Search

Abstract Background Strategy to mitigate various Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreaks are focusing on Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) capacity building, supportive supervision and IPC supply donation. This study was conducted to assess the impact of a Pay for Performance Strategy (PPS) in improving IPC performance in healthcare facilities (HF) in context of the 2018–2019 Nord Kivu/ Democratic Republic of the Congo EVD outbreak. Methods A quasi-experimental study was conducted analysing the impact of a PPS on the IPC performance. HF were selected following the inclusion criteria upon informed consent from the facility manager and the National Department of Health. Initial and process assessment of IPC performance was conducted by integrating response teams using a validated IPC assessment tool for HF. A bundle of interventions was then implemented in the different HF including training of health workers, donation of IPC kits, supportive supervision during the implementation of IPC activities, and monetary reward. IPC practices in HF were assessment every two weeks during the intervention period to measure the impact. The IPC assessment tool had 34 questions aggregated in 8 different thematic areas: triage and isolation capacity, IPC committee in HF, hand hygiene, PPE, decontamination and sterilization, linen management, hospital environment and Waste management. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and analytical approaches according to assumptions. R software (version 4.0.3) was used for all the analyses and a p-value of 0.05 was considered as the threshold for statistically significant results. Results Among 69 HF involved in this study, 48 were private facilities and 21 state facilities. The median baseline IPC score was 44% (IQR: 21–65%); this IPC median score reached respectively after 2, 4, 6 and 8 weeks 68% (IQR: 59–76%), 79% (71–84%), 76% (68–85%) and 79% (74–85%). The improvement of IPC score was statistically significative. Spearman’s rank-order correlation revealed the associated between proportion of trained HW and IPC score performance after 8 weeks of interventions (rs = .280, p-value = 0.02). Conclusion Pay for Performance Strategy was proved effective in improving healthcare facilities capacity in infection prevention and control practice in context of 2018 EVD outbreak in Nord Kivu. However, the strategy for long-term sustainability of IPC needs further provision. More studies are warranted on the HW and patients’ perceptions toward IPC program implementation in context of Nord Kivu Province.

Background: Strategy to mitigate various Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreaks are focusing on Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) capacity building, supportive supervision and IPC supply donation. This study was conducted to assess the impact of a Pay for Performance Strategy (PPS) in improving IPC performance in healthcare facilities (HF) in context of the 2018–2019 Nord Kivu/ Democratic Republic of the Congo EVD outbreak. Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted analysing the impact of a PPS on the IPC performance. HF were selected following the inclusion criteria upon informed consent from the facility manager and the National Department of Health. Initial and process assessment of IPC performance was conducted by integrating response teams using a validated IPC assessment tool for HF. A bundle of interventions was then implemented in the different HF including training of health workers, donation of IPC kits, supportive supervision during the implementation of IPC activities, and monetary reward. IPC practices in HF were assessment every two weeks during the intervention period to measure the impact. The IPC assessment tool had 34 questions aggregated in 8 different thematic areas: triage and isolation capacity, IPC committee in HF, hand hygiene, PPE, decontamination and sterilization, linen management, hospital environment and Waste management. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and analytical approaches according to assumptions. R software (version 4.0.3) was used for all the analyses and a p-value of 0.05 was considered as the threshold for statistically significant results. Results: Among 69 HF involved in this study, 48 were private facilities and 21 state facilities. The median baseline IPC score was 44% (IQR: 21–65%); this IPC median score reached respectively after 2, 4, 6 and 8 weeks 68% (IQR: 59–76%), 79% (71–84%), 76% (68–85%) and 79% (74–85%). The improvement of IPC score was statistically significative. Spearman's rank-order correlation revealed the associated between proportion of trained HW and IPC score performance after 8 weeks of interventions (rs =.280, p-value = 0.02). Conclusion: Pay for Performance Strategy was proved effective in improving healthcare facilities capacity in infection prevention and control practice in context of 2018 EVD outbreak in Nord Kivu. However, the strategy for long-term sustainability of IPC needs further provision. More studies are warranted on the HW and patients' perceptions toward IPC program implementation in context of Nord Kivu Province. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: High rates of healthcare worker (HCW) infections due to COVID-19 have been attributed to several factors, including inadequate personal protective equipment (PPE), exposure to a high density of patients with COVID-19, and poor building ventilation. We investigated an increase in the number of staff COVID-19 infections at our hospital to determine the factors contributing to infection and to implement the interventions required to prevent subsequent infections., Methods: We conducted a single-centre retrospective cohort study of staff working at a tertiary referral hospital who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 25 January 2020 and 25 November 2020. The primary outcome was the source of COVID-19 infection., Results: Of 45 staff who returned a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2, 19 were determined to be acquired at our hospital. Fifteen (15/19; 79% [95% CI: 54-94%]) of these were identified through contact tracing and testing following exposures to other infected staff and were presumed to be staff-to-staff transmission, including an outbreak in 10 healthcare workers (HCWs) linked to a single ward that cared for COVID-19 patients. The staff tearoom was identified as the likely location for transmission, with subsequent reduction in HCW infections and resolution of the outbreak following implementation of enhanced control measures in tearoom facilities. No HCW contacts (0/204; 0% [95% CI: 0-2%]) developed COVID-19 infection following exposure to unrecognised patients with COVID-19., Conclusion: Unrecognised infections among staff may be a significant driver of HCW infections in healthcare settings. Control measures should be implemented to prevent acquisition from other staff as well as patient-staff transmission., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Crown Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

There are no publicly available national data on healthcare worker infections in Australia. It has been documented in many countries that healthcare workers (HCW) are at increased occupational risk of COVID-19. We aimed to estimate the burden of COVID-19 on Australia HCW and the health system by obtaining and organizing data on HCW infections, analyzing national HCW cases in regards to occupational risk and analyzing healthcare outbreak. We searched government reports and websites and media reports to create a comprehensive line listing of Australian HCW infections and nosocomial outbreaks between January 25th and July 8th, 2020. A line list of HCW related COVID-19 reported cases was created and enhanced by matching data extracted from media reports of healthcare related COVID-19 relevant outbreaks and reports, using matching criteria. Rates of infections and odds ratios (ORs) for HCW were calculated per state, by comparing overall cases to HCW cases. To investigate the sources of infection amongst HCW, transmission data were collated and graphed to show distribution of sources. We identified 36 hospital outbreaks or HCW infection reports between January 25th and July 8th, 2020. According to our estimates, at least 536 HCW in Australia had been infected with COVID-19, comprising 6.03% of all reported infections. The rate of HCW infection was 90/100000 and of community infection 34/100,000. HCW were 2.69 times more likely to contract COVID-19 (95% CI 2.48 to 2.93; P < 0.001). The timing of hospital outbreaks did not always correspond to community peaks. Where data were available, a total of 131 HCW across 21 outbreaks led to 1656 HCW being furloughed for quarantine. In one outbreak, one hospital was closed and 1200 HCW quarantined. The study shows that HCW were at nearly 3 times the risk of infection. Of concern, this nearly tripling of risk occurred during a period of low community prevalence suggesting failures at multiple hazard levels including PPE policies within the work environment. Even in a country with relatively good control of COVID-19, HCW are at greater risk of infection than the general community and nosocomial outbreaks can have substantial effects on workforce capacity by the quarantine of numerous HCW during an outbreak. The occurrence of hospital outbreaks even when community incidence was low highlights the high risk setting that hospitals present. Australia faced a resurgence of COVID-19 after the study period, with multiple hospital outbreaks. We recommend formal reporting of HCW infections, testing protocols for nosocomial outbreaks, cohorting of workforce to minimize the impact, and improved PPE guidelines to provide precautionary and optimal protection for HCW. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]