Search

Background:Prophylactic antibiotics are commonly prescribed at discharge for mastectomy, despite guidelines recommending against this practice. We investigated factors associated with postdischarge prophylactic antibiotic use after mastectomy with and without immediate reconstruction and the impact on surgical-site infection (SSI).Study design:We studied a cohort of women aged 18–64 years undergoing mastectomy between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2015, using the MarketScan commercial database. Patients with nonsurgical perioperative infections were excluded. Postdischarge oral antibiotics were identified from outpatient drug claims. SSI was defined using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) diagnosis codes. Generalized linear models were used to determine factors associated with postdischarge prophylactic antibiotic use and SSI.Results:The cohort included 38,793 procedures; 24,818 (64%) with immediate reconstruction. Prophylactic antibiotics were prescribed after discharge after 2,688 mastectomy-only procedures (19.2%) and 17,807 mastectomies with immediate reconstruction (71.8%). The 90-day incidence of SSI was 3.5% after mastectomy only and 8.8% after mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. Antibiotics with anti–methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) activity were associated with decreased SSI risk after mastectomy only (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55–0.99) and mastectomy with immediate reconstruction (aRR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73–0.88), respectively. The numbers needed to treat to prevent 1 additional SSI were 107 and 48, respectively.Conclusions:Postdischarge prophylactic antibiotics were common after mastectomy. Anti-MSSA antibiotics were associated with decreased risk of SSI for patients who had mastectomy only and those who had mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. The high numbers needed to treat suggest that potential benefits of postdischarge antibiotics should be weighed against potential harms associated with antibiotic overuse.

Objective:Alteration of the colonic microbiota following antimicrobial exposure allows colonization by antimicrobial-resistant organisms (AROs). Ingestion of a probiotic, such as Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG), could prevent colonization or infection with AROs by promoting healthy colonic microbiota. The purpose of this trial was to determine the effect of LGG administration on ARO colonization in hospitalized patients receiving antibiotics.Design:Prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial of LGG versus placebo among patients receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics.Setting:Tertiary care center.Patients:In total, 88 inpatients receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics were enrolled.Intervention:Patients were randomized to receive 1 capsule containing 1×1010 cells of LGG twice daily (n = 44) or placebo (n = 44), stratified by ward type. Stool or rectal-swab specimens were collected for culture at enrollment, during admission, and at discharge. Using selective media, specimens were cultured for Clostridioides difficile, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp (VRE), and antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria. The primary outcome was any ARO acquisition. Secondary outcomes included loss of any ARO if colonized at enrollment, and acquisition or loss of individual ARO.Results:ARO colonization prevalence at study enrollment was similar (LGG 39% vs placebo 39%). We detected no difference in any ARO acquisition (LGG 30% vs placebo 33%; OR,1.19; 95% CI, 0.38–3.75) nor for any individual ARO acquisition. There was no difference in the loss of any ARO (LGG 18% vs placebo 24%; OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.27–7.68) nor for any individual ARO.Conclusion:LGG administration neither prevented acquisition of ARO nor accelerated loss of ARO colonization.

ObjectiveTo systematically assess enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) doffing safety risks.DesignWe employed a 3-part approach to this study: (1) hierarchical task analysis (HTA) of the PPE doffing process; (2) human factors-informed failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA); and (3) focus group sessions with a convenience sample of infection prevention (IP) subject matter experts.SettingA large academic US hospital with a regional Special Pathogens Treatment Center and enhanced PPE doffing protocol experience.ParticipantsEight IP experts.MethodsThe HTA was conducted jointly by 2 human-factors experts based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention PPE guidelines. The findings were used as a guide in 7 focus group sessions with IP experts to assess PPE doffing safety risks. For each HTA task step, IP experts identified failure mode(s), assigned priority risk scores, identified contributing factors and potential consequences, and identified potential risk mitigation strategies. Data were recorded in a tabular format during the sessions.ResultsOf 103 identified failure modes, the highest priority scores were associated with team members moving between clean and contaminated areas, glove removal, apron removal, and self-inspection while preparing to doff. Contributing factors related to the individual (eg, technical/ teamwork competency), task (eg, undetected PPE contamination), tools/technology (eg, PPE design characteristics), environment (eg, inadequate space), and organizational aspects (eg, training) were identified. Participants identified 86 types of risk mitigation strategies targeting the failure modes.ConclusionsDespite detailed guidelines, our study revealed 103 enhanced PPE doffing failure modes. Analysis of the failure modes suggests potential mitigation strategies to decrease self-contamination risk during enhanced PPE doffing.