scholarly journals Assessment of antibiotic-resistant organism transmission among rooms of hospitalized patients, healthcare personnel, and the hospital environment utilizing surrogate markers and selective bacterial cultures

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 539-546
Author(s):  
Jennie H. Kwon ◽  
Kimberly Reske ◽  
Caroline A. O’Neil ◽  
Candice Cass ◽  
Sondra Seiler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Hospital Environment ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Resistant Organism ◽  
Surrogate Markers ◽  
Antibiotic Resistant ◽  
Contact Precautions ◽  
Bacterial Cultures ◽  
Fluorescent Powder

AbstractObjective:To assess potential transmission of antibiotic-resistant organisms (AROs) using surrogate markers and bacterial cultures.Design:Pilot study.Setting:A 1,260-bed tertiary-care academic medical center.Participants:The study included 25 patients (17 of whom were on contact precautions for AROs) and 77 healthcare personnel (HCP).Methods:Fluorescent powder (FP) and MS2 bacteriophage were applied in patient rooms. HCP visits to each room were observed for 2–4 hours; hand hygiene (HH) compliance was recorded. Surfaces inside and outside the room and HCP skin and clothing were assessed for fluorescence, and swabs were collected for MS2 detection by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and selective bacterial cultures.Results:Transfer of FP was observed for 20 rooms (80%) and 26 HCP (34%). Transfer of MS2 was detected for 10 rooms (40%) and 15 HCP (19%). Bacterial cultures were positive for 1 room and 8 HCP (10%). Interactions with patients on contact precautions resulted in fewer FP detections than interactions with patients not on precautions (P < .001); MS2 detections did not differ by patient isolation status. Fluorescent powder detections did not differ by HCP type, but MS2 was recovered more frequently from physicians than from nurses (P = .03). Overall, HH compliance was better among HCP caring for patients on contact precautions than among HCP caring for patients not on precautions (P = .003), among nurses than among other nonphysician HCP at room entry (P = .002), and among nurses than among physicians at room exit (P = .03). Moreover, HCP who performed HH prior to assessment had fewer fluorescence detections (P = .008).Conclusions:Contact precautions were associated with greater HCP HH compliance and reduced detection of FP and MS2.

scholarly journals Optimizing Contact Precautions to Curb the Spread of Antibiotic-resistant Bacteria in Hospitals: A Multicenter Cohort Study to Identify Patient Characteristics and Healthcare Personnel Interactions Associated With Transmission of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. S171-S177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lyndsay M O’Hara ◽  
David P Calfee ◽  
Loren G Miller ◽  
Lisa Pineles ◽  
Laurence S Magder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Resistant Bacteria ◽  
Bacterial Burden ◽  
Multicenter Cohort Study ◽  
Antibiotic Resistant ◽  
Contact Precautions ◽  
Multicenter Cohort

Abstract Background Healthcare personnel (HCP) acquire antibiotic-resistant bacteria on their gloves and gowns when caring for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Yet, contact precautions for patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) remains controversial despite existing guidelines. We sought to understand which patients are more likely to transfer MRSA to HCP and to identify which HCP interactions are more likely to lead to glove or gown contamination. Methods This was a prospective, multicenter cohort study of cultured HCP gloves and gowns for MRSA. Samples were obtained from patients’ anterior nares, perianal area, and skin of the chest and arm to assess bacterial burden. Results Among 402 MRSA-colonized patients with 3982 interactions, we found that HCP gloves and gowns were contaminated with MRSA 14.3% and 5.9% of the time, respectively. Contamination of either gloves or gowns occurred in 16.2% of interactions. Contamination was highest among occupational/physical therapists (odds ratio [OR], 6.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.51, 13.79), respiratory therapists (OR, 5.34; 95% CI, 3.04, 9.39), and when any HCP touched the patient (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.04, 6.51). Touching the endotracheal tube (OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.38, 2.19), bedding (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.20, 1.70), and bathing (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.01, 1.75) increased the odds of contamination. We found an association between increasing bacterial burden on the patient and HCP glove or gown contamination. Conclusions Gloves and gowns are frequently contaminated with MRSA in the ICU. Hospitals may consider using fewer precautions for low-risk interactions and more for high-risk interactions and personnel.

scholarly journals Differential Effects of Chlorhexidine Skin Cleansing Methods on Residual Chlorhexidine Skin Concentrations and Bacterial Recovery

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 405-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoona Rhee ◽  
Louisa J. Palmer ◽  
Koh Okamoto ◽  
Sean Gemunden ◽  
Khaled Hammouda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Multidrug Resistant ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Teaching Hospitals ◽  
Resistant Organism ◽  
Sterile Water ◽  
Polyester Cloth ◽  
Surgical Icus ◽  
Healthcare Associated ◽  
Skin Cleansing

BACKGROUNDBathing intensive care unit (ICU) patients with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)–impregnated cloths decreases the risk of healthcare-associated bacteremia and multidrug-resistant organism transmission. Hospitals employ different methods of CHG bathing, and few studies have evaluated whether those methods yield comparable results.OBJECTIVETo determine whether 3 different CHG skin cleansing methods yield similar residual CHG concentrations and bacterial densities on skin.DESIGNProspective, randomized 2-center study with blinded assessment.PARTICIPANTS AND SETTINGHealthcare personnel in surgical ICUs at 2 tertiary-care teaching hospitals in Chicago, Illinois, and Boston, Massachusetts, from July 2015 to January 2016.INTERVENTIONCleansing skin of one forearm with no-rinse 2% CHG-impregnated polyester cloth (method A) versus 4% CHG liquid cleansing with rinsing on the contralateral arm, applied with either non–antiseptic-impregnated cellulose/polyester cloth (method B) or cotton washcloth dampened with sterile water (method C).RESULTSIn total, 63 participants (126 forearms) received method A on 1 forearm (n=63). On the contralateral forearm, 33 participants received method B and 30 participants received method C. Immediately and 6 hours after cleansing, method A yielded the highest residual CHG concentrations (2500 µg/mL and 1250 µg/mL, respectively) and lowest bacterial densities compared to methods B or C (P<.001).CONCLUSIONIn healthy volunteers, cleansing with 2% CHG-impregnated cloths yielded higher residual CHG concentrations and lower bacterial densities than cleansing with 4% CHG liquid applied with either of 2 different cloth types and followed by rinsing. The relevance of these differences to clinical outcomes remains to be determined.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:405–411

Use of a comprehensive program to review religious and personal seasonal influenza vaccination exemption requests by healthcare personnel

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Boone ◽  
Rochelle T. Johnson ◽  
Lori A. Rolando ◽  
Thomas R. Talbot
Keyword(s):  
Seasonal Influenza ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
The Body ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Personal Belief ◽  
Job Category ◽  
Appeals Process ◽  
Vaccine Exemption

Abstract Objective: Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) requires that all faculty and staff receive the seasonal influenza vaccine annually or receive an approved vaccine exemption, either for a medical or deeply held religious or personal belief. We sought to understand the underlying principles behind these exemption requests and their interaction with a multidisciplinary exemption review process. Design: All of the personal and religious exemption requests at VUMC for 3 consecutive influenza seasons from 2015 to 2018 were analyzed, categorizing these requests by 1 of 12 standardized employee categories and 1 of 18 unique reasons for vaccine exemption. Setting: Tertiary-care academic medical center. Participants: Healthcare personnel (HCP). Results: Among the 3 influenza seasons, 1.1%–2.1% of all VUMC HCP requested religious or personal exemption from vaccination. The frequency of religious and personal exemption approval increased annually from 296 of 452 (65.5%) to 196 of 248 (80.2%) to 283 of 323 (87.6%) over the 3 seasons, representing a statistically significant increase each year. Of the 5 most common reasons against vaccination, 4 were explicitly religious in nature; the most common reason was that the “body is a temple or sacred.” Nonclinical staff submitted the most religious and personal exemption requests of any job category, submitting approximately one-third of all requests every year. Conclusions: These results demonstrate how detailed the personal or religious convictions behind vaccine avoidance can be among HCP and how vaccine avoidance stems from much more than simple misinformation regarding vaccination. The intersection between misinformation and personal or religious beliefs provides a unique opportunity to address HCP opinions toward vaccination in an exemption and appeals process like the one described here.

Expanding mandatory healthcare personnel immunization beyond influenza: Impact of a broad immunization program with enhanced accountability

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Talbot ◽  
Ruth Schimmel ◽  
Melanie D. Swift ◽  
Lori A. Rolando ◽  
Rochelle T. Johnson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Immunization Coverage ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Varicella Vaccination ◽  
Hepatitis B Vaccination ◽  
Immunization Program ◽  
Data Feedback ◽  
Before And After

Abstract Objective: Evaluation of a mandatory immunization program to increase and sustain high immunization coverage for healthcare personnel (HCP). Design: Descriptive study with before-and-after analysis. Setting: Tertiary-care academic medical center. Participants: Medical center HCP. Methods: A comprehensive mandatory immunization initiative was implemented in 2 phases, starting in July 2014. Key facets of the initiative included a formalized exemption review process, incorporation into institutional quality goals, data feedback, and accountability to support compliance. Results: Both immunization and overall compliance rates with targeted immunizations increased significantly in the years after the implementation period. The influenza immunization rate increased from 80% the year prior to the initiative to >97% for the 3 subsequent influenza seasons (P < .0001). Mumps, measles and varicella vaccination compliance increased from 94% in January 2014 to >99% by January 2017, rubella vaccination compliance increased from 93% to 99.5%, and hepatitis B vaccination compliance from 95% to 99% (P < .0001 for all comparisons). An associated positive effect on TB testing compliance, which was not included in the mandatory program, was also noted; it increased from 76% to 92% over the same period (P < .0001). Conclusions: Thoughtful, step-wise implementation of a mandatory immunization program linked to professional accountability can be successful in increasing immunization rates as well as overall compliance with policy requirements to cover all recommended HCP immunizations.

scholarly journals SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Healthcare Personnel and Their Household Contacts at a Tertiary Academic Medical Center: Protocol for a Longitudinal Cohort Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily J Ciccone ◽  
Paul N Zivich ◽  
Evans K Lodge ◽  
Deanna Zhu ◽  
Elle Law ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Household Contacts ◽  
Tertiary Care Medical Center

BACKGROUND Healthcare personnel are at high risk for exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. While personal protective equipment may mitigate this risk, prospective data collection on its use and other risk factors for seroconversion in this population is needed. OBJECTIVE The primary objectives of this study are to (1) determine the incidence of and risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare personnel at a tertiary medical center and (2) actively monitor personal protective equipment use, interactions between study participants via electronic sensors, secondary cases in households, and participant mental health and well-being. METHODS To achieve these objectives, we designed a prospective, observational study of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare personnel and their household contacts at an academic tertiary care medical center. Enrolled healthcare personnel completed frequent surveys on symptoms and work activities and provided serum and nasal samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing every two weeks. Additionally, interactions between participants and their movement within the clinical environment were captured with a smartphone app and Bluetooth sensors. Finally, a subset of participants' households was randomly selected every two weeks for further investigation, and enrolled households provided serum and nasal samples via at-home collection kits. RESULTS As of September 30, 2020, 164 healthcare personnel and 33 household participants have been enrolled. Recruitment and follow-up are ongoing and expected to continue until March 2021. CONCLUSIONS Much remains to be learned regarding risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare personnel and their household contacts. Through use of a multi-faceted study design enrolling a well-characterized cohort, we will collect critical information regarding SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the healthcare setting and its linkage to the community.

scholarly journals Sustained Improvement in Hand Hygiene Adherence: Utilizing Shared Accountability and Financial Incentives

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (11) ◽  
pp. 1129-1136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Talbot ◽  
James G. Johnson ◽  
Claudette Fergus ◽  
John Henry Domenico ◽  
William Schaffner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Financial Incentives ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Project Planning ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Sustained Improvement ◽  
Implementation Phase ◽  
The Impact

Objective.To evaluate the impact of an institutional hand hygiene accountability program on healthcare personnel hand hygiene adherence.Design.Time-series design with correlation analysis.Setting.Tertiary care academic medical center, including outpatient clinics and procedural areas.Participants.Medical center healthcare personnel.Methods.A comprehensive hand hygiene initiative was implemented in 2 major phases starting in July 2009. Key facets of the initiative included extensive project planning, leadership buy-in and goal setting, financial incentives linked to performance, and use of a system-wide shared accountability model. Adherence was measured by designated hand hygiene observers. Adherence rates were compared between baseline and implementation phases, and monthly hand hygiene adherence rates were correlated with monthly rates of device-associated infection.Results.A total of 109,988 observations were completed during the study period, with a sustained increase in hand hygiene adherence throughout each implementation phase (P<.0001) as well as from one phase to the next (P < .0001), such that adherence greater than 85% has been achieved since January 2011. Medical center departments were able to reclaim some rebate dollars allocated through a self-insurance trust, but during the study period, departments did not achieve full reimbursement. Hand hygiene adherence rates were inversely correlated with device-associated standardized infection ratios (R2 = 0.70).Conclusions.Implementation of this multifaceted, observational hand hygiene program was associated with sustained improvement in hand hygiene adherence. The principles of this program could be applied to other medical centers pursuing improved hand hygiene adherence among healthcare personnel.

The devil is in the details: Factors influencing hand hygiene adherence and contamination with antibiotic-resistant organisms among healthcare providers in nursing facilities

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (12) ◽  
pp. 1394-1399 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Mills ◽  
Ziwei Zhu ◽  
Julia Mantey ◽  
Savannah Hatt ◽  
Payal Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Routine Care ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Resistant Organism ◽  
Nursing Facilities ◽  
Skilled Nursing ◽  
Antibiotic Resistant ◽  
Before And After

AbstractBackground:Antibiotic-resistant organism (ARO) colonization rates in skilled nursing facilities (NFs) are high; hand hygiene is crucial to interrupt transmission. We aimed to determine factors associated with hand hygiene adherence in NFs and to assess rates of ARO acquisition among healthcare personnel (HCP).Methods:HCP were observed during routine care at 6 NFs. We recorded hand hygiene adherence, glove use, activities, and time in room. HCP hands were cultured before and after patient care; patients and high-touch surfaces were cultured. HCP activities were categorized as high-versus low-risk for self-contamination. Multivariable regression was performed to identify predictors of hand hygiene adherence.Results:We recorded 385 HCP observations and paired them with cultures performed before and after patient care. Hand hygiene adherence occurred in 96 of 352 observations (27.3%) before patient care and 165 of 358 observations (46.1%) after patient care. Gloves were worn in 169 of 376 observations (44.9%). Higher adherence was associated with glove use before patient care (odds ratio [OR], 2.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.44–4.54) and after patient care (OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 1.77–5.48). Compared with nurses, certified nurse assistants had lower hand hygiene adherence (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15–0.67) before patient care and physical/occupational therapists (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.11–0.44) after patient care. Hand hygiene varied by activity performed and time in the room. HCP hands were contaminated with AROs in 35 of 385 cultures of hands before patient care (0.9%) and 22 of 350 cultures of hands after patient care (6.3%).Conclusions:Hand hygiene adherence in NFs remain low; it is influenced by job title, type of care activity, and glove use. Hand hygiene programs should incorporate these unique care and staffing factors to reduce ARO transmission.

scholarly journals Long-term results of microvascular free-tissue transfer reanimation of the paralyzed face: Three cases

2008 ◽  
Vol 87 (4) ◽  
pp. 226-233
Author(s):  
John P. Leonetti ◽  
Chad A. Zender ◽  
Daryl Vandevender ◽  
Sam J. Marzo
Keyword(s):  
Facial Nerve ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Free Tissue Transfer ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Wide Field ◽  
Facial Movement ◽  
Tissue Transfer ◽  
Facial Reanimation

We conducted a retrospective case review at our tertiary care academic medical center to assess the long-term results of microvascular free-tissue transfer to achieve facial reanimation in 3 patients. These patients had undergone wide-field parotidectomy with facial nerve resection. Upper facial reanimation was accomplished with a proximal facial nerve–sural nerve graft, and lower facial movement was achieved through proximal facial nerve–long thoracic (serratus muscle) nerve anastomosis. Outcomes were determined by grading postoperative facial nerve function according to the House-Brackmann system. All 3 patients were able to close their eyes independent of lower facial movement, and all 3 had achieved House-Brackmann grade III function. We conclude that reanimating the paralyzed face with microvascular free-tissue transfer provides anatomic coverage and mimetic function after wide-field parotidectomy. Synkinesis is reduced by separating upper-and lower-division reanimation.

scholarly journals Clinical Team Distribution and Antibiotic Use Patterns at a Tertiary-Care Academic Medical Center

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s168-s169
Author(s):  
Rebecca Choudhury ◽  
Ronald Beaulieu ◽  
Thomas Talbot ◽  
George Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Hospital Units ◽  
Antibiotic Utilization ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Level Data ◽  
Utilization Data

Background: As more US hospitals report antibiotic utilization to the CDC, standardized antimicrobial administration ratios (SAARs) derived from patient care unit-based antibiotic utilization data will increasingly be used to guide local antibiotic stewardship interventions. Location-based antibiotic utilization surveillance data are often utilized given the relative ease of ascertainment. However, aggregating antibiotic use data on a unit basis may have variable effects depending on the number of clinical teams providing care. In this study, we examined antibiotic utilization from units at a tertiary-care hospital to illustrate the potential challenges of using unit-based antibiotic utilization to change individual prescribing. Methods: We used inpatient pharmacy antibiotic use administration records at an adult tertiary-care academic medical center over a 6-month period from January 2019 through June 2019 to describe the geographic footprints and AU of medical, surgical, and critical care teams. All teams accounting for at least 1 patient day present on each unit during the study period were included in the analysis, as were all teams prescribing at least 1 antibiotic day of therapy (DOT). Results: The study population consisted of 24 units: 6 ICUs (25%) and 18 non-ICUs (75%). Over the study period, the average numbers of teams caring for patients in ICU and non-ICU wards were 10.2 (range, 3.2–16.9) and 13.7 (range, 10.4–18.9), respectively. Units were divided into 3 categories by the number of teams, accounting for ≥70% of total patient days present (Fig. 1): “homogenous” (≤3), “pauciteam” (4–7 teams), and “heterogeneous” (>7 teams). In total, 12 (50%) units were “pauciteam”; 7 (29%) were “homogeneous”; and 5 (21%) were “heterogeneous.” Units could also be classified as “homogenous,” “pauciteam,” or “heterogeneous” based on team-level antibiotic utilization or DOT for specific antibiotics. Different patterns emerged based on antibiotic restriction status. Classifying units based on vancomycin DOT (unrestricted) exhibited fewer “heterogeneous” units, whereas using meropenem DOT (restricted) revealed no “heterogeneous” units. Furthermore, the average number of units where individual clinical teams prescribed an antibiotic varied widely (range, 1.4–12.3 units per team). Conclusions: Unit-based antibiotic utilization data may encounter limitations in affecting prescriber behavior, particularly on units where a large number of clinical teams contribute to antibiotic utilization. Additionally, some services prescribing antibiotics across many hospital units may be minimally influenced by unit-level data. Team-based antibiotic utilization may allow for a more targeted metric to drive individual team prescribing.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document