Background: Acute viral bronchiolitis caused by respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) may be a manifestation of high severity in neonatal-ICU (NICU) patients, with high risk of in-hospital cross transmission and outbreaks. During the epidemic seasonal period, intense viral circulation occurs in community; thus, transmission in the NICU is difficult to control. Objective: We describe an outbreak that occurred in a NICU in a public hospital in So Paulo state, Brazil. We also discuss the role of admitting external newborns with community-acquired virus in the incidence of these outbreaks in the NICU. Methods: In 2017 in Campinas, an RSV epidemic occurred during the seasonal period, resulting in a outbreak at the Campinas maternity hospital. A retrospective investigation was performed, and patients were analyzed for clinical and epidemiological characteristics and for risk factors for poor prognosis. We included neonates admitted in NICU with positive nasal lavage for RSV from April to July 2017. Statistical analysis were performed with 2 test for the categorical variables and the Student t test for the continuous variables comparing the newborn group from the community (external) with infected newborns in the hospital (internal). P < .05 was considered significant. Results: Of 44 neonates with RSV during this period, 32 were external and 12 were internal (Fig. 1). The mean gestational age of the external neonates was 38 weeks and 2 days, whereas the mean gestational age of the internal neonates was 29 weeks and 1 day (P < .001). The hospitalization time was higher in the internal group (P < .001). Table 1. One death associated with infection occurred in the internal group. Community neonates (external group) were mostly term-born, with no comorbidities, and they had a more favorable clinical course. In the literature, neonates infected with RSV at the hospital have several risk factors for poor prognosis, with a 13.5% mortality rate. Discussion: RSV outbreaks have great relevance in hospital settings, especially in the NICU, where there are a large number of vulnerable patients and a high risk of in-hospital cross transmission. Neonates infected with RSV at the hospital have several risk factors for poor prognosis, including high mortality. Therefore, it is important to discuss the exposure of this population to community-based infectious agents, mainly viral, and the risk of accepting patients from the community to be admitted to the NICU.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: MRSA continues to spread in hospitals, despite modest recent success. Gaps exist regarding how hospital policies impact MRSA transmission in hospitals. Characterization of the policy environment has been useful in approaching other public health issues including control of alcohol, firearms, tobacco, and traffic safety. Objective: Our goal was to describe measurable and modifiable policy components designed to prevent MRSA in hospital settings. Methods: We examined 4 types of hospital policies from 5 metropolitan hospitals in Minnesota: hand hygiene, multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) and isolation, healthcare personnel influenza vaccination, and whistleblower (corporate compliance). We developed a tool to systematically evaluate policies for each topic that included 19–23 instructional and implementation elements guided by regulatory and clinical practice guidelines: purpose, expectations, education and training, monitoring, enforcement, corrective actions, responsibilities, and corrective actions. Each policy element was evaluated for its presence (yes or no) and thoroughness (nonexistent = 0, cursory = 1, thorough = 2). Results: All hospitals had hand hygiene and MDRO and isolation policies; 3 of 5 had influenza and whistleblower policies. The policies varied in comprehensiveness and thoroughness across hospitals and topics. Most policies included purpose and policy statements with a statement of organizational rules (14 of 16 and 16 of 16, respectively) with mean thoroughness scores of 1.04 and 1.20, respectively. Most policies lacked consequences for noncompliance (6 of 16), accountability (6 of 16), and monitoring and enforcement of policy expectations (5 of 16). When included, the policy components scored low for thoroughness, and 50% of policies (8 of 16; range, 20% for hand hygiene and 100% for influenza vaccination) specified expectations for educating staff about the policy topic, with a mean thoroughness score of 0.75. Responsibilities for policy expectations were lacking: responsibilities for product needs and availability (3 of 13), training and education (1 of 16); and monitoring compliance with skills and techniques (4 of 16). Of the 4 policy types, influenza vaccination was the most complete. All influenza policies had 50% of categories completed versus hand hygiene (26%), MDRO (17%), and whistleblower (26%). The hand hygiene policies scored highest for thoroughness; 48% of policy elements scored >1.0 versus MDRO (22%), influenza (25%), and whistleblower (11%). Conclusions: We developed a systematic method to quantitatively evaluate hospital policies. Our review of hospital policies most commonly contained thorough instructional elements such as organizational requirements and protocols and procedures. Policies often lacked implementation elements such as expectations for monitoring, enforcement, responsibilities, accountabilities, and staff training and education. As we begin to characterize policy, endogenous in nature, as a potential exposure, it is important that we develop rigorous measurement. We have provided a first step in developing such an approach.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Measles was considered eradicated in Brazil in 2016, but the virus reemerged in the country in 2018, causing large outbreaks. Ribeirao Preto has been measles free since 1997, but the outbreak in Sao Paulo City, 180 miles away in June 2019, alerted us to the possibility of measles patients coming to our emergency room (ER). The preparedness challenge was considerable: most healthcare workers (HCWs) had never seen a measles case before, and confirmatory measles laboratory tests were not readily available to us. Objective: To describe the hospital preparedness for the coming community measles outbreak. Methods: Hospital So Francisco is a 170-bed, general, tertiary-care hospital with 10,000 ER visits monthly. Measles preparedness consisted of measles training classes for HCWs, and flow charts with pictures and measles information in every ER office, also sent to HCW cell phones. We also designated areas for suspected measles patients for prompt medical evaluation; and we implemented mass measles vaccination for all hospital HCWs regardless of vaccination status, excluding pregnant or immunosuppressed HCWs. We considered a measles suspected case any person with fever, 1 of 3 symptoms (cough, coryza or conjunctivitis), and a generalized maculopapular rash with head-to-toe distribution. All contacts for suspected cases were recommended to obtain a measles vaccination. Detection of viral RNA in a biological sample and or a positive IgM result in serum was used to confirm a clinically suspected case. The study period spanned July 2019 to September 2019. Results: Measles training occurred for 3 weeks in July–August and reached 200 HCWs. The measles vaccination was offered July 23 to August 15; 1,362 HCWs were already vaccinated (93% of target population). In total, 35 clinical suspected measles cases were seen in the ER, and 3 of these were HCWs who had received the measles vaccine in their incubation period. Also, 3 patients were admitted to the hospital and 1 to the intensive care unit; there were no deaths. Overall, 8 patients had laboratory-confirmed measles, and 1,343 community contacts of these patients were vaccinated. We did not detect measles transmission to inpatients or to other HCWs after mass vaccination began. In the same period, Sao Paulo state had >7,000 laboratory-confirmed measles cases and 12 deaths. Conclusions: Community measles outbreaks are a challenge for the hospital infection control team, and they can potentially disrupt the daily activities in the hospital. We were able to adequately prepare for the largest state outbreak in 20 years without secondary cases or deaths.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in severely ill patients, contributing to increased length of stay and a higher cost of care. Surveillance of hospital-acquired (HA) BSI is considered a measure of quality of care and has been performed provincially in Alberta since 2011. Prior to October 2015, a nonstandardized, risk-factor–based VRE screening process was used. Screening practices for antibiotic-resistant organisms (AROs) were aligned in October 2015 with a provincially standardized admission screening tool to allow for early initiation of contact precautions for patients colonized or infected with MRSA or VRE. In this data review, we sought to determine whether this admission screening change influenced ARO infections through review of HA-BSI rates. Methods: Prospectively, we reviewed reports of all patients admitted to Alberta Health Services/Covenant Health acute-care and acute-/tertiary-care rehabilitation facilities who met inclusion criteria: (1) positive blood culture identified with MRSA or VRE; (2) new episode for the patient; and (3) positive result occurred on or after calendar day 3 of admission. Data are presented as quarterly rates. Screening practices for MRSA and VRE were standardized provincially in October 2015 to include screening for MRSA on admission for patients who had an inpatient admission, received hemodialysis, or was an inmate in a correctional facility in the past 6 months. We also screened for VRE patients admitted to a solid-organ transplant unit or a hematology unit, regardless of risk factors. Results: We detected no changes in the quarterly rates of HA-BSI with MRSA or VRE after admission screening was standardized. Prior to standardized screening, MRSA BSI rates ranged from 0.12 to 0.25 per 10,000 patient days, with an overall rate of 0.18 per 10,000 patient days. After standardization, rates ranged from 0.09 to 0.30 per 10,000 patient days, with an overall rate of 0.17 per 10,000 patient days (P = .46). VRE BSI rates prior to standardization ranged from 0.03 to 0.13 per 10,000 patient days, with an overall rate of 0.08 per 10,000 patient days, which increased slightly to 0.09 per 10,000 patient days after standardized screening, ranging between 0.04 and 0.16 per 10,000 patient days (P = .61). Conclusions: Following the implementation of standardized admission screening and the early initiation of contact precautions, no significant changes were observed in rates of either HA-BSI with MRSA or VRE. Further investigation is required to identify the most effective strategies to reduce HA-BSIs caused by MRSA and VRE.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Standard precautions are the basis of infection prevention and include a set of common-sense infection control practices that prevent transmission of diseases acquired by contact with blood, body fluids, nonintact skin, and mucous membranes. These measures include hand hygiene, personal protective equipment (PPE), cleaning and disinfecting, linen handling, waste disposal, sharps safety and respiratory etiquette. Standard precautions require that the risk for exposure be assessed and appropriate precautions taken based on risk. Observations and anecdotal evidence have led us to believe that understanding of standard precautions is lacking among healthcare personnel. Methods: A survey was conducted at a large health system to assess knowledge and practices related to specific elements of standard precautions. Results: More than 3,000 HCWs responded from inpatient settings (41%), outpatient settings (37%), and both settings (22%). Nurses comprised the majority of respondents (54%), and others included physicians (9%), respiratory therapists, as well as physical and occupational therapists. Discussion: The vast majority (96%) of respondents agreed that standard precautions were required in the care of all patients, but a significant proportion (34%) interpreted that to mean that standard precautions always involve wearing gloves, and 22.5% thought that PPE was always required for standard precautions. Hand hygiene and sharps safety were identified as the best understood elements of standard precautions. Respiratory etiquette and cleaning and disinfection were reported as the least understood elements, with PPE, waste disposal, and linen handling also being reported as inadequately understood components of standard precautions (Fig. 1). Conclusions: In an era of increasing drug resistance and fewer effective antibiotics, standard precautions are our best defense against the spread of infections in the healthcare setting. Our survey showed that there is room for improvement among healthcare workers in understanding of the elements of standard precautions. We plan to use the survey to craft a targeted education campaign to improve understanding of and adherence to standard precautions.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Our team has been fighting nosocomial infections since 1991. During our journey, we often ask why people do not wash their hands! Semmelweiss discovered in the 1840s that handwashing prevented deaths from puerperal sepsis, but we still need to convince healthcare workers about hand hygiene. One answer is that washing hands is an unsophisticated gesture, without any technology, so people just do not do it. How can we improve compliance with hand hygiene? We imagined a robot in our team to remind people to wash their hands. Then, in 2016 we met Meccanoid, a US$200 toy robot: a 4-foot-tall programmable humanoid robot with voice recognition capabilities. We made adaptions in the robot (mini-projector + audio amplifier + alcohol dispenser + spy camera), and we gave him a name (Ozires) and a purpose: He became a professor who teaches healthcare workers how, when, and why wash their hands! Here, we describe the multimodal strategy centered around Ozires. Methods: The multimodal strategy consists of 7 key elements: (1) the robot, accompanied by a infection control practitioner, performs audio and video lectures about hand hygiene techniques, motivational videos, data feedback; (2) the robot’s wood copies with sound alert with motion detector for hand hygiene are spread out in the whole hospital; (3) fridge magnet with robot prints (gifts for patients and healthcare professionals); (4) app for hand hygiene monitoring (Hands Clean); (5) adherence rates by professional category and individual feedback; (6) patient empowerment for hand hygiene; and (7) sound alert for hand hygiene in the patient room’s door. Results: After the insertion of Ozires in 3 ICUs of hospital A (pilot study), the hand hygiene (HH) rate increased from ~36%, between January and July 2016, to ~68% between August 2016 and October 2019. At hospital B, Ozires started his lectures in May 2018, throughout the hospital. Hand hygiene adherence increased from 23% between July and December 2017 to 60% between June 2018 and October 2019. In the 3 months before this multimodal strategy was implemented in hospital C (June–August 2019), and the mean rate of hand hygiene was 65%. With the robot, the hand hygiene rate increased to 94% (September–October 2019). Conclusions: The multimodal strategy centered around the robot Ozires works! Hand hygiene compliance increased significantly after the interventions. People listen the robot much more attentively than to their human colleagues, and healthcare worker behavior changed! We need to go further improve the program, but it is sustainable. Finally, we succeeded in convincing people to improve their hand hygiene practices.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Multidrug-resistant bacteria can lead to treatment failure, resulting in infectious diseases being transferred through nonpotable water. Aminoglycosides are an important class of antibiotics that are abused in Nigeria. Few studies have investigated aminoglycoside-modifying genes (AMGs) that are likely responsible for resistance in Nigeria bacteria isolates. Therefore, we aimed to characterize AMGs from isolates in drinking water distribution systems (DWDS) in southwestern Nigeria. Methods: Multidrug-resistant bacteria (n = 181) that had been previously characterized by 16S rDNA sequencing and that were positive for resistance to at least 1 aminoglycoside antibiotic were selected from 6 treated and untreated water distribution systems. Strains were PCR genotyped for 3 AMGs: aph(3)c, ant(3)b and aph(6)-1dd. Results: Of 181 MDR bacteria tested, 69 (38.12%) were positive for at least 1 of the AMGs. The most common was ant(3)c (27.6%), followed by aph(3")c (18.23%). Both aph(3)c and ant(3")b were found in 7.73% of tested isolates, ant(3)b was most commonly found in Alcaligenes spp (50%). Furthermore, aph(3")c was most commonly detected in Proteus spp (50%). Other genera positive for AMGs included Acinetobacter, Aeromonas, Bordetella, Brevundimonas, Chromobacterium, Klebsiella, Leucobacter, Morganella, Pantoae, Proteus, Providencia, Psychrobacter, and Serratia. Conclusions: High occurrence of ant(3)c and aph(3)c among these bacteria call for urgent attention among public health workers because these genes can be easily disseminated to consumers if present on mobile genetic elements like plasmids, integrons, and transposons.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: In June 2019, the Maryland Department of Health (MDH) was notified of a hospitalized patient with Candida auris bloodstream infection. The MDH initiated a contact investigation to identify additional patients with C. auris colonization. Many of the contacts had been discharged home from the hospital and were therefore not available for screening. Healthcare facilities in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC, submit patient data to a regional health information exchange (HIE) called the Chesapeake Regional Information System for our Patients (CRISP). CRISP includes a notification system that alerts providers when flagged patients have healthcare encounters. We aimed to use this system to identify discharged C. auris contacts on their next inpatient encounter to rapidly screen them and to detect new cases. Methods:C. auris contacts were defined as patients located on an inpatient unit on the same day, receiving wound care from the same team, or having a procedure in the same operating room on the same day as the index patient or any patients subsequently identified as having C. auris infection or colonization detected either during the normal course of clinical care or through screening. Contacts who remained hospitalized were screened during inpatient point prevalence surveys (PPSs). Contacts discharged to postacute-care facilities were screened by facility staff. Contacts who had been discharged home were flagged in CRISP, and MDH staff received CRISP encounter alerts when these patients were readmitted. MDH staff then contacted the admitting facilities to recommend screening for C. auris. Axilla and groin swabs were collected and tested by rt-PCR at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Antibiotic Resistance Laboratory Network laboratory. Results: As of October 8, 2019, 4,017 contacts were identified. Among these, 936 (23%) contacts at 56 healthcare facilities (33 acute-care hospitals and 23 postacute-care facilities) were screened for C. auris, and 10 patients with C. auris colonization were identified (1.1% of contacts who underwent C. auris screening). Of these, 6 (60%) were identified through CRISP notification and 4 (40%) were identified by PPSs conducted in acute-care hospitals. Conclusions: In this ongoing C. auris outbreak, a large proportion of colonized patients was identified using an electronic encounter notification system within a regional HIE. This approach was effective for identifying opportunities to screen contacts at their next healthcare encounter and can augment other means of case detection, like PPSs. HIEs should incorporate mechanisms to facilitate contact tracing for public health investigations.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Shortages of essential medicines, a long-standing issue in healthcare, apply equally to antimicrobial agents, a group of essential drugs necessary for sustainable healthcare. The WHO categorized essential medicines into the access, watch, and reserve groups. Older antimicrobials, in particular, were categorized into the access group, meaning that these drugs are in theory widely available at an affordable cost. The shortage of essential antimicrobial agents like cefazolin leads to increased consumption of alternative antimicrobial agents with broad-spectrum activity, which often has the undesirable consequence of defeating antimicrobial stewardship efforts in inpatient settings and potentially promoting antimicrobial resistance. In Japan, cefazolin has been in critically short supply since March 2019. Cefazolin is a first-line agent against common infectious diseases and in surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis, and its shortage has substantially impacted inpatient care. The aim of the present study was to investigate changes in antimicrobial practice at a tertiary-care center in Japan following the emergence of the national cefazolin shortage in March 2019. Methods: Data on each antimicrobial use are logged as days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 patient days (PD) for antimicrobial stewardship purposes at the study institution. We extracted weekly data from September 2018 to September 2019 to evaluate the impact of the national cefazolin shortage on antimicrobial use at our tertiary-care center. Changes in weekly antimicrobial use and the weekly incidence of Clostridium difficile infections were analyzed by interrupted time series analysis. We also investigated changes in antimicrobial practice at selected situations. Results: As weekly cefazolin use significantly declined after the emergence of the national shortage, use of third-generation cephalosporin (+18.9 DOT per 1,000 PD for intercept [P < .001] and +0.65 DOT per 1,000 PD per week for trend [P = .037]) and clindamycin (18 DOT per 1,000 PD for intercept [P = .008] and 0.12 DOT per 1,000 PD per week for trend [P = .003]) significantly increased. Significant changes in antimicrobial practice were also observed in surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis: third-generation cephalosporin use increased from 1.0% (31 of 3,032) to 62.9% (2,237 of 3,554) (P < .001). However, no significant change in the incidence of Clostridium difficile infection was observed during the study period: +1.72 per 10,000 PD for intercept (P = .12) and 0.12 per 10,000 PD per week for the trend (P = .09). Conclusions: The national cefazolin shortage had a significantly negative impact on patient care and led to increased use of alternative, broader-spectrum antimicrobials, which are not ideal choices either for prophylaxis or treatment.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates have steadily decreased as evidence-based prevention bundles were implemented. Bone marrow transplant (BMT) patients are at increased risk for CLABSI due to immunosuppression, prolonged central-line utilization, and frequent central-line accesses. We assessed the impact of an enhanced prevention bundle on BMT nonmucosal barrier injury CLABSI rates. Methods: The University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics is an 811-bed academic medical center that houses the only BMT program in Iowa. During October 2018, we added 3 interventions to the ongoing CLABSI prevention bundle in our BMT inpatient unit: (1) a standardized 2-person dressing change team, (2) enhanced quality daily chlorhexidine treatments, and (3) staff and patient line-care stewardship. The bundle included training of nurse champions to execute a team approach to changing central-line dressings. Standard process description and supplies are contained in a cart. In addition, 2 sets of sterile hands and a second person to monitor for breaches in sterile procedure are available. Site disinfection with chlorhexidine scrub and dry time are monitored. Training on quality chlorhexidine bathing includes evaluation of preferred product, application per product instructions for use and protection of the central-line site with a waterproof shoulder length glove. In addition to routine BMT education, staff and patients are instructed on device stewardship during dressing changes. CLABSIs are monitored using NHSN definitions. We performed an interrupted time-series analysis to determine the impact of our enhanced prevention bundle on CLABSI rates in the BMT unit. We used monthly CLABSI rates since January 2017 until the intervention (October 2018) as baseline. Because the BMT changed locations in December 2018, we included both time points in our analysis. For a sensitivity analysis, we assessed the impact of the enhanced prevention bundle in a hematology-oncology unit (March 2019) that did not change locations. Results: During the period preceding bundle implementation, the CLABSI rate was 2.2 per 1,000 central-line days. After the intervention, the rate decreased to 0.6 CLABSI per 1,000 central-line days (P = .03). The move in unit location did not have a significant impact on CLABSI rates (P = .85). CLABSI rates also decreased from 1.6 per 1,000 central-line days to 0 per 1,000 central-line days (P < .01) in the hematology-oncology unit. Conclusions: An enhanced CLABSI prevention bundle was associated with significant decreases in CLABSI rates in 2 high-risk units. Novel infection prevention bundle elements should be considered for special populations when all other evidence-based recommendations have been implemented.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Although central-line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in US hospitals have improved in the last decade, ~30,100 CLABSIs occur annually.1,2 Central venous catheters (CVC) carry a high risk of infections and should be limited to appropriate clinical indications.6,7 Montefiore Medical Center, a large, urban, academic medical center in the Bronx, serves a high-risk population with multiple comobidities.8–11 Despite this, the critical care medicine (CCM) team is often consulted to place a CVC when a peripheral intravenous line (PIV) cannot be obtained by nurses or primary providers. We evaluated the volume of CCM consultation requests for avoidable CVCs and related CLABSIs. Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed for patients with CCM consultation requests for CVC placement between July and October 2019. The indication for CVC, type of catheter inserted or recommended, and NHSN data were used to identify CLABSIs. CVCs were considered avoidable if a PIV was used for the stated indication and duration of therapy, with no anatomical contraindications to PIV in nonemergencies, according to the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC).6Results: Of 229 total CCM consults, 4 (18%) requests were for CVC placement; 21 consultations (9%) were requested for avoidable CVCs. Of 40 CVC requests, 18 (45%) resulted in CVC placement by the CCM team, 4 (10%) were deferred for nonurgent PICC by interventional radiology, and 18 (45%) were deferred in favor of PIV or no IV. Indications for CVC insertion included emergent chemotherapy (n = 8, 44%) and dialysis (n = 3, 16%), vasopressors (n = 3, 16%), antibiotics (n = 2, 11%) and blood transfusion (n = 2, 11%). Of 18 CVCs, 9 (50%) were potentially avoidable: 2 short-term antibiotics and rest for nonemergent indications; 2 blood transfusions, 1 dialysis, 2 chemotherapy and 2 vasopressors. Between July and October 2019, 6 CLABSIs occurred in CVCs placed by the CCM team; in 3 of 6 CLABSI events (50%), the CVC was avoidable. Conclusions: More than half of consultation requests to the CCM team for CVCs are avoidable, and they disproportionately contribute to CLABSI events. Alternatives for intravenous access could potentially avoid 9% of CCM consultations and 50% of CLABSIs in CCM-inserted CVCs on medical-surgical wards.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Clinically diagnosed ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is common in the long-term acute-care hospital (LTACH) setting and may contribute to adverse ventilator-associated events (VAEs). Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a common causative organism of VAP. We evaluated the impact of respiratory P. aeruginosa colonization and bacterial community dominance, both diagnosed and undiagnosed, on subsequent P. aeruginosa VAP and VAE events during long-term acute care. Methods: We enrolled 83 patients on LTACH admission for ventilator weaning, performed longitudinal sampling of endotracheal aspirates followed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Illumina HiSeq), and bacterial community profiling (QIIME2). Statistical analysis was performed with R and Stan; mixed-effects models were fit to relate the abundance of respiratory Psa on admission to clinically diagnosed VAP and VAE events. Results: Of the 83 patients included, 12 were diagnosed with P. aeruginosa pneumonia during the 14 days prior to LTACH admission (known P. aeruginosa), and 22 additional patients received anti–P. aeruginosa antibiotics within 48 hours of admission (suspected P. aeruginosa); 49 patients had no known or suspected P. aeruginosa (unknown P. aeruginosa). Among the known P. aeruginosa group, all 12 patients had P. aeruginosa detectable by 16S sequencing, with elevated admission P. aeruginosa proportional abundance (median, 0.97; IQR, 0.33–1). Among the suspected P. aeruginosa group, all 22 patients had P. aeruginosa detectable by 16S sequencing, with a wide range of admission P. aeruginosa proportional abundance (median, 0.0088; IQR, 0.00012–0.31). Of the 49 patients in the unknown group, 47 also had detectable respiratory Psa, and many had high P. aeruginosa proportional abundance at admission (median, 0.014; IQR, 0.00025–0.52). Incident P. aeruginosa VAP was observed within 30 days in 4 of the known P. aeruginosa patients (33.3%), 5 of the suspected P. aeruginosa patients (22.7%), and 8 of the unknown P. aeruginosa patients (16.3%). VAE was observed within 30 days in 1 of the known P. aeruginosa patients (8.3%), 2 of the suspected P. aeruginosa patients (9.1%), and 1 of the unknown P. aeruginosa patients (2%). Admission P. aeruginosa abundance was positively associated with VAP and VAE risk in all groups, but the association only achieved statistical significance in the unknown group (type S error <0.002 for 30-day VAP and <0.011 for 30-day VAE). Conclusions: We identified a high prevalence of unrecognized respiratory P. aeruginosa colonization among patients admitted to LTACH for weaning from mechanical ventilation. The admission P. aeruginosa proportional abundance was strongly associated with increased risk of incident P. aeruginosa VAP among these patients.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Ventilator-associated lower respiratory infections (LRIs) and pneumonia (VAP) are important healthcare-associated infections and are among the leading causes of death worldwide. Prevention of these infections are often based on care bundles. We investigated the incidence of VAP+LRI and the preventive efficacy of each component of our ventilator bundle. Methods: Our ventilator bundle includes 6 components that are daily checked by an infection control practitioner. These 6 evidence-based practices were implemented in 3 ICUs from a general tertiary-care private hospital in Belo Horizonte City (Brazil): (1) daily oral care with chlorhexidine; (2) elevate the head of the bed to between 30 and 45; (3) avoid scheduled ventilator circuit change; (4) monitor cuff pressure; (5) use subglottic secretion drainage; and (6) daily sedation interruption and daily assessment of readiness to extubate. VAP and ventilator-LRI definitions were obtained from the CDC NHSN. The impact of adherence rate to items in the ventilator bundle (%) on the incidence rate of VAP+LRI was assessed using linear regression and scatterplot analyses. Results: Between January 2018 and April 2019, 1,888 ventilator days were observed in the 3 ICUs, with 42 VAP and LRI events, an overall incidence rate of 22.2 cases per 1,000 ventilator days. After September 2018, the infection control service started a campaign to increase the ventilator bundle compliance (Fig. 1). Adherence rates to all 6 bundle components increased between January–August 2018 and September 2018–April 2019 from 25% to 55% for daily oral care, from 34% to 79% for elevating the head of the bed, 28% to 86% for avoiding scheduled ventilator circuit change, from 32% to 83% for cuff pressure monitoring, from 32% to 83% for subglottic secretion drainage, and from 33% to 85% for daily sedation interruption. PAV and LRI incidence decreased from 41 to 16 in ICU A, from 22 to 14 in ICU B and from 24 to 18 in ICU C. The impact of each bundle component was identified by linear regression, calculating the percentage of PAV+LRI incidence rate that is explained by bundle item adherence (r2) and correlation coefficient (r): daily sedation interruption (r2 = 48%; r = 0.69; P = .004) (Fig. 2), cuff pressure monitorization (r2 = 0.3721; r = 0.61; P = .016), subglottic secretion drainage (r2 = 36%; r = 0.60; P = .017), avoidance of scheduled ventilator circuit change (r2 = 34%; r = 0.58; P = .023), daily oral care (r2 = 25%; r = 0.50; P = .050), and elevate the head of the bed (r2 = 25%; r = 0.48; P = .067). Conclusions: The impact of each bundle component on preventing PAV+LRI was identified by the study. An educational intervention performed by the infection control service increased the adherence to the ventilator bundle, and the PAV and LRI incidence decreased.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Through participation in a system-wide healthcare-associated infection-reduction task force, we leveraged our ability to standardize best practices across hospitals in a university-owned healthcare system to reduce central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates. Methods: Our multidisciplinary team had representation from all hospitals in our healthcare system. The team benchmarked practices in place and compared CLABSI standardized infection ratios (SIRs). One hospital had a robust vascular access team (VAT) and consistently low CLABSI SIRs; expanding and standardizing VAT across the hospitals in the system became the primary goal of the team. We developed a business case to justify VAT expansion that considered savings from decreasing CLABSIs and benefits to interventional radiology revenue by decreasing PICC insertion and comparing costs for added full-time equivalents (FTEs). CLABSI rates before and after VAT team expansion at 2 large hospitals were compared to the hospital with existing robust VAT. Other process improvement activities were implemented across all hospitals. The expanded VAT assumed responsibility for central-line maintenance, promoted removal of unneeded lines, expanded education efforts, and enhanced capacity for insertions. Results: The VAT expansion from 5.4 FTEs to 15.9 FTEs at 2 large hospitals (1,100 total beds) began in April 2017 and was phased over ~6 months. CLABSI SIRs for the 15 months preceding expansion were compared to the SIRs for the 15-month period after expansion for the 2 hospitals with expanded VAT (hospitals A and B) and for hospital C with preexisting robust VAT (Table 1). We observed a 33% decrease in PICC insertions in interventional radiology department in hospitals A and B. Overall return on investment (ROI) estimates using lower and upper cost per CLABSI ranged from a loss of $156,000 to a net gain of $623,000. Conclusions: A significant decrease in CLABSI rates temporally related to expansion of VAT occurred in 2 hospitals, whereas the hospital with existing robust VAT demonstrated a modest decrease in CLABSI rates. We were able to demonstrate a favorable ROI from the VAT expansion without an impact on HAC penalties. Using the model of standardizing best practices across a system and creative ROIs may help justify the addition of scarce resources.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Patients with pneumonia are frequently recipients of broad-spectrum antibiotics while awaiting maturation of respiratory cultures. FilmArray pneumonia panel (FPP) is an option for more expeditious identification of pathogen(s). We evaluated the utility of FPP in early de-escalation or escalation of antibiotics. Methods: FPP tests were performed on adults hospitalized with pneumonia. The microbiologist directly communicated the organisms, colony counts, and resistance patterns to the infectious disease physician or pharmacist. These results were also compared with pathogen identification and resistance patterns from a VITEK-2 system. The primary objective of this analysis was to evaluate the rates of de-escalation, escalation, and discontinuation of therapy and their impact on inpatient mortality. The secondary objective of the analysis was to evaluate the confirmation of detected organisms and resistance patterns by FPP. Results: In total, 26 patients included in the analysis. The median age was 70 years and 62% of patients were men; 50% of these patients were critically ill. In the cohort, the most commonly identified organisms were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (31%) and Staphylococcus aureus (30%). Other common organisms were Moraxella catarrhalis (23%) and influenza A (15%). The CTX-M resistance gene was seen in 30% of Enterobacteriaceae cultures, and the MecA/C and MREJ genes were detected in 75% of Staphylococcus aureus cultures. As a result of FPP, de-escalation occurred at a rate of 62%; discontinuation occurred at 42%; and escalation occurred 23%. Inpatient mortality was similar among the 3 groups: de-escalation, 37.5%; discontinuation, 45.5%; escalation, 50%. Notably, 82% of patients received comfort care. Organisms and resistance rates were confirmed with respiratory cultures in 54% of patients. Conclusions: Utilizing FPP yielded high rates of de-escalation, discontinuation, and escalation of antibiotics. No impact noted on inpatient mortality was noted; most of these patients were managed by comfort care. Culture confirmation rates were low due to the variety of sample types. We believe that the use of FPP for bronchoscopy and endotracheal cultures would have the highest impact on antibiotic stewardship efforts.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Aster Medcity is a 400-bed tertiary-care hospital in India. Over the years, the CLABSI rates have been within the INICC benchmarks but much above the CDC benchmarks. Is it possible to achieve the CDC/NHSN benchmarks without using engineered vascular access devices? How can we implement the available evidence in using feedback as an effective way to improve practices? Methods: In this prospective interventional trial, we compared the CLABSI rates at baseline over the previous 6 months (January 2019 to June 2019) with the CLABSI rates over the following 3 months (July –September 2019) with introduction of a new feedback structure. This feedback was delivered in the following ways. (1) Leadership walk-arounds consisted of the CEO, CNO, and CMS visiting each unit that reported a CLABSI as soon as it was reported (instead of the month end when cumulative reports become available) to discuss what went wrong and what could be corrected with the local unit teams. (2) The CEO had a 1-to-1 discussion with the nursing leadership regarding the monthly CLABSI rates with clear goal setting for the nursing teams. (3) Daily feedback on the practices as reviewed in the observational audits by the infection control team (ie, infection control nurses) was provided to the ICU teams through the ICO and CMS to the individual practitioners (both nurses and doctors). Results: Metrics were collected for both the process measures as well as outcome measures. The CLABSI outcome measure dropped from a mean of 4 per 1,000 CVC days before the intervention to a mean of 1 per 1,000 CVC days after the intervention, both calculated for a 6-month period. The compliance to hand hygiene as per the WHO 5 Moments improved from a mean of 79% to 86%, and the compliance to safe injection practices improved from 76% to 95%. Noncompliant HCWs observed via the daily feedback system dropped from 16–20 HCWs per week at the start of the intervention to 5–6 HCWs per week by the end of 6 months. The environmental cleaning scores (using glow-gel scores with the CDC environmental cleaning tool) remained at an average of 85%. Conclusions: Feedback is the backbone of most of the interventions of quality and infection control teams of healthcare organizations. Increased frequency and feedback from senior management can overcome inertia in improving practices on the ground level. This method could be more cost-effective at reducing CLABSIs than engineered devices.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Bloodstream infection (BSI) is the most challenging conditions in patients who undergo hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). These infections may be related to health care in cases of central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) or to translocation secondary to mucosal barrier injury (MBI). In 2013, MBI surveillance was incorporated into the CDC NHSN. The aim was to increase the CLABSI diagnostic accuracy by proposing more effective preventive care measures. The objective of this study was to evaluate impact of the MBI surveillance on CLABSI incidence density in a Brazilian university hospital. Methods: The CLABSI incidence densities from the period before BMI surveillance (2007–2012) and the period after BMI surveillance was implemented (2013–2018) were analyzed and compared. Infections during the preintervention period were reclassified according to the MBI criterion to obtain an accurate CLABSI rate for the first period. The average incidence densities for the 2 periods were compared using the Student t test after testing for no autocorrelation (P > .05). Results: After reclassification, the preintervention period incidence density (10 infections per 1,000 patient days) was significantly higher than the postintervention period incidence density (6 infections per 1,000 patients day; P = .011) (Table 1). Therefore, the reclassification of nonpreventable infections (MBI) in the surveillance system made the diagnosis of CLABSI more specific. The hospital infection control service was able to introduce specific preventive measures related to the insertion and management of central lines in HSCT patient care. Conclusions: The MBI classification improved the CLABSI diagnosis, which upgraded central-line prevention measures, then contributed to the decrease of CLABSI rates in this high-risk population.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) screening has been utilized to identify colonized patients to prevent transmission. However, little is known about the utility of screening to guide antibiotic therapy. We assessed the appropriateness of definitive therapy in patients with a VRE screen and evaluate the predictive value of screening for the development of a VRE infection. Methods: In this retrospective study, we evaluated VRE screening of patients aged 18 years admitted between June 1, 2015, and May 31, 2018, to a 280-bed, academic, tertiary-care hospital. Rectal swabs were tested using Cepheid Xpert. Screening was performed routinely on admission for hematologic malignancy and liver transplantation patients. Only the first screen result was included for patients who had multiple VRE screens. The patient was classified as having a VRE infection if any Enterococcus isolates were vancomycin resistant. The primary outcome was appropriateness of antibiotic therapy in patients who had a VRE screen. Appropriateness of VRE-directed therapy was defined as therapy with linezolid or daptomycin for patients who had a positive VRE culture and an identifiable source of infection, or who had no clinical improvement on alternative therapy, or who had a documented β-lactam allergy. If appropriateness was unclear, 2 infectious diseases specialists determined appropriateness. Results: In total, 1,374 patients who had a rectal VRE screen met inclusion criteria. Of these, 1,053 (88%) had a negative screen. We detected no difference in the appropriateness of VRE-directed therapy between patients with a positive screen and those with a negative screen (59.3% vs 61.0%; P = .8657). The VRE screen had a sensitivity of 60% (95% CI, 43%–74%), specificity of 90% (95% CI, 88%–92%), positive predictive value of 18% (95% CI, 12%–25%), and negative predictive value of 98% (95% CI, 97%–99%) for VRE infection. Conclusions: Although VRE screening may have utility to detect colonization in high-risk patients, a positive VRE screen is of limited value in determining the need for VRE-directed therapy. Patients with a negative VRE screen have a low likelihood of developing a VRE infection, and a negative screen could be used to identify patients who may not require empiric coverage for VRE. Further research is needed to determine optimal utilization of VRE screening for prediction and treatment of VRE infections.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Influenza causes a high burden of disease in the United States, with an estimate of 960,000 hospitalizations in the 2017–2018 flu season. Traditional flu diagnostic polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests have a longer (24 hours or more) turnaround time that may lead to an increase in unnecessary inpatient admissions during peak influenza season. A new point-of-care rapid PCR assays, Xpert Flu, is an FDA-approved PCR test that has a significant decrease in turnaround time (2 hours). The present study sought to understand the impact of implementing a new Xpert Flu test on the rate of inpatient admissions. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted to compare rates of inpatient admissions in patients tested with traditional flu PCR during the 2017–2018 flu season and the rapid flu PCR during the 2018–2019 flu season in a tertiary-care center in greater Detroit area. The center has 1 pediatric hospital (hospital A) and 3 adult hospitals (hospital B, C, D). Patients with influenza-like illness who presented to all 4 hospitals during 2 consecutive influenza seasons were analyzed. Results: In total, 20,923 patients were tested with either the rapid flu PCR or the traditional flu PCR. Among these, 14,124 patients (67.2%) were discharged from the emergency department and 6,844 (32.7%) were admitted. There was a significant decrease in inpatient admissions in the traditional flu PCR group compared to the rapid flu PCR group across all hospitals (49.56% vs 26.6% respectively; P < .001). As expected, a significant proportion of influenza testing was performed in the pediatric hospital, 10,513 (50.2%). A greater reduction (30% decrease in the rapid flu PCR group compared to the traditional flu PCR group) was observed in inpatient admissions in the pediatric hospital (Table 1) Conclusions: Rapid molecular influenza testing can significantly decrease inpatient admissions in a busy tertiary-care hospital, which can indirectly lead to improved patient quality with easy bed availability and less time spent in a private room with droplet precautions. Last but not the least, this testing method can certainly lead to lower healthcare costs.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Automatic discontinuation of antimicrobial orders after a prespecified duration of therapy has been adopted as a strategy for reducing excess days of therapy (DOT) as part of antimicrobial stewardship efforts. Automatic stop orders have been shown to decrease antimicrobial DOT. However, inadvertent treatment interruptions may occur as a result, potentially contributing to adverse patient outcomes. To evaluate the effects of this practice, we examined the impact of the removal of an electronic 7-day ASO program on hospitalized patients. Methods: We performed a quasi-experimental study on inpatients in 3 acute-care academic hospitals. In the preintervention period (automatic stop orders present; January 1, 2016, to February 28, 2017), we had an electronic dashboard to identify and intervene on unintentionally missed doses. In the postintervention period (April 1, 2017, to March 31, 2018), the automatic stop orders were removed. We compared the primary outcome, DOT per 1,000 patient days (PD) per month, for patients in the automatic stop orders present and absent periods. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare median monthly DOT/1,000 PD. Interrupted time series analysis (Prais-Winsten model) was used to compared trends in antibiotic DOT/1,000 PD and the immediate impact of the automatic stop order removal. Manual chart review on a subset of 300 patients, equally divided between the 2 periods, was performed to assess for unintentionally missed doses. Results: In the automatic stop order period, a monthly median of 644.5 antibiotic DOT/1,000 PD were administered, compared to 686.2 DOT/1,000 PD in the period without automatic stop orders (P < .001) (Fig. 1). Using interrupted time series analysis, there was a nonsignificant increase by 46.7 DOT/1,000 PD (95% CI, 40.8 to 134.3) in the month immediately following removal of automatic stop orders (P = .28) (Fig. 2). Even though the slope representing monthly change in DOT/1,000 PD increased in the period without automatic stop orders compared to the period with automatic stop orders, it was not statistically significant (P = .41). Manual chart abstraction revealed that in the period with automatic stop orders, 9 of 150 patients had 17 unintentionally missed days of therapy, whereas none (of 150 patients) in the period without automatic stop orders did. Conclusions: Following removal of the automatic stop orders, there was an overall increase in antibiotic use, although the change in monthly trend of antibiotic use was not significantly different. Even with a dashboard to identify missed doses, there was still a risk of unintentionally missed doses in the period with automatic stop orders. Therefore, this risk should be weighed against the modest difference in antibiotic utilization garnered from automatic stop orders.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None