Search

The recently updated Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, and the Association of Professionals in Infection Control practice recommendations for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) prevention in acute care facilities list contact precautions (CPs) for patients known to be infected or colonized with MRSA as an "essential practice," meaning that it should be adopted in all acute care facilities. We argue that existing evidence on benefits and harms associated with CP do not justify this recommendation. There are no controlled trials that support broad use of CP for MRSA prevention. Data from hospitals that have discontinued CP for MRSA have found no impact on MRSA acquisition or infection. The burden and harms of CP remain concerning, including the environmental impact of increased gown and glove use. We suggest that CP be included among other "additional approaches" to MRSA prevention that can be implemented under specific circumstances (eg outbreaks, evidence of ongoing transmission despite application of essential practices)., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. The authors: No reported conflicts of interest. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Diagnostic stewardship seeks to improve ordering, collection, performance, and reporting of tests. Test results play an important role in reportable HAIs. The inclusion of HAIs in public reporting and pay for performance programs has highlighted the value of diagnostic stewardship as part of infection prevention initiatives. Inappropriate testing should be discouraged, and approaches that seek to alter testing solely to impact a reportable metric should be avoided. HAI definitions should be further adapted to new testing technologies, with focus on actionable and clinically relevant test results that will improve patient care.

Purpose of Review: The aim of this study was to review recently published diagnostic stewardship studies of common clinical infectious syndromes and the impact on antibiotic prescribing., Recent Findings: Diagnostic stewardship can be implemented within healthcare systems and tailored to infectious syndromes, including urinary tract, gastrointestinal, respiratory and bloodstream infections. In urinary syndromes, diagnostic stewardship can decrease unnecessary urine culturing and associated antibiotic prescribing. Diagnostic stewardship of Clostridium difficile testing can decrease antibiotics and test ordering with a reduction in healthcare-associated C. difficile infections. Respiratory syndrome multiplex arrays can decrease time to results and increase detection of clinically relevant pathogens but may not decrease antibiotics use, or worse, could increase over-prescribing if diagnostic stewardship of ordering practices is not exercised. Lastly, blood culturing practices can be improved by clinical decision support to safely decrease collection and broad-spectrum antibiotic use., Summary: Diagnostic stewardship decreases unnecessary antibiotic use in a way that is different from and complementary to antibiotic stewardship. Further studies are needed to quantify the full impact on antibiotic use and resistance. Future considerations should be to institutionalize diagnostic stewardship in patient care activities to leverage integration into systems-based interventions., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

In total, 50 healthcare facilities completed a survey in 2021 to characterize changes in infection prevention and control and antibiotic stewardship practices. Notable findings include sustained surveillance for multidrug-resistant organisms but decreased use of human resource-intensive interventions compared to previous surveys in 2013 and 2018 conducted prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Clostridioides difficile is the most common cause of healthcare-associated infections in the United States. It is unknown whether universal gown and glove use in intensive care units (ICUs) decreases acquisition of C. difficile., Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized trial in 20 medical and surgical ICUs in 20 US hospitals from 4 January 2012 to 4 October 2012. After a baseline period, ICUs were randomized to standard practice for glove and gown use versus the intervention of all healthcare workers being required to wear gloves and gowns for all patient contact and when entering any patient room (contact precautions). The primary outcome was acquisition of toxigenic C. difficile determined by surveillance cultures collected on admission and discharge from the ICU., Results: A total of 21 845 patients had both admission and discharge perianal swabs cultured for toxigenic C. difficile. On admission, 9.43% (2060/21 845) of patients were colonized with toxigenic C. difficile. No significant difference was observed in the rate of toxigenic C. difficile acquisition with universal gown and glove use. Differences in acquisition rates in the study period compared with the baseline period in control ICUs were 1.49 per 100 patient-days versus 1.68 per 100 patient-days in universal gown and glove ICUs (rate difference, -0.28; generalized linear mixed model, P = .091)., Conclusions: Glove and gown use for all patient contact in medical and surgical ICUs did not result in a reduction in the acquisition of C. difficile compared with usual care., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01318213., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. E. R. D. reports grants or contracts from Synthetic Biologics, Ferring, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work, and consulting fees from Seres, Merck, Pfizer, Abbott, and Ferring. S. L. reports grants/contracts to their institution under the CDC Prevention Epicenters and Broad Agency Agreement mechanisms in the broad field of infection prevention and healthcare epidemiology from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and a contract for Maryland hospital collaboratives on C. difficile and COVID-19 prevention from the Maryland Department of Health, all outside of the submitted work. T. H. reports grants or contracts paid to their institution from Synthetic Biologics, Inc, and CDC Epicenters, both outside of the submitted work. D. J. M. reports grants or contracts unrelated to this work from the National Institutes of Health, CDC, and Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development; reimbursement for travel from IDWeek and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA); and unpaid positions as Chair of the IDWeek SHEA Committee and as lead of the SHEA Diagnostic Stewardship Taskforce. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2022.)

Diagnostic stewardship means ordering the right tests for the right patient at the right time to inform optimal clinical care. Diagnostic stewardship is an integral part of antibiotic stewardship efforts to optimize antibiotic use and improve patient outcomes, including reductions in antibiotic resistance and treatment of sepsis. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion hosted a meeting on improving patient safety through diagnostic stewardship with a focus on use of the laboratory. At the meeting, emerging issues in the field of diagnostic stewardship were identified, awareness of these issues among stakeholders was raised, and strategies and interventions to address the issues were discussed-all with an emphasis on improved outcomes and patient safety. Here, we summarize the key takeaways of the meeting including needs for diagnostic stewardship implementation, promising future avenues for diagnostic stewardship implementation, and areas of needed research., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2021.)

To evaluate changes in Clostridioides difficile incidence rates for Maryland hospitals that participated in the Statewide Prevention and Reduction of C. difficile (SPARC) collaborative. Pre-post, difference-in-difference analysis of non-randomised intervention using four quarters of preintervention and six quarters of postintervention National Healthcare Safety Network data for SPARC hospitals (April 2017 to March 2020) and 10 quarters for control hospitals (October 2017 to March 2020). Mixed-effects negative binomial models were used to assess changes over time. Process evaluation using hospital intervention implementation plans, assessments and interviews with staff at eight SPARC hospitals. Maryland, USA. All Maryland acute care hospitals; 12 intervention and 36 control hospitals. Participation in SPARC, a public health-academic collaborative made available to Maryland hospitals, with staggered enrolment between June 2018 and August 2019. Hospitals with higher C. difficile rates were recruited via email and phone. SPARC included assessments, feedback reports and ongoing technical assistance. Primary outcomes were C. difficile incidence rate measured as the quarterly number of C. difficile infections per 10 000 patient-days (outcome measure) and SPARC intervention hospitals' experiences participating in the collaborative (process measures). SPARC invited 13 hospitals to participate in the intervention, with 92% (n=12) participating. The 36 hospitals that did not participate served as control hospitals. SPARC hospitals were associated with 45% greater C. difficile reduction as compared with control hospitals (incidence rate ratio=0.55, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.88, p=0.012). Key SPARC activities, including access to trusted external experts, technical assistance, multidisciplinary collaboration, an accountability structure, peer-to-peer learning opportunities and educational resources, were associated with hospitals reporting positive experiences with SPARC. SPARC intervention hospitals experienced 45% greater reduction in C. difficile rates than control hospitals. A public health-academic collaborative might help reduce C. difficile and other hospital-acquired infections in individual hospitals and at state or regional levels., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SC reports consulting fees from Basilea and Theravance for work on external infection adjudication committees. KC reports investigator-initiated study funds from Merck & Co and served as a speaker for GenMark Diagnostics. LLM reports research funds from Clorox., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Published bundles to reduce Clostridioides difficile Infection (CDI) frequently lack information on compliance with individual elements. We piloted a computerized clinical decision support-based intervention bundle and conducted detailed evaluation of several intervention-related measures., Methods: A quasi-experimental study of a bundled intervention was performed at 2 acute care community hospitals in Maryland. The bundle had five components: (1) timely placement in enteric precautions, (2) appropriate CDI testing, (3) reducing proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) use, (4) reducing high-CDI risk antibiotic use, and (5) optimizing use of a sporicidal agent for environmental cleaning. Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare measure differences. An interrupted time series analysis was used to evaluate impact on hospital-onset (HO)-CDI., Results: Placement of CDI suspects in enteric precautions before test results did not change. Only hospital B decreased the frequency of CDI testing and reduced inappropriate testing related to laxative use. Both hospitals reduced the use of PPI and high-risk antibiotics. A 75% decrease in HO-CDI immediately postimplementation was observed for hospital B only., Conclusion: A CDI reduction bundle showed variable impact on relevant measures. Hospital-specific differential uptake of bundle elements may explain differences in effectiveness, and emphasizes the importance of measuring processes and intermediate outcomes., (Copyright © 2020 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented a core measure sepsis (SEP-1) bundle in 2015. One element was initiation of broad-spectrum antibiotics within 3 hours of diagnosis. The policy has the potential to increase antibiotic use and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). We evaluated the impact of SEP-1 implementation on broad-spectrum antibiotic use and CDI occurrence rates., Methods: Monthly adult antibiotic data for 4 antibiotic categories (surgical prophylaxis, broad-spectrum for community-acquired infections, broad-spectrum for hospital-onset/multidrug-resistant [MDR] organisms, and anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus [MRSA]) from 111 hospitals participating in the Clinical Data Base Resource Manager were evaluated in periods before (October 2014-September 2015) and after (October 2015-June 2017) policy implementation. Interrupted time series analyses, using negative binomial regression, evaluated changes in antibiotic category use and CDI rates., Results: At the hospital level, there was an immediate increase in the level of broad-spectrum agents for hospital-onset/MDR organisms (+2.3%, P = .0375) as well as a long-term increase in trend (+0.4% per month, P = .0273). There was also an immediate increase in level of overall antibiotic use (+1.4%, P = .0293). CDI rates unexpectedly decreased at the time of SEP-1 implementation. When analyses were limited to patients with sepsis, there was a significant level increase in use of all antibiotic categories at the time of SEP-1 implementation., Conclusions: SEP-1 implementation was associated with immediate and long-term increases in broad-spectrum hospital-onset/MDR organism antibiotics. Antimicrobial stewardship programs should evaluate sepsis treatment for opportunities to de-escalate broad therapy as indicated., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The Benefits of Universal Glove and Gown (BUGG) cluster randomized trial found varying effects on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus and no increase in adverse events. The aim of this study was to assess whether the intervention decreases the acquisition of antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria., Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a randomized trial in 20 hospital intensive care units. The intervention consisted of healthcare workers wearing gloves and gowns when entering any patient room compared to standard care. The primary composite outcome was acquisition of any antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria based on surveillance cultures., Results: A total of 40 492 admission and discharge perianal swabs from 20 246 individual patient admissions were included in the primary outcome. For the primary outcome of acquisition of any antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria, the intervention had a rate ratio (RR) of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], .71-1.12; P = .34). Effects on the secondary outcomes of individual bacteria acquisition were as follows: carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (RR, 0.86 [95% CI, .60-1.24; P = .43), carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter (RR, 0.81 [95% CI, .52-1.27; P = .36), carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas (RR, 0.88 [95% CI, .55-1.42]; P = .62), and extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing bacteria (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, .71-1.24]; P = .67)., Conclusions: Universal glove and gown use in the intensive care unit was associated with a non-statistically significant decrease in acquisition of antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria. Individual hospitals should consider the intervention based on the importance of these organisms at their hospital, effect sizes, CIs, and cost of instituting the intervention., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01318213., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

We question the reliability of the vague symptoms that most commonly define catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) and encourage further examination of whether the current CAUTI definition reflects a true infection. While diagnosing CAUTI using the current surveillance definition, physicians may be missing a number of nonurinary etiologies for fever, prematurely diagnosing urinary tract infection, and prescribing unnecessary antibiotics. We believe it is time to reconsider the quality metric of CAUTI. By doing so, we can improve antibiotic use and quality of patient care., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2020.)

Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a common cause of health care-associated infections in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends contact precautions for the prevention of MRSA within acute care facilities, which are being used within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for LTCFs in a modified fashion. The impact of contact precautions in long-term care is unknown., Methods: To evaluate whether contact precautions decreased MRSA acquisition in LTCFs, compared to standard precautions, we performed a retrospective effectiveness study (pre-post, with concurrent controls) using data from the VA health-care system from 1 January 2011 until 31 December 2015, 2 years before and after a 2013 policy recommending a more aggressive form of contact precautions., Results: Across 75 414 patient admissions from 74 long-term care facilities in the United States, the overall unadjusted rate of MRSA acquisition was 2.6/1000 patient days. Patients were no more likely to acquire MRSA if they were cared for using standard precautions versus contact precautions in a multivariable, discrete time survival analysis, controlling for patient demographics, risk factors, and year of admission (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, .85-1.12; P = .71)., Conclusions: MRSA acquisition and infections were not impacted by the use of active surveillance and contact precautions in LTCFs in the VA., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2019.)

Objective: We examined Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) prevention practices and their relationship with hospital-onset healthcare facility-associated CDI rates (CDI rates) in Veterans Affairs (VA) acute-care facilities., Design: Cross-sectional study., Methods: From January 2017 to February 2017, we conducted an electronic survey of CDI prevention practices and hospital characteristics in the VA. We linked survey data with CDI rate data for the period January 2015 to December 2016. We stratified facilities according to whether their overall CDI rate per 10,000 bed days of care was above or below the national VA mean CDI rate. We examined whether specific CDI prevention practices were associated with an increased risk of a CDI rate above the national VA mean CDI rate., Results: All 126 facilities responded (100% response rate). Since implementing CDI prevention practices in July 2012, 60 of 123 facilities (49%) reported a decrease in CDI rates; 22 of 123 facilities (18%) reported an increase, and 41 of 123 (33%) reported no change. Facilities reporting an increase in the CDI rate (vs those reporting a decrease) after implementing prevention practices were 2.54 times more likely to have CDI rates that were above the national mean CDI rate. Whether a facility's CDI rates were above or below the national mean CDI rate was not associated with self-reported cleaning practices, duration of contact precautions, availability of private rooms, or certification of infection preventionists in infection prevention., Conclusions: We found considerable variation in CDI rates. We were unable to identify which particular CDI prevention practices (i.e., bundle components) were associated with lower CDI rates.

Importance: Although hand hygiene (HH) is considered the most effective strategy for preventing hospital-acquired infections, HH adherence rates remain poor., Objective: To examine whether the frequency of changing reminder signs affects HH adherence among health care workers., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial in 9 US Department of Veterans Affairs acute care hospitals randomly assigned 58 inpatient units to 1 of 3 schedules for changing signs designed to promote HH adherence among health care workers: (1) no change; (2) weekly; and (3) monthly. Hand hygiene rates among health care workers were documented at entry and exit to patient rooms during the baseline period from October 1, 2014, to March 31, 2015, of normal signage and throughout the intervention period of June 8, 2015, to December 28, 2015. Data analyses were conducted in April 2018., Interventions: Hospital units were randomly assigned into 3 groups: (1) no sign changes throughout the intervention period, (2) signs changed weekly, and (3) signs changed monthly., Main Outcomes and Measures: Hand hygiene adherence as measured by covert observation. Interrupted time series analysis was used to examine changes in HH adherence from baseline through the intervention period by group., Results: Among 58 inpatient units, 19 units were assigned to the no change group, 19 units were assigned to the weekly change group, and 20 units were assigned to the monthly change group. During the baseline period, 9755 HH opportunities were observed at room entry and 10 095 HH opportunities were observed at room exit. During the intervention period, a total of 15 855 HH opportunities were observed at room entry, and 16 360 HH opportunities were observed at room exit. Overall HH adherence did not change from baseline compared with the intervention period at either room entry (4770 HH events [48.9%] vs 3057 HH events [50.1%]; P = .14) or exit (6439 HH events [63.8%] vs 4087 HH events [65.2%]; P = .06). In units that changed signs weekly, HH adherence declined from baseline at room entry (-1.9% [95% CI, -2.7% to -0.8%] per week; P < .001) and exit (-0.8% [95% CI, -1.5% to 0.1%] per week; P = .02). No significant changes in HH adherence were observed in other groups., Conclusions and Relevance: The frequency of changing reminder signs had no effect on HH rates overall. Units assigned to change signs most frequently demonstrated worsening adherence. Considering the abundance of signs in the acute care environment, the frequency of changing signs did not appear to provide a strong enough cue by itself to promote behavioral change., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02223455.

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., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

We used a survey to characterize contemporary infection prevention and antibiotic stewardship program practices across 64 healthcare facilities, and we compared these findings to those of a similar 2013 survey. Notable findings include decreased frequency of active surveillance for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, frequent active surveillance for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, and increased support for antibiotic stewardship programs.

Objective: To ascertain opinions regarding etiology and preventability of hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia (HOB) and perspectives on HOB as a potential outcome measure reflecting quality of infection prevention and hospital care., Design: Cross-sectional survey., Participants: Hospital epidemiologists and infection preventionist members of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) Research Network., Methods: A web-based, multiple-choice survey was administered via the SHEA Research Network to 133 hospitals., Results: A total of 89 surveys were completed (67% response rate). Overall, 60% of respondents defined HOB as a positive blood culture on or after hospital day 3. Central line-associated bloodstream infections and intra-abdominal infections were perceived as the most frequent etiologies. Moreover, 61% thought that most HOB events are preventable, and 54% viewed HOB as a measure reflecting a hospital's quality of care. Also, 29% of respondents' hospitals already collect HOB data for internal purposes. Given a choice to publicly report central-line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and/or HOB, 57% favored reporting either HOB alone (22%) or in addition to CLABSI (35%) and 34% favored CLABSI alone., Conclusions: Among the majority of SHEA Research Network respondents, HOB is perceived as preventable, reflective of quality of care, and potentially acceptable as a publicly reported quality metric. Further studies on HOB are needed, including validation as a quality measure, assessment of risk adjustment, and formation of evidence-based bundles and toolkits to facilitate measurement and improvement of HOB rates.

OBJECTIVETo directly observe healthcare workers in a nursing home setting to measure frequency and duration of resident contact and infection prevention behavior as a factor of isolation practiceDESIGNObservational studySETTING AND PARTICIPANTSHealthcare workers in 8 VA nursing homes in Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Washington, and TexasMETHODSOver a 15-month period, trained research staff without clinical responsibilities on the units observed nursing home resident room activity for 15-30-minute intervals. Observers recorded time of entry and exit, isolation status, visitor type (staff, visitor, etc), hand hygiene, use of gloves and gowns, and activities performed in the room when visible.RESULTSA total of 999 hours of observation were conducted across 8 VA nursing homes during which 4,325 visits were observed. Residents in isolation received an average of 4.73 visits per hour of observation compared with 4.21 for nonisolation residents (P<.01), a 12.4% increase in visits for residents in isolation. Residents in isolation received an average of 3.53 resident care activities per hour of observation, compared with 2.46 for residents not in isolation (P<.01). For residents in isolation, compliance was 34% for gowns and 58% for gloves. Healthcare worker hand hygiene compliance was 45% versus 44% (P=.79) on entry and 66% versus 55% (P<.01) on exit for isolation and nonisolation rooms, respectively.CONCLUSIONSHealthcare workers visited residents in isolation more frequently, likely because they required greater assistance. Compliance with gowns and gloves for isolation was limited in the nursing home setting. Adherence to hand hygiene also was less than optimal, regardless of isolation status of residents.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:683-687.

OBJECTIVE To determine whether patients using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Compare website (http://medicare.gov/hospitalcompare) can use nationally reported healthcare-associated infection (HAI) data to differentiate hospitals. DESIGN Secondary analysis of publicly available HAI data for calendar year 2013. METHODS We assessed the availability of HAI data for geographically proximate hospitals (ie, hospitals within the same referral region) and then analyzed these data to determine whether they are useful to differentiate hospitals. We assessed data for the 6 HAIs reported by hospitals to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). RESULTS Data were analyzed for 4,561 hospitals representing 88% of registered community and federal government hospitals in the United States. Healthcare-associated infection data are only useful for comparing hospitals if they are available for multiple hospitals within a geographic region. We found that data availability differed by HAI. Clostridium difficile infections (CDI) data were most available, with 82% of geographic regions (ie, hospital referral regions) having >50% of hospitals reporting them. In contrast, 4% of geographic regions had >50% of member hospitals reporting surgical site infections (SSI) for hysterectomies, which had the lowest availability. The ability of HAI data to differentiate hospitals differed by HAI: 72% of hospital referral regions had at least 1 pair of hospitals with statistically different risk-adjusted CDI rates (SIRs), compared to 9% for SSI (hysterectomy). CONCLUSIONS HAI data generally are reported by enough hospitals to meet minimal criteria for useful comparisons in many geographic locations, though this varies by type of HAI. CDI and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) are more likely to differentiate hospitals than the other publicly reported HAIs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1167-1171.

The objectives of the study were to estimate the risk of transmission of antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (RGNB) to gowns and gloves (G&G) worn by health care workers (HCWs) when providing care to nursing home residents and to identify the types of care and resident characteristics associated with transmission. A multicenter, prospective observational study was conducted with residents and HCWs from Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing homes. Perianal swabs to detect RGNB were collected from residents. HCWs wore G&G during usual care activities, and the G&G were swabbed at the end of the interaction in a standardized manner. Transmission of RGNB from a colonized resident to G&G by type of care was measured. Odds ratios (ORs) associated with type of care or resident characteristics were estimated. Fifty-seven (31%) of 185 enrolled residents were colonized with ≥1 RGNB. RGNB transmission to HCW gloves or gowns occurred during 9% of the interactions ( n = 905): 7% to only gloves and 2% to only gowns. Bathing the resident and providing hygiene and toilet assistance were associated with a high risk of transmission. Glucose monitoring and assistance with feeding or medication were associated with a low risk of transmission. In addition, antibiotic use by the resident was strongly associated with greater transmission (OR, 2.51; P < 0.01). RGNB were transferred to HCWs during ∼9% of visits. High-risk types of care were identified for which use of G&G may be prioritized. Antibiotic use was associated with 2.5 times greater risk of transmission, emphasizing the importance of antibiotic stewardship. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT01350479.)., (Copyright © 2017 American Society for Microbiology.)

OBJECTIVE Antibiotic resistance is a major threat to public health. Resistance is largely driven by antibiotic usage, which in many cases is unnecessary and can be improved. The impact of decreasing overall antibiotic usage on resistance is unknown and difficult to assess using standard study designs. The objective of this study was to explore the potential impact of reducing antibiotic usage on the transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). DESIGN We used agent-based modeling to simulate interactions between patients and healthcare workers (HCWs) using model inputs informed by the literature. We modeled the effect of antibiotic usage as (1) a microbiome effect, for which antibiotic usage decreases competing bacteria and increases the MDRO transmission probability between patients and HCWs and (2) a mutation effect that designates a proportion of patients who receive antibiotics to subsequently develop a MDRO via genetic mutation. SETTING Intensive care unit INTERVENTIONS Absolute reduction in overall antibiotic usage by experimental values of 10% and 25% RESULTS Reducing antibiotic usage absolutely by 10% (from 75% to 65%) and 25% (from 75% to 50%) reduced acquisition rates of high-prevalence MDROs by 11.2% (P<.001) and 28.3% (P<.001), respectively. We observed similar effect sizes for low-prevalence MDROs. CONCLUSIONS In a critical care setting, where up to 50% of antibiotic courses may be inappropriate, even a moderate reduction in antibiotic usage can reduce MDRO transmission. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:663-669.

Objectives: To explore current use and perceptions of glove and gown use in nursing homes., Design: Qualitative study using focus groups and semi-structured interviews., Setting: Three community-based nursing homes in Maryland., Participants: Direct care staff, administrators, and residents., Methods: We conducted three focus groups among nursing home staff, one focus group among nursing home administrators, and five interviews with residents. Topic guides were created based on our recent study results and a review of the literature. Two investigators separately analyzed the transcribed recordings and identified recurrent themes., Results: Direct care staff reported using gowns and gloves primarily as self-protection against contact with bodily fluids, not to prevent MRSA transmission. Glove use was described as common and more acceptable to staff and residents than gown use. Administrators were surprised that MRSA transmission to health care worker hands and clothing occurred during activities when direct care staff perceives no contact with bodily fluids. Staff and administrators expressed willingness to use gowns and gloves for high-risk care activities, particularly if use is targeted toward specific types of residents such as those with pressure ulcers. There was a knowledge deficit about MRSA transmission and infection among direct care staff and residents., Conclusions: Results from this study will inform a strategy to reduce MRSA transmission in long-term care., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2016 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

OBJECTIVE To examine self-reported practices and policies to reduce infection and transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) in healthcare settings outside the United States. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS International members of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) Research Network. METHODS Electronic survey of infection control and prevention practices, capabilities, and barriers outside the United States and Canada. Participants were stratified according to their country's economic development status as defined by the World Bank as low-income, lower-middle-income, upper-middle-income, and high-income. RESULTS A total of 76 respondents (33%) of 229 SHEA members outside the United States and Canada completed the survey questionnaire, representing 30 countries. Forty (53%) were high-, 33 (43%) were middle-, and 1 (1%) was a low-income country. Country data were missing for 2 respondents (3%). Of the 76 respondents, 64 (84%) reported having a formal or informal antibiotic stewardship program at their institution. High-income countries were more likely than middle-income countries to have existing MDRO policies (39/64 [61%] vs 25/64 [39%], P=.003) and to place patients with MDRO in contact precautions (40/72 [56%] vs 31/72 [44%], P=.05). Major barriers to preventing MDRO transmission included constrained resources (infrastructure, supplies, and trained staff) and challenges in changing provider behavior. CONCLUSIONS In this survey, a substantial proportion of institutions reported encountering barriers to implementing key MDRO prevention strategies. Interventions to address capacity building internationally are urgently needed. Data on the infection prevention practices of low income countries are needed. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2016:1-8.

OBJECTIVE Hospital-acquired infection (HAI) data are reported to the public on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Compare website. We previously found that public understanding of these data is poor. Our objective was to develop an improved method for presenting HAI data that could be used on the CMS website. DESIGN Randomized controlled trial comparing understanding of data presented using the current CMS presentation strategy versus a new strategy. SETTING A 760-bed tertiary referral hospital. PARTICIPANTS A total of 61 patients were randomly selected within 24 hours of admission. INTERVENTION Participants were shown HAI data as presented on the CMS Hospital Compare website (control arm) or data formatted using a new method (experimental arm). RESULTS No statistically significant demographic differences were identified between study arms. Although 47% percent of participants said a website for comparing hospitals would have been helpful, only 10% had ever used such a website. Participants viewing data using the new presentation strategy compared hospitals correctly 56% of the time, compared with 32% in the control arm (P=.0002). CONCLUSIONS Understanding of HAI data increased significantly with the new data presentation method compared to the method currently used on the CMS Hospital Compare website. Many participants expressed interest in a website for comparing hospitals. Improved methods for presenting CMS HAI data, such as the one assessed here, should be adopted to increase public understanding. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1-6.

Administrative and surveillance data are used frequently in healthcare epidemiology and antimicrobial stewardship (HE&AS) research because of their wide availability and efficiency. However, data quality issues exist, requiring careful consideration and potential validation of data. This methods paper presents key considerations for using administrative and surveillance data in HE&AS, including types of data available and potential use, data limitations, and the importance of validation. After discussing these issues, we review examples of HE&AS research using administrative data with a focus on scenarios when their use may be advantageous. A checklist is provided to help aid study development in HE&AS using administrative data. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1-10.

Background: Public reporting of hospital quality data is a key element of US healthcare reform. Data for hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are especially complex., Objective: To assess interpretability of HAI data as presented on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Compare website among patients who might benefit from access to these data., Methods: We randomly selected inpatients at a large tertiary referral hospital from June to September 2014. Participants performed 4 distinct tasks comparing hypothetical HAI data for 2 hospitals, and the accuracy of their comparisons was assessed. Data were presented using the same tabular formats used by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Demographic characteristics and healthcare experience data were also collected., Results: Participants (N=110) correctly identified the better of 2 hospitals when given written descriptions of the HAI measure in 72% of the responses (95% CI, 66%-79%). Adding the underlying numerical data (number of infections, patient-time, and standardized infection ratio) to the written descriptions reduced correct responses to 60% (55%-66%). When the written HAI measure description was not informative (identical for both hospitals), 50% answered correctly (42%-58%). When no written HAI measure description was provided and hospitals differed by denominator for infection rate, 38% answered correctly (31%-45%)., Conclusions: Current public HAI data presentation methods may be inadequate. When presented with numeric HAI data, study participants incorrectly compared hospitals on the basis of HAI data in more than 40% of the responses. Research is needed to identify better ways to convey these data to the public.

Objective: To determine whether use of contact precautions on hospital ward patients is associated with patient adverse events, Design: Individually matched prospective cohort study, Setting: The University of Maryland Medical Center, a tertiary care hospital in Baltimore, Maryland, Methods: A total of 296 medical or surgical inpatients admitted to non-intensive care unit hospital wards were enrolled at admission from January to November 2010. Patients on contact precautions were individually matched by hospital unit after an initial 3-day length of stay to patients not on contact precautions. Adverse events were detected by physician chart review and categorized as noninfectious, preventable and severe noninfectious, and infectious adverse events during the patient's stay using the standardized Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Global Trigger Tool., Results: The cohort of 148 patients on contact precautions at admission was matched with a cohort of 148 patients not on contact precautions. Of the total 296 subjects, 104 (35.1%) experienced at least 1 adverse event during their hospital stay. Contact precautions were associated with fewer noninfectious adverse events (rate ratio [RtR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-0.95; P=.02) and although not statistically significant, with fewer severe adverse events (RtR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.03; P=.07). Preventable adverse events did not significantly differ between patients on contact precautions and patients not on contact precautions (RtR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.59-1.24; P=.41)., Conclusions: Hospital ward patients on contact precautions were less likely to experience noninfectious adverse events during their hospital stay than patients not on contact precautions.

Background: Whether contact precautions (CP) are required to control the endemic transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) in acute care hospitals is controversial in light of improvements in hand hygiene, MRSA decolonization, environmental cleaning and disinfection, fomite elimination, and chlorhexidine bathing., Objective: To provide a framework for decision making around use of CP for endemic MRSA and VRE based on a summary of evidence related to use of CP, including impact on patients and patient care processes, and current practices in use of CP for MRSA and VRE in US hospitals., Design: A literature review, a survey of Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Research Network members on use of CP, and a detailed examination of the experience of a convenience sample of hospitals not using CP for MRSA or VRE., Participants: Hospital epidemiologists and infection prevention experts., Results: No high quality data support or reject use of CP for endemic MRSA or VRE. Our survey found more than 90% of responding hospitals currently use CP for MRSA and VRE, but approximately 60% are interested in using CP in a different manner. More than 30 US hospitals do not use CP for control of endemic MRSA or VRE., Conclusions: Higher quality research on the benefits and harms of CP in the control of endemic MRSA and VRE is needed. Until more definitive data are available, the use of CP for endemic MRSA or VRE in acute care hospitals should be guided by local needs and resources.

Background: No randomized trials have examined the effect of contact precautions or universal glove and gown use on adverse events. We assessed if wearing gloves and gowns during all patient contact in the intensive care unit (ICU) changes adverse event rates., Methods: From January 2012 to October 2012, intervention ICUs of the 20-site Benefits of Universal Gloving and Gowning cluster randomized trial required that healthcare workers use gloves and gowns for all patient contact. We randomly sampled 1800 medical records of adult patients not colonized with antibiotic-resistant bacteria and reviewed them for adverse events using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Global Trigger Tool., Results: Four hundred forty-seven patients (24.8%) had 1 or more ICU adverse events. Adverse events were not associated with universal glove and gown use (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], .48-1.36). This did not change with adjustment for ICU type, severity of illness, academic hospital status, and ICU size, (IRR, 0.91; 95% CI, .59-1.42; P = .68). Rates of infectious adverse events also did not differ after adjusting for the same factors (IRR, 0.75; 95% CI, .47-1.21; P = .24)., Conclusions: In ICUs where healthcare workers donned gloves and gowns for all patient contact, patients were no more likely to experience adverse events than in control ICUs. Concerns of adverse events resulting from universal glove and gown use were not supported. Similar considerations may be appropriate regarding use of contact precautions., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT0131821., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2015. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.)

We report the results of a subgroup analysis of the Benefits of Universal Glove and Gown trial. In 20 intensive care units, the reduction in acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus observed in this trial was observed in units also using chlorhexidine bathing and in those that previously performed active surveillance.

Objective: To determine whether gowning and gloving for all patient care reduces contamination of healthcare worker (HCW) clothing, compared to usual practice., Design: Cross-sectional surveys., Setting: Five study sites were recruited from intensive care units (ICUs) randomized to the intervention arm of the Benefits of Universal Gown and Glove (BUGG) study., Participants: All HCWs performing direct patient care in the study ICUs were eligible to participate., Methods: Surveys were performed first during the BUGG intervention study period (July-September 2012) with universal gowning/gloving and again after BUGG study conclusion (October-December 2012), with resumption of usual care. During each phase, HCW clothing was sampled at the beginning and near the end of each shift. Cultures were performed using broth enrichment followed by selective media. Acquisition was defined as having a negative clothing culture for samples taken at the beginning of a shift and positive clothing culture at for samples taken at the end of the shift., Results: A total of 348 HCWs participated (21-92 per site), including 179 (51%) during the universal gowning/gloving phase. Overall, 51 (15%) HCWs acquired commonly pathogenic bacteria on their clothing: 13 (7.1%) HCWs acquired bacteria during universal gowning/gloving, and 38 (23%) HCWs acquired bacteria during usual care (odds ratio [OR], 0.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-0.6). Pathogens identified included S. aureus (25 species, including 7 methicillin-resistant S. aureus [MRSA]), Enterococcus spp. (25, including 1 vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus [VRE]), Pseudomonas spp. (4), Acinetobacter spp. (4), and Klebsiella (2)., Conclusion: Nearly 25% of HCWs practicing usual care (gowning and gloving only for patients with known resistant bacteria) contaminate their clothing during their shift. This contamination was reduced by 70% by gowning and gloving for all patient interactions.

Infection transmission in healthcare facilities is a growing concern. Visitation to healthcare facilities is very common, though the potential role of visitors in the transmission of infection is unknown. Although transmission-based precautions are generally used to prevent the spread of organisms in healthcare settings by healthcare staff, the applicability of these precautions to visitors is unclear. Decisions regarding whether to implement transmission-based precautions among visitors should take into account the organism of concern and means of transmission as well as factors pertaining to the visitor and the healthcare setting. The role of visitors as vectors for organism transmission in the healthcare setting and the potential benefits and adverse consequences of visitor adherence with transmission-based precautions are important areas for additional research.

Objective: Hand hygiene and environmental cleaning are essential infection prevention strategies, but the relative impact of each is unknown. This information is important in assessing resource allocation., Methods: We developed an agent-based model of patient-to-patient transmission-via the hands of transiently colonized healthcare workers and incompletely terminally cleaned rooms-in a 20-patient intensive care unit. Nurses and physicians were modeled and had distinct hand hygiene compliance levels on entry and exit to patient rooms. We simulated the transmission of Acinetobacter baumannii, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and vancomycin-resistant enterococci for 1 year using data from the literature and observed data to inform model input parameters., Results: We simulated 175 parameter-based scenarios and compared the effects of hand hygiene and environmental cleaning on rates of multidrug-resistant organism acquisition. For all organisms, increases in hand hygiene compliance outperformed equal increases in thoroughness of terminal cleaning. From baseline, a 2∶1 improvement in terminal cleaning compared with hand hygiene was required to match an equal reduction in acquisition rates (eg, a 20% improvement in terminal cleaning was required to match the reduction in acquisition due to a 10% improvement in hand hygiene compliance)., Conclusions: Hand hygiene should remain a priority for infection control programs, but environmental cleaning can have significant benefit for hospitals or individual hospital units that have either high hand hygiene compliance levels or low terminal cleaning thoroughness.

We surveyed hospital epidemiologists and infection preventionists on their usage of and satisfaction with infection prevention-specific software supplementing their institution's electronic medical record. Respondents with supplemental software were more satisfied with their software's infection prevention and antimicrobial stewardship capabilities than those without. Infection preventionists were more satisfied than hospital epidemiologists.

Objective: To assess definitions, experience, and infection control practices for multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB), including Enterobacteriaceae, Acinetobacter, and Pseudomonas species, in acute care hospitals., Design: Cross-sectional survey., Participants: US and international members of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) Research Network., Methods: Online survey that included definitions, infection control procedures, and microbiology capability related to MDR-GNB and other MDR bacteria., Results: From November 2012 through February 2013, 66 of 170 SHEA Research Network members responded (39% response rate), representing 26 states and 15 countries. More than 80% of facilities reported experience with each MDR-GNB isolate, and 78% had encountered GNB resistant to all antibiotics except colistin (62% Acinetobacter, 59% Pseudomonas, and 52% Enterobacteriaceae species). Participants varied regarding their definitions of "multidrug resistant," with 14 unique definitions for Acinetobacter, 18 for Pseudomonas, and 22 for Enterobacteriaceae species. Substantial variation also existed in isolation practices. Although isolation was commonly used for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), approximately 20% of facilities did not isolate for MDR Pseudomonas or Acinetobacter. The majority of those that isolated MDR organisms also removed isolation using a wide variety of criteria., Conclusion: Facilities vary significantly in their approach to preventing MDR-GNB transmission. Although practices for MRSA and VRE are relatively standardized, emerging pathogens CRE and other MDR-GNB have highly varied definitions and management. This confusion makes communication difficult, and varied use of isolation may contribute to emergence of these organisms. Public health agencies need to promote standard definitions and management to enable broader initiatives to limit emergence of MDR-GNB.

We examined contamination of healthcare worker (HCW) gown and gloves after caring for patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing and non-KPC-producing Klebsiella as a proxy for horizontal transmission. The rate of contamination with Klebsiella species is similar to that of contamination with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococcus, with 31 (14%) of 220 of HCW-patient interactions resulting in contamination of gloves and gowns.

Importance: Antibiotic-resistant bacteria are associated with increased patient morbidity and mortality. It is unknown whether wearing gloves and gowns for all patient contact in the intensive care unit (ICU) decreases acquisition of antibiotic-resistant bacteria., Objective: To assess whether wearing gloves and gowns for all patient contact in the ICU decreases acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) compared with usual care., Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster-randomized trial in 20 medical and surgical ICUs in 20 US hospitals from January 4, 2012, to October 4, 2012., Interventions: In the intervention ICUs, all health care workers were required to wear gloves and gowns for all patient contact and when entering any patient room., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was acquisition of MRSA or VRE based on surveillance cultures collected on admission and discharge from the ICU. Secondary outcomes included individual VRE acquisition, MRSA acquisition, frequency of health care worker visits, hand hygiene compliance, health care–associated infections, and adverse events., Results: From the 26,180 patients included, 92,241 swabs were collected for the primary outcome. Intervention ICUs had a decrease in the primary outcome of MRSA or VRE from 21.35 acquisitions per 1000 patient-days (95% CI, 17.57 to 25.94) in the baseline period to 16.91 acquisitions per 1000 patient-days (95% CI, 14.09 to 20.28) in the study period, whereas control ICUs had a decrease in MRSA or VRE from 19.02 acquisitions per 1000 patient-days (95% CI, 14.20 to 25.49) in the baseline period to 16.29 acquisitions per 1000 patient-days (95% CI, 13.48 to 19.68) in the study period, a difference in changes that was not statistically significant (difference, −1.71 acquisitions per 1000 person-days, 95% CI, −6.15 to 2.73; P = .57). For key secondary outcomes, there was no difference in VRE acquisition with the intervention (difference,  0.89 acquisitions per 1000 person-days; 95% CI, −4.27 to 6.04, P = .70), whereas for MRSA, there were fewer acquisitions with the intervention (difference, −2.98 acquisitions per 1000 person-days; 95% CI, −5.58 to −0.38; P = .046). Universal glove and gown use also decreased health care worker room entry (4.28 vs 5.24 entries per hour, difference, −0.96; 95% CI, −1.71 to −0.21, P = .02), increased room-exit hand hygiene compliance (78.3% vs 62.9%, difference, 15.4%; 95% CI, 8.99% to 21.8%; P = .02) and had no statistically significant effect on rates of adverse events (58.7 events per 1000 patient days vs 74.4 events per 1000 patient days; difference, −15.7; 95% CI, −40.7 to 9.2, P = .24)., Conclusions and Relevance: The use of gloves and gowns for all patient contact compared with usual care among patients in medical and surgical ICUs did not result in a difference in the primary outcome of acquisition of MRSA or VRE. Although there was a lower risk of MRSA acquisition alone and no difference in adverse events, these secondary outcomes require replication before reaching definitive conclusions., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT0131821.

Objective: Contact precautions decrease healthcare worker-patient contact and may impact patient satisfaction. To determine the association between contact precautions and patient satisfaction, we used a standardized interview for perceived issues with care., Design: Prospective cohort study of inpatients, evaluated at admission and on hospital days 3, 7, and 14 (until discharged). At each point, patients underwent a standardized interview to identify perceived problems with care. After discharge, the standardized interview and Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey were administered by telephone. Responses were recorded, transcribed, and coded by 2 physician reviewers., Participants: A total of 528 medical or surgical patients not admitted to the intensive care unit., Results: A total of 528 patients were included in the primary analysis, of whom 104 (20%) perceived some issue with their care. On multivariable logistic regression, contact precautions were independently associated with a greater number of perceived concerns with care (odds ratio, 2.05 [95% confidence interval, 1.31-3.21]; P < .01), including poor coordination of care (P = .02) and a lack of respect for patient needs and preferences (P = .001). Eighty-eight patients were included in the secondary analysis of HCAHPS. Patients under contact precautions did not have different HCAHPS scores than those not under contact precautions (odds ratio, 1.79 [95% confidence interval, 0.64-5.00]; P = .27)., Conclusions: Patients under contact precautions were more likely to perceive problems with their care, especially poor coordination of care and a lack of respect for patient preferences.

The validity of the central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) measure is compromised by subjectivity. We observed significant decreases in both CLABSIs and total hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (BSIs) following a CLABSI prevention intervention in adult intensive care units. Total hospital-acquired BSIs could be explored as an adjunct, objective CLABSI measure.

Objective: To determine the association between contact precautions and depression or anxiety as well as feelings of anger, sadness, worry, happiness, or confusion., Design: Prospective frequency-matched cohort study., Setting: The University of Maryland Medical Center, a 662-bed tertiary care hospital in Baltimore, Maryland., Participants: A total of 1,876 medical and surgical patients over the age of 18 years were approached; 528 patients were enrolled from January through November 2010, and 296 patients, frequency matched by hospital unit, completed follow-up on hospital day 3., Results: The primary outcome was Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores on hospital day 3, controlling for baseline HADS scores. Secondary moods were measured with visual analog mood scale diaries. Patients under contact precautions had baseline symptoms of depression 1.3 points higher (P<.01) and anxiety 0.8 points higher (P=.08) at hospital admission using HADS. Exposure to contact precautions was not associated with increased depression (P=.42) or anxiety (P=.25) on hospital day 3. On hospital day 3, patients under contact precautions were no more likely than unexposed patients to be angry (20% vs 20%; P=.99), sad (33% vs 38%; P=.45), worried (51% vs 46%; P=.41), happy (58% vs 67%; P=.14), or confused (23% vs 24%; P=.95)., Conclusions: Patients under contact precautions have more symptoms of depression and anxiety at hospital admission but do not appear to be more likely to develop depression, anxiety, or negative moods while under contact precautions. The use of contact precautions should not be restricted by the belief that contact precautions will produce more depression or anxiety.

Background and Objective: Contact precautions are a cornerstone of infection prevention but have also been associated with less healthcare worker (HCW) contact and adverse events. We studied how contact precautions modified HCW behavior in 4 acute care facilities., Design: Prospective cohort study., Participants and Setting: Four acute care facilities in the United States performing active surveillance for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus., Methods: Trained observers performed "secret shopper" monitoring of HCW activities during routine care, using a standardized collection tool and fixed 1-hour observation periods., Results: A total of 7,743 HCW visits were observed over 1,989 hours. Patients on contact precautions had 36.4% fewer hourly HCW visits than patients not on contact precautions (2.78 vs 4.37 visits per hour; [Formula: see text]) as well as 17.7% less direct patient contact time with HCWs (13.98 vs 16.98 minutes per hour; [Formula: see text]). Patients on contact precautions tended to have fewer visitors (23.6% fewer; [Formula: see text]). HCWs were more likely to perform hand hygiene on exiting the room of a patient on contact precautions (63.2% vs 47.4% in rooms of patients not on contact precautions; [Formula: see text])., Conclusion: Contact precautions were found to be associated with activities likely to reduce transmission of resistant pathogens, such as fewer visits and better hand hygiene at exit, while exposing patients on contact precautions to less HCW contact, less visitor contact, and potentially other unintended outcomes.

Objective: To assess the role of environmental contamination in the transmission of multidrug-resistant bacteria to healthcare workers' clothing., Design: Prospective cohort., Setting: Six intensive care units at a tertiary care hospital., Subjects: Healthcare workers including registered nurses, patient care technicians, respiratory therapists, occupational/physical therapists, and physicians., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: One hundred twenty of 585 (20.5%) healthcare worker/patient interactions resulted in contamination of healthcare workers' gloves or gowns. Multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii contamination occurred most frequently, 55 of 167 observations (32.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 25.8% to 40.0%), followed by multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 15 of 86 (17.4%; 95% CI 9.4% to 25.4%), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus, 25 of 180 (13.9%, 95% CI 8.9, 18.9%) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, 21 of 152 (13.8%; 95% CI 8.3% to 19.2%). Independent risk factors associated with healthcare worker contamination with multidrug-resistant bacteria were positive environmental cultures (odds ratio [OR] 4.2; 95% CI 2.7-6.5), duration in room for >5 mins (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.2-3.4), performing physical examinations (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.8), and contact with the ventilator (OR 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.8). Pulsed field gel electrophoresis determined that 91% of healthcare worker isolates were related to an environmental or patient isolate., Conclusions: The contamination of healthcare workers' protective clothing during routine care of patients with multidrug-resistant organisms is most frequent with A. baumannii. Environmental contamination was the major determinant of transmission to healthcare workers' gloves or gowns. Compliance with contact precautions and more aggressive environmental cleaning may decrease transmission.