Search

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.

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: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are a significant burden on healthcare facilities. Universal gloving is a horizontal intervention to prevent transmission of pathogens that cause HAI. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to identify whether implementation of universal gloving is associated with decreased incidence of HAI in clinical settings., Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted to find all relevant publications using search terms for universal gloving and HAIs. Pooled incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects models. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Woolf test and the I2 test., Results: In total, 8 studies were included. These studies were moderately to substantially heterogeneous (I2 = 59%) and had varied results. Stratified analyses showed a nonsignificant association between universal gloving and incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA; pooled IRR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79-1.11) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE; pooled IRR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69-1.28). Studies that implemented universal gloving alone showed a significant association with decreased incidence of HAI (IRR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.89), but studies implementing universal gloving as part of intervention bundles showed no significant association with incidence of HAI (IRR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86-1.05)., Conclusions: Universal gloving may be associated with a small protective effect against HAI. Despite limited data, universal gloving may be considered in high-risk settings, such as pediatric intensive care units. Further research should be performed to determine the effects of universal gloving on a broader range of pathogens, including gram-negative pathogens.

Background: Several single-center studies have suggested that eliminating contact precautions (CPs) for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) control in nonoutbreak settings has no impact on infection rates. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis on the impact of discontinuing contact precautions in the acute care setting., Methods: We searched PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Embase through December 2016 for studies evaluating discontinuation of contact precautions for multidrug-resistant organisms. We used random-effect models to obtain pooled risk ratio estimates. Heterogeneity was evaluated with I 2 estimation and the Cochran Q statistic. Pooled risk ratios for MRSA and VRE were assessed separately., Results: Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. Six studies discontinued CPs for both MRSA and VRE, 3 for MRSA only, 2 for VRE only, 2 for extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli, and 1 for Clostridium difficile infection. When study results were pooled, there was a trend toward reduction of MRSA infection after discontinuing CPs (pooled risk ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.02; P = .07) and a statistically significant reduction in VRE infection (pooled risk ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.94; P = .005)., Conclusions: Discontinuation of CPs for MRSA and VRE has not been associated with increased infection rates., (Copyright © 2018 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

BACKGROUND Recent studies have shown that using no-touch disinfection technologies (ie, ultraviolet light [UVL] or hydrogen peroxide vapor [HPV] systems) can limit the transmission of nosocomial pathogens and prevent healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). To investigate these findings further, we performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis on the impact of no-touch disinfection methods to decrease HAIs. METHODS We searched PubMed, CINAHL, CDSR, DARE and EMBASE through April 2017 for studies evaluating no-touch disinfection technology and the nosocomial infection rates for Clostridium difficile, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), and other multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). We employed random-effect models to obtain pooled risk ratio (pRR) estimates. Heterogeneity was evaluated with I2 estimation and the Cochran Q statistic. Pooled risk ratios for C. difficile, MRSA, VRE, and MDRO were assessed separately. RESULTS In total, 20 studies were included in the final review: 13 studies using UVL systems and 7 studies using HPV systems. When the results of the UVL studies were pooled, statistically significant reduction ins C. difficile infection (CDI) (pRR, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.84) and VRE infection rates (pRR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.28-0.65) were observed. No differences were found in rates of MRSA or gram-negative multidrug-resistant pathogens. CONCLUSIONS Ultraviolet light no-touch disinfection technology may be effective in preventing CDI and VRE infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:20-31.

Systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses are important research designs used to summarize and derive conclusions about the collective evidence on a focused research question in a structured, reproducible manner. The goal of this Methodology Minute is to describe how to conduct a systematic literature review and meta-analysis using a step-by-step approach to help infection preventionists (IPs) and others in the field perform their own systematic literature review and meta-analysis, and to critically evaluate published systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

We compared the ability to observe hand hygiene opportunities using the World Health Organization My 5 Moments method to the Entry/Exit method. Under covert direct observation, Entry/Exit method opportunities were observed at all times. My 5 Moments were observable in 32.3% of episodes, with a lower rate in wards versus intensive care units (28.0% vs 39.4%; P < .01). In US hospitals, the Entry/Exit method appears to be more feasible for directly observed hand hygiene compliance monitoring due to line-of-sight issues and other barriers., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: A number of strategies exist to reduce Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) transmission. We conducted an economic evaluation of "bundling" these strategies together., Methods: We constructed an agent-based computer simulation of nosocomial C. difficile transmission and infection in a hospital setting. This model included the following components: interactions between patients and health care workers; room contamination via C. difficile shedding; C. difficile hand carriage and removal via hand hygiene; patient acquisition of C. difficile via contact with contaminated rooms or health care workers; and patient antimicrobial use. Six interventions were introduced alone and "bundled" together: (a) aggressive C. difficile testing; (b) empiric isolation and treatment of symptomatic patients; (c) improved adherence to hand hygiene and (d) contact precautions; (e) improved use of soap and water for hand hygiene; and (f) improved environmental cleaning. Our analysis compared these interventions using values representing 3 different scenarios: (1) base-case (BASE) values that reflect typical hospital practice, (2) intervention (INT) values that represent implementation of hospital-wide efforts to reduce C. diff transmission, and (3) optimal (OPT) values representing the highest expected results from strong adherence to the interventions. Cost parameters for each intervention were obtained from published literature. We performed our analyses assuming low, normal, and high C. difficile importation prevalence and transmissibility of C. difficile., Results: INT levels of the "bundled" intervention were cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year in all importation prevalence and transmissibility scenarios. OPT levels of intervention were cost-effective for normal and high importation prevalence and transmissibility scenarios. When analyzed separately, hand hygiene compliance, environmental decontamination, and empiric isolation and treatment were the interventions that had the greatest impact on both cost and effectiveness., Conclusions: A combination of available interventions to prevent CDI is likely to be cost-effective but the cost-effectiveness varies for different levels of intensity of the interventions depending on epidemiological conditions such as C. difficile importation prevalence and transmissibility.

Objective: Hand hygiene surveillance programs that rely on direct observations of healthcare worker activity may be limited by the Hawthorne effect. In addition, comparing compliance rates from period to period requires adequately sized samples of observations. We aimed to statistically determine whether the Hawthorne effect is stable over an observation period and statistically derive sample sizes of observations necessary to compare compliance rates., Design: Prospective multicenter cohort study., Setting: Five intensive care units and 6 medical/surgical wards in 3 geographically distinct acute care hospitals., Methods: Trained observers monitored hand hygiene compliance during routine care in fixed 1-hour periods, using a standardized collection tool. We estimated the impact of the Hawthorne effect using empirical fluctuation processes and F tests for structural change. Standard sample-size calculation methods were used to estimate how many hand hygiene opportunities are required to accurately measure hand hygiene across various levels of baseline and target compliance., Results: Exit hand hygiene compliance increased after 14 minutes of observation (from 56.2% to 60.5%; P < .001) and increased further after 50 minutes (from 60.5% to 66.0%; P < .001). Entry compliance increased after 38 minutes (from 40.4% to 43.4%; P = .005). Between 79 and 723 opportunities are required during each period, depending on baseline compliance rates (range, 35%-90%) and targeted improvement (5% or 10%)., Conclusions: Limiting direct observation periods to approximately 15 minutes to minimize the Hawthorne effect and determining required number of hand hygiene opportunities observed per period on the basis of statistical power calculations would be expected to improve the validity of hand hygiene surveillance programs.

Background: The Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) created an evidence-based bundle to help reduce methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) health care-associated infections. The study aim was to identify which components of the IHI's MRSA bundle that rural hospitals have implemented and to identify barriers that hindered implementation of bundle components., Methods: Four surveys about the IHI's MRSA bundle were administered at the Iowa Statewide Infection Prevention Seminar between 2007 and 2011. Surveys were mailed to infection preventionists (IPs) who did not attend the meetings., Results: The percentage of IPs reporting that their hospital implemented a hand hygiene program (range by year, 87%-94%) and used contact precautions for patients infected (range by year, 97%-100%) or colonized (range by year, 77%-92%) with MRSA did not change significantly. The number of hospitals that monitored the effectiveness of environmental cleaning significantly increased from 23%-71% (P < .01). Few hospitals assessed daily if central lines were necessary (range by year, 22%-26%). IPs perceived lack of support to be a major barrier to implementing bundle components., Conclusion: Most IPs reported that their hospitals had implemented most components of the MRSA bundle. Support within the health care system is essential for implementing each component of an evidence-based bundle., (Copyright © 2014 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hand hygiene is one of the most effective ways to prevent transmission of health care-associated infections. Electronic systems and tools are being developed to enhance hand hygiene compliance monitoring. Our systematic review assesses the existing evidence surrounding the adoption and accuracy of automated systems or electronically enhanced direct observations and also reviews the effectiveness of such systems in health care settings., Methods: We systematically reviewed PubMed for articles published between January 1, 2000, and March 31, 2013, containing the terms hand AND hygiene or hand AND disinfection or handwashing. Resulting articles were reviewed to determine if an electronic system was used., Results: We identified 42 articles for inclusion. Four types of systems were identified: electronically assisted/enhanced direct observation, video-monitored direct observation systems, electronic dispenser counters, and automated hand hygiene monitoring networks. Fewer than 20% of articles identified included calculations for efficiency or accuracy., Conclusions: Limited data are currently available to recommend adoption of specific automatic or electronically assisted hand hygiene surveillance systems. Future studies should be undertaken that assess the accuracy, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of such systems. Given the restricted clinical and infection prevention budgets of most facilities, cost-effectiveness analysis of specific systems will be required before these systems are widely adopted., (Published by Mosby, Inc.)

Many studies have evaluated bundled interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance. However, there are few evidence-based recommendations on optimal interventions for implementation. We aimed to systematically review all studies on interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance to evaluate existing bundles and identify areas of promise to target high-quality studies. Adjusted risk ratios were pooled to assess common bundles. Of the 8148 studies evaluated, 6 randomized controlled trials and 39 quasi-experimental studies met inclusion criteria. Three studies evaluated the interventions education, reminders, feedback, administrative support, and access to alcohol-based hand rub as a bundle, which was associated with improved hand hygiene compliance (pooled odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.69-1.97). Another bundle of education, reminders, and feedback evaluated in 3 studies was associated with improved compliance (pooled OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.12-1.94). These bundles should be further studied using high-quality study designs and compared with other interventions.

Background: To prevent transmission, some pediatric units require clinicians to wear gloves for all patient contacts during RSV season. We sought to assess whether a mandatory gloving policy reduced the risk of other health care-acquired infections (HAIs)., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all patients admitted to pediatric units of a tertiary care center between 2002 and 2010. Poisson regression models were used to measure the association between mandatory gloving and HAI incidence. Autoregressive models were used to adjust for time correlation., Results: During the study period, 686 HAIs occurred during 363 782 patient-days. The risk of any HAI was 25% lower during mandatory gloving periods compared with during nongloving periods (relative risk [RR]: 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-0.93; P = .01), after adjusting for long-term trends and seasonal effect. Mandatory gloving was associated with lower risks of bloodstream infections (RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.49-0.81; P < .001), central line-associated bloodstream infections (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.44-0.84; P = 0.003), and hospital-acquired pneumonia (RR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.03-1.25; P= 0.09). The reduction was significant in the PICU (RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.42-0.93; P = .02), the NICU (RR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.39-0.98; P = .04), and the Pediatric Bone Marrow Transplant Unit (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.29-0.91, P = .02)., Conclusions: Universal gloving during RSV season was associated with significantly lower rates of bacteremia and central line-associated bloodstream infections, particularly in the ICUs and the Pediatric Bone Marrow Transplant Unit.

Background: Previous studies have suggested that informatics tools, such as automated alert and decision support systems, may increase the efficiency and quality of infection control surveillance. However, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of these tools., Methods: We focus on 2 types of economic analyses that have utility in assessing infection control interventions (cost-effectiveness analysis and business-case analysis) and review the available literature on the economics of computerized infection control surveillance systems., Results: Previous studies on the effectiveness of computerized infection control surveillance have been limited to assessments of whether these tools increase the sensitivity and specificity of surveillance over traditional methods. Furthermore, we identified only 2 studies that assessed the costs associated with computerized infection control surveillance. Thus, it remains unknown whether computerized infection control surveillance systems are cost-effective and whether use of these systems improves patient outcomes., Conclusion: The existing data are insufficient to allow for a summary conclusion on the cost-effectiveness of infection control surveillance technology. All future studies of computerized infection control surveillance systems should aim to collect outcomes and economic data to inform decision making and assist hospitals with completing business-cases analyses.