Cases of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were first reported in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. In this report, we describe 3 clusters of COVID-19 infections among healthcare workers (HCWs), not associated with patient exposure, and the interventions undertaken to halt ongoing exposure and transmission at our cancer center.

A cluster of cases was defined as 2 or more cases of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–positive COVID-19 among HCWs who work in the same unit area at the same time. Cases were identified by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing. Contact tracing, facility observations, and infection prevention assessments were performed to investigate the 3 clusters between March 1 and April 30, 2020, with subsequent implementation of containment strategies.

The initial cluster involved HCWs from an ancillary services unit, with contacts traced back to a gathering in a break room in which 1 employee was symptomatic, although not yet diagnosed with COVID-19, with subsequent transmission to 7 employees. The second cluster involved 4 employees and was community related. The third cluster involved only 2 employees with possible transmission while working in the same office at the same time. A step-up approach was implemented to control the spread of infection among employees, including universal masking, enhanced cleaning, increase awareness, and surveillance testing. No nosocomial transmission to patients transpired.

To our knowledge, this is the first report of a hospital-based cluster of COVID-19 infections among HCWs in a cancer hospital describing our steps to mitigate further transmission.

To analyze the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in workers of a hospital located in one of the most affected areas in Spain.

Cross-sectional study performed between March and May 2020 over all workers of a secondary hospital in Madrid, Spain.

We employed polymerase chain reaction (PCR, for symptomatic individuals) and serology (for both PCR-negative symptomatic workers and asymptomatic workers) as diagnostic tests for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We analyzed the prevalence of the virus in healthcare workers (HCWs) and nonhealthcare workers (nHCWs). We also collected information about the use of personal protective equipment (PPEs) and possible contacts prior to infection.

In total, 2,963 workers were included: 1,092 were symptomatic, and of these, 539 were positive by PCR (49.4% of symptomatic workers). From the remaining symptomatic workers, 197 (35.6%) were positive by serology. Regarding asymptomatic workers, 345 were positive by serology (31.9% of infected workers). In total, 1,081 (36.5%) presented a positive diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2. Infection rates were different between HCWs (37.4%) and nHCWs (29.8%) (P = .006). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the use of PPE (protective: OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.44–0.72; P < .001) and previous contact with COVID-19 patients (risk factor: OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.28–2.24; P < .001) were independent factors that were associated with SAS-CoV-2 infection.

Overall, >36% of our workers became infected with SARS-CoV-2, and the rate of asymptomatic infections accounted for almost 32% of all SARS-CoV-2 infections. We detected differences in the rates of infection between HCWs and nHCWs. The use of PPE and previous contact with COVID-19 patients were associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Evaluate changes in antimicrobial use during COVID-19 and after implementation of a multispecialty COVID-19 clinical guidance team compared to pre–COVID-19 antimicrobial use.

Retrospective observational study.

Tertiary-care academic medical center.

Internal medicine and medical intensive care unit (MICU) provider teams and hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Difference-in-differences analyses of antibiotic days of therapy per 1,000 patient days present (DOT) for internal medicine and MICU teams treating COVID-19 patients versus teams that did not were performed for 3 periods: before COVID-19, initial COVID-19 period, and after implementation of a multispecialty COVID-19 clinical guidance team which included daily, patient-specific antimicrobial stewardship recommendations. Patient characteristics associated with antibiotic DOT were evaluated using multivariable Poisson regression.

In the initial COVID-19 period, compared to the pre–COVID-19 period, internal medicine and MICU teams increased weekly antimicrobial use by 145.3 DOT (95% CI, 35.1–255.5) and 204.0 DOT (95% CI, −16.9 to 424.8), respectively, compared to non–COVID-19 teams. In the intervention period, internal medicine and MICU COVID-19 teams both had significant weekly decreases of 362.3 DOT (95% CI, −443.3 to −281.2) and 226.3 DOT (95% CI, −381.2 to –71.3). Of 131 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 86 (65.6%) received antibiotics; no specific patient factors were significantly associated with an expected change in antibiotic days.

Antimicrobial use initially increased for COVID-19 patient care teams compared to pre–COVID-19 levels but significantly decreased after implementation of a multispecialty clinical guidance team, which may be an effective strategy to reduce unnecessary antimicrobial use.

Viruses are more common than bacteria in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia. Little is known, however, about the frequency of respiratory viral testing and its associations with antimicrobial utilization.

Retrospective cohort study.

The study included 179 US hospitals.

Adults admitted with pneumonia between July 2010 and June 2015.

We assessed the frequency of respiratory virus testing and compared antimicrobial utilization, mortality, length of stay, and costs between tested versus untested patients, and between virus-positive versus virus-negative patients.

Among 166,273 patients with pneumonia on admission, 40,787 patients (24.5%) were tested for respiratory viruses, 94.8% were tested for influenza, and 20.7% were tested for other viruses. Viral assays were positive in 5,133 of 40,787 tested patients (12.6%), typically for influenza and rhinovirus. Tested patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities than untested patients, but patients with positive viral assays were older and had more comorbidities than those with negative assays. Blood cultures were positive for bacterial pathogens in 2.7% of patients with positive viral assays versus 5.3% of patients with negative viral tests (P < .001). Antibacterial courses were shorter for virus-positive versus -negative patients overall (mean 5.5 vs 6.4 days; P < .001) but varied by bacterial testing: 8.1 versus 8.0 days (P = .60) if bacterial tests were positive; 5.3 versus 6.1 days (P < .001) if bacterial tests were negative; and 3.3 versus 5.2 days (P < .001) if bacterial tests were not obtained (interaction P < .001).

A minority of patients hospitalized with pneumonia were tested for respiratory viruses; only a fraction of potential viral pathogens were assayed; and patients with positive viral tests often received long antibacterial courses.

Tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation provide essential support for patients with respiratory failure, but the course of mechanical ventilation may be complicated by adverse ventilator-associated events (VAEs), which may or may not be associated with infection. We sought to understand how the frequency of subglottic suction, an indicator of the quantity of sputum produced by ventilated patients, relates to the onset of all VAEs and infection-associated VAEs.

We performed a case-crossover study including 87 patients with VAEs, and we evaluated 848 days in the pre-VAE period at risk for a VAE.

Critically ill patients were recruited from the medical intensive care unit of an academic medical center.

We used the number of as-needed subglottic suctioning events performed per calendar day to quantify sputum production, and we compared the immediate pre-VAE period to the preceding period. We used CDC surveillance definitions for VAE and to categorize whether events were infection associated or not.

Sputum quantity measured by subglottic suction frequency is greater in the period immediately prior to VAE than in the preceding period. However, it does not discriminate well between infection-associated VAEs and VAEs without associated infection.

Subglottic suction frequency may serve as a valuable marker of sputum quantity, and it is associated with risk of a VAE. However, our results require validation in a broader population of mechanically ventilated patients and intensive care settings.

To assess infectious and thrombotic complications of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) in adults.

A 5-year prospective cohort study.

Tertiary-care teaching hospital in Seville, Spain.

Adult patients undergoing PICC insertion.

Catheter-associated bloodstream infection (CABSI) including catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI), primary bacteremia (PB), and upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) were recorded. Independent predictors of complications were assessed by multivariate analysis.

In total, 1,142 PICCs were inserted, with 153,191 catheter days (median, 79). Complications included 66 cases of CABSI (5.78%; 0.43‰ catheter days), 38 cases of CRBSI (3.33%; 0.25‰ catheter days), 28 cases of PB (2.45%; 0.18‰ catheter days), and 23 cases of UEDVT (2.01%; 0.15‰ catheter days). The median times to infection were 24, 41, and 60 days for CRBSI, PB, and UEDVT, respectively. Parenteral nutrition (odds ratio [OR], 3.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.77–6.52) and admission to the hematology ward (OR, 4.90; 95% CI, 2.25–10.71) were independently associated with CRBSI and PB, respectively. Admission to the hematology ward (OR, 12.46; 95% CI, 2.49–62.50) or to the oncology ward (OR, 7.89; 95% CI, 1.77–35.16) was independently associated with UEDVT. The crude mortality rate was 24.8%. Only 2 patients died of complications.

PICCs showed a low rate of thrombotic and infectious complications. Compared to PB, CRBSI showed significantly different risk factors, a higher incidence density per catheter days, and a shorter median time to infection. Separate analyses of CRBSI and PB are more specific and clinically useful when analyzing infectious complications.

Central-line bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) negatively impact clinical outcomes and hospital reimbursement. In this report, 4 year trends involving 11 hospitals in New York City were examined.

Data from the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) were extracted for 11 acute-care hospitals belonging to the NYC Health + Hospital system from 2016 through 2019. Trends in device infections per 1,000 patient days, device utilization ratios, and standardized infection ratios (SIRs) were examined for the 11 hospitals and for the entire system.

Over the 4-year period, there were progressive declines in central-line days, infections per 1,000 central-line days, and device utilization ratios for the system. The average annual SIRs for the system also declined: 1.40 in 2016, 1.09 in 2017, 1.04 in 2018, and 0.82 in 2019. Case-mix indices correlated with SIRs for CLABSIs. Level 1 trauma centers had higher SIRs and a disproportionately greater number of CLABSIs in patients located in NHSN-defined surgical intensive care units. Similar trends with CAUTIs were noted, with progressive declines in catheter days, infections per 1,000 patient days, device utilization ratios, and SIRs (1.42 in 2016, 0.93 in 2017, 1.18 in 2018, and 0.78 in 2019) over the 4-year period.

Across an 11-hospital system, continuing efforts to reduce device utilization and infection rates resulted in declining SIRs for CLABSIs and CAUTIs. Hospitals with higher case-mix indices, and particularly level 1 trauma centers, had significantly higher central-line infection rates and SIRs.

To investigate hospital room and patient-level risk factors associated with increased risk of healthcare-facility–onset Clostridioides difficile infection (HO-CDI).

The study used a retrospective cohort design that included patient data from the institution’s electronic health record, existing surveillance data on HO-CDI, and a walk-through survey of hospital rooms to identify potential room-level risk factors. The primary outcome was HO-CDI diagnosis.

A large academic medical center.

All adult patients admitted between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016 were eligible for inclusion. Prisoners were excluded. Patients who only stayed in rooms that were not surveyed were excluded.

The hospital room survey collected room-level data on 806 rooms. Included in the study were 17,034 patients without HO-CDI and 251 with HO-CDI nested within 535 unique rooms. In this exploratory study, room-level risk factors associated with the outcome in the multivariate model included wear on furniture and flooring and antibiotic use by the prior room occupant. Hand hygiene devices and fixed in-room computers were associated with reduced odds of a HO-CDI. Differences between hospital buildings were also detected. The only individual patient factors that were associated with increased odds of HO-CDI were antibiotic use and comorbidity score.

Combining a hospital-room walk-through data collection survey, EHR data, and CDI surveillance data, we were able to develop a model to investigate room and patient-level risks for HO-CDI.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal swabs are utilized to guide the discontinuation of empiric MRSA therapy. In multiple studies, MRSA nasal swabs have been shown to have a negative predictive value (NPV) of ~99% in non-oncology patients with pneumonia and other infections. We evaluated the performance characteristics of a negative MRSA nasal swab in the acute myeloid leukemia (AML) populaion to determine its NPV.

Retrospective chart review.

This study included adult AML patients with a suspected infection and a MRSA nasal swab collected between 2013 and 2018.

MRSA nasal swab and culture-documented infections were identified to determine the sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and positive predictive value of the MRSA nasal swabs.

In total, 194 patients were identified, and 484 discrete encounters were analyzed. Overall, 468 (97%) encounters had a negative MRSA nasal swab upon admission with no cultured documented MRSA infection during their hospitalization. However, 3 encounters (0.6%) had a negative MRSA nasal swab with a subsequent cultured documented MRSA infection during their admission. Identified infections were bacteremia (n = 2) and confirmed pneumonia (n = 1). MRSA nasal swab had a sensitivity of 62% (95% CI, 0.24–0.91), specificity of 98% (95% CI, 0.96–0.99), positive predictive value of 38% (95% CI, 0.21–0.6), and NPV of 99% (95% CI, 0.98–1).

A negative MRSA nasal swab has a 99% NPV for subsequent MRSA infections in AML patients with no prior history of MRSA colonization or infection. Based on these findings, a negative MRSA nasal swab can help guide de-escalation of empiric MRSA antibiotic therapy.

Despite the existence of various levels of infection prevention and control (IPC) measures aimed at limiting the transmission of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in hospitals, these measures are sometimes difficult to implement. Using an agent-based model (ABM), we simulated the transmission of VRE within and between 3 care units according to different IPC measures.

The ABM was modelled on short-stay medical wards, represented by 2 conventional care units and 1 intensive care unit. The scenarios consisted of the simulation of various compliance rates of caregivers with regard to hand hygiene (HH) in different contexts of IPC measures: (1) standard precautions for all patients, (2) additional contact precautions for VRE-carrier patients, (3) geographical cohorting of carrier patients, and (4) creation of an isolation unit with dedicated staff.

With <50% HH compliance, the dissemination of VRE was not adequately controlled. With 80% compliance for all patients (ie, standard precautions scenario), there were no secondary VRE cases in 50% of the simulations, which represented the best scenario. A more realistic rate, 60% HH compliance for all patients, revealed interesting results. Implementing an isolation unit was effective only if the level of HH compliance was low. Patient cohorting was less effective.

The present ABM showed that while contact precautions, geographic cohorting, and an isolation unit may represent good complements to standard precautions, they may theoretically not be necessary if HH is followed at a high level of compliance.