-19 at work (97%) and had access to adequate PPE supplies (95%). Many HCP reported that wearing a mask or face shield made communication difficult (59%), that they had taken on additional responsibilities due to staff shortages (56%), and that their job became more stressful because of COVID-19 (53%). Moreover, 28% had considered quitting their job. Most respondents (78%) had received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Common reasons for vaccination were a desire to protect family and friends (84%) and a desire to stop the spread of COVID-19 (82%). Potential side effects and/or inadequate vaccine testing were cited as the most common concerns by unvaccinated HCP.

A significant proportion of HCP reported increased stress and responsibilities at work due to COVID-19. The majority were vaccinated. Improving workplace policies related to mental health resources and sick leave, maintaining access to PPE, and ensuring clear communication of PPE requirements may improve workplace stress and burnout.

To examine the impact of commonly used case definitions for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations on case counts and outcomes.

Retrospective analysis of all adults hospitalized between March 1, 2020, and March 1, 2022, at 5 Massachusetts acute-care hospitals.

We applied 6 commonly used definitions of COVID-19 hospitalization: positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay within 14 days of admission, PCR plus dexamethasone administration, PCR plus remdesivir, PCR plus hypoxemia, institutional COVID-19 flag, or COVID-19 International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes. Outcomes included case counts and in-hospital mortality. Overall, 100 PCR-positive cases were reviewed to determine each definition’s accuracy for distinguishing primary or contributing versus incidental COVID-19 hospitalizations.

Of 306,387 hospital encounters, 15,436 (5.0%) met the PCR-based definition. COVID-19 hospitalization counts varied substantially between definitions: 4,628 (1.5% of all encounters) for PCR plus dexamethasone, 5,757 (1.9%) for PCR plus remdesivir, 11,801 (3.9%) for PCR plus hypoxemia, 15,673 (5.1%) for institutional flags, and 15,868 (5.2%) for ICD-10 codes. Definitions requiring dexamethasone, hypoxemia, or remdesivir selected sicker patients compared to PCR alone (mortality rates 12.2%, 10.7%, and 8.8% vs 8.3%, respectively). Definitions requiring PCR plus remdesivir or dexamethasone did not detect a reduction in in-hospital mortality associated with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. ICD-10 codes had the highest sensitivity (98.4%) but low specificity (39.5%) for distinguishing primary or contributing versus incidental COVID-19 hospitalizations. PCR plus dexamethasone had the highest specificity (92.1%) but low sensitivity (35.5%).

Commonly used definitions for COVID-19 hospitalizations generate variable case counts and outcomes and differentiate poorly between primary or contributing versus incidental COVID-19 hospitalizations. Surveillance definitions that better capture and delineate COVID-19–associated hospitalizations are needed.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) hospital outbreaks have been common and devastating during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 transmission in these environments is critical for preventing and managing outbreaks.

Outbreak investigation through epidemiological mapping and whole-genome sequencing phylogeny.

Hospital in-patient medical unit outbreak in Toronto, Canada, from November 2020 to January 2021.

The outbreak involved 8 patients and 10 staff and was associated with 3 patient deaths.

Patients being cared for in geriatric chairs at the nursing station were at high risk for both acquiring and transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to other patients and staff. Furthermore, given the informal nature of these transmissions, they were not initially recognized, which led to further transmission and missing the opportunity for preventative COVID-19 therapies.

During outbreak prevention and management, the risk of informal patient care settings, such as geriatric chairs, should be considered. During high-risk periods or during outbreaks, efforts should be made to care for patients in their rooms when possible.

To investigate a cluster of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in employees working on 1 floor of a hospital administration building.

Contact tracing was performed to identify potential exposures and all employees were tested for SARS-CoV-2. Whole-genome sequencing was performed to determine the relatedness of SARS-CoV-2 samples from infected personnel and from control cases in the healthcare system with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the same period. Carbon dioxide levels were measured during a workday to assess adequacy of ventilation; readings >800 parts per million (ppm) were considered an indication of suboptimal ventilation. To assess the potential for airborne transmission, DNA-barcoded aerosols were released, and real-time polymerase chain reaction was used to quantify particles recovered from air samples in multiple locations.

Between December 22, 2020, and January 8, 2021, 17 coworkers tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, including 13 symptomatic and 4 asymptomatic individuals. Of the 5 cluster SARS-CoV-2 samples sequenced, 3 were genetically related, but these employees denied higher-risk contacts with one another. None of the sequences from the cluster were genetically related to the 17 control sequences of SARS-CoV-2. Carbon dioxide levels increased during a workday but never exceeded 800 ppm. DNA-barcoded aerosol particles were dispersed from the sites of release to locations throughout the floor; 20% of air samples had >1 log10 particles.

In a hospital administration building outbreak, sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 confirmed transmission among coworkers. Transmission occurred despite the absence of higher-risk exposures and in a setting with adequate ventilation based on monitoring of carbon dioxide levels.