Search

OBJECTIVE: Nursing home residents may be particularly vulnerable to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, a question is when and how often nursing homes should test staff for COVID-19 and how this may change as severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) evolves. DESIGN: We developed an agent-based model representing a typical nursing home, COVID-19 spread, and its health and economic outcomes to determine the clinical and economic value of various screening and isolation strategies and how it may change under various circumstances. RESULTS: Under winter 2023-2024 SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant conditions, symptom-based antigen testing averted 4.5 COVID-19 cases compared to no testing, saving $191 in direct medical costs. Testing implementation costs far outweighed these savings, resulting in net costs of $990 from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services perspective, $1,545 from the third-party payer perspective, and $57,155 from the societal perspective. Testing did not return sufficient positive health effects to make it cost-effective [$50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) threshold], but it exceeded this threshold in ≥59% of simulation trials. Testing remained cost-ineffective when routinely testing staff and varying face mask compliance, vaccine efficacy, and booster coverage. However, all antigen testing strategies became cost-effective (≤$31,906 per QALY) or cost saving (saving ≤$18,372) when the severe outcome risk was ≥3 times higher than that of current omicron variants. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 testing costs outweighed benefits under winter 2023-2024 conditions; however, testing became cost-effective with increasingly severe clinical outcomes. Cost-effectiveness can change as the epidemic evolves because it depends on clinical severity and other intervention use. Thus, nursing home administrators and policy makers should monitor and evaluate viral virulence and other interventions over time.

BackgroundEnvironmental contamination is suspected to play an important role in Candida auris transmission. Understanding speed and risks of contamination after room disinfection could inform environmental cleaning recommendations.MethodsWe conducted a prospective multicenter study of environmental contamination associated with C. auris colonization at six ventilator-capable skilled nursing facilities and one acute-care hospital in Illinois and California. Known C. auris carriers were sampled at five body-sites followed by sampling of nearby room surfaces before disinfection and at 0, 4, 8, and 12-hours post-disinfection. Samples were cultured for C. auris and bacterial multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Odds of surface contamination after disinfection were analyzed using multilevel generalized estimating equations.ResultsAmong 41 known C. auris carriers, colonization was detected most frequently on palms/fingertips (76%) and nares (71%). C. auris contamination was detected on 32.2% (66/205) of room surfaces pre-disinfection and 20.5% (39/190) of room surfaces by 4-hours post-disinfection. A higher number of C. auris-colonized body sites was associated with higher odds of environmental contamination at every time point following disinfection, adjusting for facility of residence. In the rooms of 38 (93%) C. auris carriers co-colonized with a bacterial MDRO, 2%-24% of surfaces were additionally contaminated with the same MDRO by 4-hours post-disinfection.ConclusionsC. auris can contaminate the healthcare environment rapidly after disinfection, highlighting the challenges associated with environmental disinfection. Future research should investigate long-acting disinfectants, antimicrobial surfaces, and more effective patient skin antisepsis to reduce the environmental reservoir of C. auris and bacterial MDROs in healthcare settings.

ObjectiveQuantify the frequency and drivers of unreported coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms among nursing home (NH) staff.DesignConfidential telephone survey.SettingThe study was conducted in 70 NHs in Orange County, California, December 2020-February 2022.ParticipantsThe study included 120 NH staff with COVID-19.MethodsWe designed a 40-item telephone survey of NH staff to assess COVID-19 symptom reporting behavior and types of barriers [monetary, logistic, and emotional (fear or stigma)] and facilitators of symptom reporting using 5-point Likert scales. Summary statistics, reliability of survey constructs, and construct and discriminant validity were assessed.ResultsOverall, 49% of surveys were completed during the 2020-2021 COVID-19 winter wave and 51% were completed during severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) δ (delta)/ (omicron) waves, with a relatively even distribution of certified nursing assistants, licensed vocational or registered nurses, and nonfrontline staff. Most COVID-19 cases (71%) were detected during mandated weekly NH surveillance testing and most staff (67%) had ≥1 symptom prior to their test. Only 34% of those with symptoms disclosed their symptom to a supervisor. Responses were consistent across 8 discrete survey constructs with Cronbach α > 0.70. In the first wave of the pandemic, fear and lack of knowledge were drivers of symptom reporting. In later waves, adequate staffing and sick days were drivers of symptom reporting. COVID-19 help lines and encouragement from supervisors facilitated symptom reporting and testing.ConclusionsMandatory COVID-19 testing for NH staff is key to identifying staff COVID-19 cases due to reluctance to speak up about existing symptoms. Active encouragement from supervisors to report symptoms and stay home when ill was a major driver of symptom reporting and resultant infection prevention and worker safety measures.

BackgroundNursing home residents are at high risk for infection, hospitalization, and colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms.MethodsWe performed a cluster-randomized trial of universal decolonization as compared with routine-care bathing in nursing homes. The trial included an 18-month baseline period and an 18-month intervention period. Decolonization entailed the use of chlorhexidine for all routine bathing and showering and administration of nasal povidone-iodine twice daily for the first 5 days after admission and then twice daily for 5 days every other week. The primary outcome was transfer to a hospital due to infection. The secondary outcome was transfer to a hospital for any reason. An intention-to-treat (as-assigned) difference-in-differences analysis was performed for each outcome with the use of generalized linear mixed models to compare the intervention period with the baseline period across trial groups.ResultsData were obtained from 28 nursing homes with a total of 28,956 residents. Among the transfers to a hospital in the routine-care group, 62.2% (the mean across facilities) were due to infection during the baseline period and 62.6% were due to infection during the intervention period (risk ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.04). The corresponding values in the decolonization group were 62.9% and 52.2% (risk ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.88), for a difference in risk ratio, as compared with routine care, of 16.6% (95% CI, 11.0 to 21.8; P

Standardized observation of bed baths and showers for 100 residents in 8 nursing homes revealed inadequate cleansing of body sites (88%-100% failure) and >90% process failure involving lather, firm massage, changing dirty wipes or cloths, and following clean-to-dirty sequence. Insufficient water warmth affected 86% of bathing opportunities. Bathing training and adequate resources are needed.

We hosted a confidential helpline to address concerns about COVID-19 prevention among staff in 12 nursing homes in Orange County, California. We fielded 301 inquiries from April 2021-April 2022, most commonly involving questions about vaccines (40%), nursing home COVID-19 prevention (28%), SARS-CoV-2 variants (18%), symptom reporting (10%), and home and community COVID-19 prevention (5%). During COVID-19 surges, staff dominantly expressed fear, anger, and exhaustion. During nadirs, sentiment shifted towards optimism and acceptance.

Pooling of samples can increase throughput and reduce costs for large-scale SARS-CoV-2 testing when incidence is low. In a cross-sectional study of serial SARS-CoV-2 sampling of staff and residents at three nursing homes, laboratory labor constraints limited the feasibility of pooling prior to the maximal incidence that favored cost savings. IMPORTANCE This study highlights the pragmatic considerations surrounding SARS-CoV-2 sample pooling beyond accuracy and costs. We performed a cost analysis to determine the percent positivity at which pooling would reduce costs versus single testing. We found that the need for a stable amount of daily work hours staffed by a highly trained workforce was a major limitation in pooling as test positivity increased. For the COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemic threats, laboratories should carefully consider the thresholds at which sample pooling is beneficial, with a particular focus on the impact on laboratory staff.

BackgroundThe CLEAR Trial demonstrated that a multisite body decolonization regimen reduced post-discharge infection and hospitalization in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriers. Here, we describe decolonization efficacy.MethodsWe performed a large, multicenter, randomized clinical trial of MRSA decolonization among adult patients after hospital discharge with MRSA infection or colonization. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either MRSA prevention education or education plus decolonization with topical chlorhexidine, oral chlorhexidine, and nasal mupirocin. Participants were swabbed in the nares, throat, axilla/groin, and wound (if applicable) at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 9 months after randomization. The primary outcomes of this study are follow-up colonization differences between groups.ResultsAmong 2121 participants, 1058 were randomized to decolonization. By 1 month, MRSA colonization was lower in the decolonization group compared with the education-only group (odds ration [OR] = 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], .36-.54; P ≤ .001). A similar magnitude of reduction was seen in the nares (OR = 0.34; 95% CI, .27-.42; P < .001), throat (OR = 0.55; 95% CI, .42-.73; P < .001), and axilla/groin (OR = 0.57; 95% CI, .43-.75; P < .001). These differences persisted through month 9 except at the wound site, which had a relatively small sample size. Higher regimen adherence was associated with lower MRSA colonization (P ≤ .01).ConclusionsIn a randomized, clinical trial, a repeated post-discharge decolonization regimen for MRSA carriers reduced MRSA colonization overall and at multiple body sites. Higher treatment adherence was associated with greater reductions in MRSA colonization.

The CLEAR Trial recently found that decolonization reduced infections and hospitalizations in MRSA carriers in the year following hospital discharge. In this secondary analysis, we explored whether decolonization had a similar benefit in the subgroup of trial participants who harbored USA300, using two different definitions for the USA300 strain-type.

Abstract Background Outpatient peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) use has grown without standardized protocols for their management. We assessed the impact of a mobile app strategy for outpatient CLABSI prevention using photo-monitoring, assessment, and response to lines with local inflammation/infection in a cohort of cancer clinic patients. Methods This prospective cohort study evaluated adults with PICCs at an academic cancer clinic at baseline (7/2015–12/2016) and after implementing the SAFER (Standardizing Assessment For Effective Response) Lines program (intervention 5/2017–11/2018). This included a mobile app enabling (1) clinic assessment of localized inflammation or infection defined as Central Line Insertion Site Assessment (CLISA) score 2 or 3, respectively (Table 1), (2) photo-documentation, and (3) score-based automated physician alerts for remote response. We assessed demographics, malignancy type, and line characteristics. Generalized linear mixed effects model assessed program impact on frequency of CLISA 2 or 3 lines, clustered by patient. Cox proportional hazards and Kaplan Meier models assessed days to line removal after CLISA 2 or 3 were identified. Results Among 4,894 assessments of 528 PICCs in 380 outpatients, there were 272 lines (199 patients) at baseline and 256 lines (181 patients) after SAFER program implementation. Mean age, gender, PICC dwell time, and history of prior PICC were similar at baseline and intervention. The proportion of inflamed (CLISA 2) and infected (CLISA 3) lines decreased 40% (from 26% to 16%, and 19% to 11%, respectively) during intervention compared to baseline. Lines with peeling dressings decreased 80% (from 46% to 9%). Mean days to removal of inflamed lines decreased 59% (from 19 to 8 days); removal of infected lines decreased 85% (from 11 to < 2 days). Intervention was associated with 46% lower risk of local inflammation/infection (OR 0.46, CI=0.26–0.83, p< 0.01, Table 2) and faster line removal when such lines were identified (HR 0.18, CI=0.12–0.27, p< 0.01). Conclusion The SAFER Lines mobile app and program decreased the frequency of locally inflamed or infected PICC insertion sites and increased the speed of removal when local inflammation/infection was found in cancer clinic patients. Disclosures Raheeb Saavedra, AS, Medline: Conducted studies in which hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and/or environmental cleaning products|Stryker: Conducted clinical studies in which hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products|Xttrium Laboratories: Conducted clinical studies in which hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products Raveena D. Singh, MA, Medline: Conducted studies in which hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and/or environmental cleaning products|Stryker: Conducted clinical studies in which hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products|Xttrium Laboratories: Conducted clinical studies in which hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products Susan S. Huang, MD, MPH, Medline: Conducted studies in which hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and/or environmental cleaning products|Molnlyke: Conducted clinical studies in which hospitals received contributed antiseptic product|Stryker: Conducted clinical studies in which hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products|Xttrium Laboratories: Conducted clinical studies in which hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic product.

In a prospective cohort study, we compared a 2-swabs-per-nostril 5% iodophor regimen with a 1-swab-per-nostril 10% iodophor regimen on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriage in nursing-home residents. Compared with baseline, both single-swab and double-swab regimens resulted in an identical 40% reduction in nasal carriage and 60% reduction in any carriage, skin or nasal.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/ash.2022.205.].

Abstract Background Federal mandate requires NHs to perform weekly COVID-19 testing of staff. Testing is effective due to barriers to disclosing mild illness, but it is unclear how long the mandate will last. We explored if environmental samples can be used to signal staff COVID-19 cases as an alternative screening tool in NHs. Methods We conducted a cross sectional study to assess the value of environmental sampling as a trigger for COVID-19 testing of NH staff using data from currently performed weekly staff sweeps. We performed 35 sampling sweeps across 21 NHs from 6/2020-2/2021. For each sweep, we sampled up to 24 high touch objects in NH breakrooms (N=226), entryways (N=216), and nursing stations (N=194) assuming that positive samples were due to contamination from infected staff. Total staff and positive staff counts were tallied for the staff testing sweeps performed the week of and week prior to environmental sampling. Object samples were processed for SARS-CoV-2 using PCR (StepOnePlus) with a 1 copy/mL limit of detection. We evaluated concordance between object and staff positivity using Cohen’s kappa and calculated the positive and negative predictive value (PPV, NPV) of environmental sweeps for staff positivity, including the attributable capture of positive staff. We tested the association between the proportion of staff positivity and object contamination by room type in a linear regression model when clustering by NH. Results Among 35 environmental sweeps, 49% had SARS-CoV-2 positive objects and 69% had positive staff in the same or prior week. Mean positivity was 16% (range 0-83%) among objects and 4% (range 0-22%) among staff. Overall, NPV was 61% and Cohen’s kappa was 0.60. PPV of object sampling as an indicator of positive staff was 100% for every room type, with an attributable capture of positive staff of 76%, with values varying by room type (Table). Breakroom samples were the strongest indicator of any staff cases. Each percent increase in object positivity was associated with an increase in staff positivity in entryways (7.2% increased staff positivity, P=0.01) and nursing stations (5.7% increased staff positivity, P=0.05). Conclusion If mandatory weekly staff testing ends in NHs, environmental sampling may serve as an effective tool to trigger targeted COVID-19 testing sweeps of NH staff. Disclosures Gabrielle Gussin, MS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Raveena Singh, MA, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Raheeb Saavedra, AS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Susan S. Huang, MD, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)

Abstract Background OC is the 6th largest U.S. county with 70 NHs. Universal decolonization (chlorhexidine for routine bathing, and twice daily nasal iodophor Mon-Fri every other week) was adopted in 24 NHs prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and 12 NHs (11 of those adopting decolonization) participated in a COVID prevention training program with a rolling launch from July-Sept 2020. We evaluated the impact of these initiatives on staff and resident COVID cases. Methods We conducted a quasi-experimental study of the impact of decolonization and COVID prevention training on staff and resident COVID cases during the CA winter surge (11/16/20-1/31/21), when compared to non-participating NHs. Decolonization NHs received weekly visits for encouraging adherence during the pandemic, and NHs in the COVID training program received 3 in-person training sessions for all work shifts plus weekly feedback about adherence to hand hygiene, masking, and breakroom safety using video monitoring. We calculated incident 1) staff COVID cases, 2) resident COVID cases, and 3) resident COVID deaths adjusting for NH average daily census. We assessed impact of initiatives on these outcomes using linear mixed effects models testing the interaction between any training participation and calendar date when clustering by NH. Because of the overlap of the two initiatives, we evaluated ‘any training’ vs ‘no training.’ Results 63 NHs had available data. 24 adopted universal decolonization, 12 received COVID training (11 of which participated in decolonization), and 38 were not enrolled in either. During the winter surge, the 63 NHs experienced 1867 staff COVID cases, 2186 resident COVID cases, and 251 resident deaths due to COVID, corresponding to 29.6, 34.7, and 4.0 events per NH, respectively. In NHs participating in either initiative, staff COVID cases were reduced by 31% (OR=0.69 (0.52, 0.92), P=0.01), resident COVID cases were reduced by 43% (OR=0.57 (0.39, 0.82), P=0.003), and resident deaths were reduced (non-significantly) by 26% (OR=0.74 (0.46, 1.21), P=0.23). The grey box represents the California COVID-19 winter surge (11/16/20-1/31/21). Incident and cumulative COVID-19 cases and deaths for each nursing home were divided by the nursing home’s average daily census and multiplied by 100, representing events per 100 beds, which were aggregated across groups. Conclusion NHs are vulnerable to COVID-19 outbreaks. A universal decolonization and COVID prevention training initiative in OC, CA significantly reduced staff and resident COVID cases in this high-risk care setting. Disclosures Gabrielle Gussin, MS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Raveena Singh, MA, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Shruti K. Gohil, MD, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-Investigator in studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Molnycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-Investigator in studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-Investigator in studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Raheeb Saavedra, AS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Robert Pedroza, BS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Chase Berman, BS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Susan S. Huang, MD, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)

We performed secondary analyses of a postdischarge decolonization trial of MRSA carriers that reduced MRSA infection and hospitalization by 30%. Hospitalized MRSA infection was associated with 7.9 days of non-MRSA antibiotics and CDI in 3.9%. Preventing MRSA infection and associated hospitalization may reduce antibiotic use and CDI incidence.

Abstract Background Nursing home (NH) residents are at high infection and hospital readmission risk. Colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) is common. In ICU and post-hospital discharge settings, decolonization has reduced infection rates. However, the effectiveness of this strategy in NHs is unclear. Methods We performed a cluster randomized trial of 1:1 universal decolonization (decol) vs standard of care bathing (control) in 28 California NHs. After an 18 month baseline evaluation of hospitalization rates due to infection and MDRO prevalence, NHs were randomized to decol or control. Decol consisted of 1) chlorhexidine bathing; 2) nasal povidone iodine bid on admission x 5d and then M-F biweekly x 18 mo. Primary outcome was the probability that a transfer to a hospital was due to infection. Secondary outcome was the probability that a NH discharge was to a hospital. Results Four of 28 NHs dropped from the trial (3 decol, 1 control). Mean facility baseline of hospital transfers due to infection was 58% and 57% in the control and decol groups. In the intervention period, proportions were 57% and 48% in the control and decol groups. When accounting for clustering within NHs, hospital transfers due to infection had an OR of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.82-1.02) in the control group and an OR of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.56-0.95) in the decol group when comparing intervention to baseline period. For the primary outcome, decol had a 18% greater impact v. control (P=0.005, Fig. A). Baseline proportion of NH discharges due to hospitalization was 37% and 39% in the control and decol groups. In the intervention period, proportions were 36% and 33%. When accounting for clustering within NHs, the proportion of discharges due to hospitalization had an OR of 1.14 (95% CI: 1.06-1.22) in the control group and 0.91 (CI: 0.77-1.07) in the decol group when comparing the intervention period to the baseline period. For the secondary outcome, decol had a 23% greater impact v. control (P< 0.0001, Fig. B). In this figure, each nursing home is represented by a circle. The size of the circle represents the amount of contributed patient days to the trial. The groups represent “as randomized” categories. Panel A) compares the probability that a transfer to a hospital was due to infection; panel B) compares the probability that a nursing home discharge was to a hospital. The y-axis represents the odds ratio of these probabilities comparing the baseline to the intervention period. The p values represent the significance of the difference between groups (the trial effect). Conclusion Universal NH decolonization with chlorhexidine and nasal iodophor significantly reduced the proportion of transfers to hospitals due to infection and discharges due to hospitalization. Our findings suggest that NH decolonization reduces serious infections and can decrease morbidity in this vulnerable population. Disclosures Loren G. Miller, MD, MPH, Medline (Grant/Research Support, Other Financial or Material Support, Contributed product) Stryker (Other Financial or Material Support, Contributed product) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Contributed product) James A. McKinnell, MD, Medline (Grant/Research Support) Raveena Singh, MA, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Gabrielle Gussin, MS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Ken Kleinman, PhD, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products) Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products) Raheeb Saavedra, AS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic products) Lauren Heim, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted clinical trials and studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted clinical trials and studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic product) Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted clinical trials and studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic product) Shruti K. Gohil, MD, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-Investigator in studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Molnycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-Investigator in studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-Investigator in studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Susan S. Huang, MD, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)

ObjectiveDetermine the prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE), extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing organisms (ESBLs), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) among residents and in the environment of nursing homes (NHs).DesignPoint prevalence sampling of residents and environmental sampling of high-touch objects in resident rooms and common areas.SettingTwenty-eight NHs in Southern California from 2016 to 2017.ParticipantsNH participants in Project PROTECT, a cluster-randomized trial of enhanced bathing and decolonization vs routine care.MethodsFifty residents were randomly sampled per NH. Twenty objects were sampled, including 5 common room objects plus 5 objects in each of 3 rooms (ambulatory, total care, and dementia care residents).ResultsA total of 2797 swabs were obtained from 1400 residents in 28 NHs. Median prevalence of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) carriage per NH was 50% (range: 24%-70%). Median prevalence of specific MDROs were as follows: MRSA, 36% (range: 20%-54%); ESBL, 16% (range: 2%-34%); VRE, 5% (range: 0%-30%); and CRE, 0% (range: 0%-8%). A median of 45% of residents (range: 24%-67%) harbored an MDRO without a known MDRO history. Environmental MDRO contamination was found in 74% of resident rooms and 93% of common areas.Conclusions and implicationsIn more than half of the NHs, more than 50% of residents were colonized with MDROs of clinical and public health significance, most commonly MRSA and ESBL. Additionally, the vast majority of resident rooms and common areas were MDRO contaminated. The unknown submerged portion of the iceberg of MDRO carriers in NHs may warrant changes to infection prevention and control practices, particularly high-fidelity adoption of universal strategies such as hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and decolonization.

Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is responsible for the largest number of invasive infections due to a multidrug-resistant pathogen. Approximately 10% of hospitalized carriers will experience invasive MRSA disease in the year following discharge incurring antibiotic therapy beyond focused treatment of MRSA. Objective: We aimed to quantify the extent of non-MRSA empiric antibiotics incurred by MRSA infections and further assess the risk of Clostridioides difficile Infection (CDI) as a result of treatment of MRSA infection. Methods: The CLEAR Trial was a postdischarge randomized controlled trial of 2,121 MRSA carriers comparing MRSA education alone to education plus repeated decolonization that demonstrated a 30% reduction in MRSA infection and a 17% reduction in all-cause infection attributable to decolonization in the year following hospital discharge (Huang SS, NEJM 2019). We included all hospitalization outcomes due to MRSA infection in the CLEAR Trial with detailed medication administration records to quantify unintended consequences of MRSA infection related to empiric non-MRSA antibiotic use and resultant CDI. Full-text medical records were reviewed with a standardized abstraction form to collect inpatient administered antibiotics and hospital-associated CDI. Results: In total,154 hospitalizations due to MRSA infection with a mean length-of-stay of 10.6 days were identified. During 25 hospitalizations (16.2%), patients received only anti-MRSA antibiotics. During the remaining 129 (83.8%) hospitalizations, patients received a mean of 1.6 distinct non-MRSA antibiotics totaling a mean of 6.6 days of therapy (DOT). Empiric non-MRSA therapy was given for 3.2 DOT before MRSA culture results became available and was continued for an additional 3.4 DOT afterward. Among all 849 non-MRSA DOT, the most common were due to piperacillin-tazobactam (293 DOT, 34.5%), levofloxacin (105 DOT, 12.4%), and metronidazole (93 DOT, 11.0%). Across all 154 hospitalizations, a mean of 5.5 non-MRSA DOT was calculated per MRSA hospitalization, with 6 CDI cases (3.9%) as a direct sequelae of empiric non-MRSA antibiotics provided for MRSA infection. Conclusions: Hospitalization for MRSA infection results in extensive non-MRSA empiric antibiotic therapy both before and after MRSA culture results are known. This antibiotic use is associated with a 3.9% risk of CDI that exceeds the national risk of acquiring CDI (3.2 per 1,000 admissions) by 12-fold during any hospital stay (Barrett ML, AHRQ 2018). The CLEAR Trial findings that postdischarge decolonization reduces MRSA infection and hospitalization by 30% suggests that decolonization may also reduce non-MRSA antibiotic use and CDI in this population. Funding: None Disclosures: None

Background: Addressing the high burden of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in nursing homes is a public health priority. High interfacility transmission may be attributed to inadequate infection prevention practices, shared living spaces, and frequent care needs. We assessed the contribution of roommates to the likelihood of MDRO carriage in nursing homes. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of the SHIELD OC (Shared Healthcare Intervention to Eliminate Life-threatening Dissemination of MDROs in Orange County, CA) Project, a CDC-funded regional decolonization intervention to reduce MDROs among 38 regional facilities (18 nursing homes, 3 long-term acute-care hospitals, and 17 hospitals). Decolonization in participating nursing homes involved routine chlorhexidine bathing plus nasal iodophor (Monday through Friday, twice daily every other week) from April 2017 through July 2019. MDRO point-prevalence assessments involving all residents at 16 nursing homes conducted at the end of the intervention period were used to determine whether having a roommate was associated with MDRO carriage. Nares, bilateral axilla/groin, and perirectal swabs were processed for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE), extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)–producing Enterobacteriaceae, and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). Generalized linear mixed models assessed the impact of maximum room occupancy on MDRO prevalence when clustering by room and hallway, and adjusting for the following factors: nursing home facility, age, gender, length-of-stay at time of swabbing, bedbound status, known MDRO history, and presence of urinary or gastrointestinal devices. CRE models were not run due to low counts. Results: During the intervention phase, 1,451 residents were sampled across 16 nursing homes. Overall MDRO prevalence was 49%. In multivariable models, we detected a significant increasing association of maximum room occupants and MDRO carriage for MRSA but not other MDROs. For MRSA, the adjusted odds ratios for quadruple-, triple-, and double-occupancy rooms were 3.5, 3.6, and 2.8, respectively, compared to residents in single rooms (P = .013). For VRE, these adjusted odds ratios were 0.3, 0.3, and 0.4, respectively, compared to residents in single rooms (P = NS). For ESBL, the adjusted odds ratios were 0.9, 1.1, and 1.5, respectively, compared to residents in single rooms (P = nonsignificant). Conclusions: Nursing home residents in shared rooms were more likely to harbor MRSA, suggesting MRSA transmission between roommates. Although decolonization was previously shown to reduce MDRO prevalence by 22% in SHIELD nursing homes, this strategy did not appear to prevent all MRSA transmission between roommates. Additional efforts involving high adherence hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and judicious use of contact precautions are likely needed to reduce transmission between roommates in nursing homes. Funding: None Disclosures: Gabrielle M. Gussin, Stryker (Sage Products): Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Clorox: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Medline: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Xttrium: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes.

Background: Greater than 10% of hospitalized MRSA carriers experience serious MRSA infection in the year following discharge. Prevention opportunities have primarily focused on hospital stays; however postdischarge interventions have the potential to reduce morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. The CLEAR trial found a 30% hazard reduction in postdischarge MRSA infections among patients who had inpatient MRSA cultures and were given postdischarge decolonization (5 days twice-a-month for 6 months) relative to hygiene education alone. We conducted a cost analysis of the CLEAR intervention to quantify the economic implications and understand the value of adopting this MRSA decolonization strategy. Methods: We constructed a decision model to estimate the one-year healthcare utilization and costs associated with postdischarge decolonization relative to hygiene education. Trial results for MRSA infection risk and downstream outcomes (including outpatient and emergency room visits, hospitalizations, related nursing home stays, and postdischarge antibiotics) were used to parameterize the model. Other medical care and prescription drug costs were based on Medicare Fee Schedules, Red Book and the literature. Patient out-of-pocket costs and time costs associated with subsequent infections were from a survey of trial participants experiencing infection (n=405). All costs were reported in 2019 US dollars. The analysis was conducted using healthcare system and societal perspectives. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on key parameters. Results: Among a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 hospitalized MRSA carriers, we estimated that a postdischarge decolonization intervention versus hygiene education would result in at least 36 fewer subsequent MRSA infections (130 vs 93 of 1,000, respectively) and >40 fewer MRSA-attributable healthcare events including 32 hospitalizations and 6 postdischarge nursing home visits over the course of a year. Assuming an intervention cost of $185 per individual, the program would result in an overall cost savings of $469,000 per 1,000 MRSA carriers undergoing decolonization. This translates to an overall savings of $13,200 per infection averted and $9,000 per infection averted from the healthcare system perspective. Even assuming a lower infection rate or a less effective intervention (15% reduction in infections vs 30% in the CLEAR trial), or a more expensive (up to $653 per patient) intervention, a decolonization program would still result in cost-savings for society, the healthcare system and patients. Conclusions: In addition to health benefits of preventing infections, postdischarge decolonization of MRSA carriers yields substantial savings to society and the healthcare system. Future recommendations for reducing postdischarge MRSA-related disease among MRSA carriers should consider routine decolonization at hospital discharge. Funding: This study was supported by a grant from the AHRQ Healthcare-Associated Infections Program (R01HS019388) and by the University of California Irvine Institute for Clinical and Translational Science, which was funded by a grant from the NIH Clinical and Translational Sciences Award program (UL1 TR000153). Disclosures: Dr. Huang reports conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker (Sage Products), Mölnlycke, 3M, Clorox, Xttrium Laboratories, and Medline. Ms. Singh reports conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker (Sage Products), 3M, Clorox, Xttrium Laboratories, and Medline. Dr. Rashid, conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker(Sage Products), Clorox, and Medline. Dr. McKinnell reports receiving grant support to his institution from Melinta Therapeutics, and fees for serving as a research investigator from Lightship, conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker (Sage Products), 3M, Clorox, Xttrium Laboratories and Medline, and serving as cofounder of Expert Stewardship. Dr. Miller reports receiving grant support from Gilead Sciences, Merck, Abbott, Cepheid, Genentech, Atox Bio, and Paratek Pharmaceuticals, grant support and fees for serving on an advisory board from Achaogen and grant support, consulting fees, and fees for serving on an advisory board from Tetraphase and conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker (Sage Products), 3M, Clorox, Xttrium Laboratories, and Medline.

Distinguished Oral Background: Shared Healthcare Intervention to Eliminate Life-threatening Dissemination of MDROs in Orange County, California (SHIELD OC) was a CDC-funded regional decolonization intervention from April 2017 through July 2019 involving 38 hospitals, nursing homes (NHs), and long-term acute-care hospitals (LTACHs) to reduce MDROs. Decolonization in NH and LTACHs consisted of universal antiseptic bathing with chlorhexidine (CHG) for routine bathing and showering plus nasal iodophor decolonization (Monday through Friday, twice daily every other week). Hospitals used universal CHG in ICUs and provided daily CHG and nasal iodophor to patients in contact precautions. We sought to evaluate whether decolonization reduced hospitalization and associated healthcare costs due to infections among residents of NHs participating in SHIELD compared to nonparticipating NHs. Methods: Medicaid insurer data covering NH residents in Orange County were used to calculate hospitalization rates due to a primary diagnosis of infection (counts per member quarter), hospital bed days/member-quarter, and expenditures/member quarter from the fourth quarter of 2015 to the second quarter of 2019. We used a time-series design and a segmented regression analysis to evaluate changes attributable to the SHIELD OC intervention among participating and nonparticipating NHs. Results: Across the SHIELD OC intervention period, intervention NHs experienced a 44% decrease in hospitalization rates, a 43% decrease in hospital bed days, and a 53% decrease in Medicaid expenditures when comparing the last quarter of the intervention to the baseline period (Fig. 1). These data translated to a significant downward slope, with a reduction of 4% per quarter in hospital admissions due to infection (P < .001), a reduction of 7% per quarter in hospitalization days due to infection (P < .001), and a reduction of 9% per quarter in Medicaid expenditures (P = .019) per NH resident. Conclusions: The universal CHG bathing and nasal decolonization intervention adopted by NHs in the SHIELD OC collaborative resulted in large, meaningful reductions in hospitalization events, hospitalization days, and healthcare expenditures among Medicaid-insured NH residents. The findings led CalOptima, the Medicaid provider in Orange County, California, to launch an NH incentive program that provides dedicated training and covers the cost of CHG and nasal iodophor for OC NHs that enroll. Funding: None Disclosures: Gabrielle M. Gussin, University of California, Irvine, Stryker (Sage Products): Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Clorox: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Medline: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Xttrium: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes.

Background: More than half of nursing home (NH) residents harbor a multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO), and MDRO contamination of the environment is common. Whether NH decolonization of residents reduces MDRO contamination remains unclear. The PROTECT trial was a cluster-randomized trial of decolonization versus routine care in 28 California NHs from April 2017 through December 2018. Decolonization involved chlorhexidine bathing plus nasal iodophor (Monday–Friday, every other week), and it reduced resident nares and skin MDRO colonization by 36%. Methods: We swabbed high-touch objects in resident rooms and common areas for MDROs before and after the 3-month decolonization phase-in (April–July 2017). Five high-touch objects (bedrail, call button and TV remote, doorknob, light switch, and bathroom handles) were swabbed in 3 resident rooms per NH based on care needs (Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD), ie, total care; ADRD, ambulatory care; and short stay). Five high-touch objects were also swabbed in the common area (nursing station, table, chair, railing, and drinking fountain). Swabs were processed for methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE), extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) producing Enterobacteriaceae, and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). We used generalized linear mixed models to assess the impact of decolonization on MDRO environmental contamination when clustering by NH and room and adjusting for room type and object because unclustered and unadjusted results are likely to be inaccurate. Results: A high proportion of rooms were contaminated with any MDRO in control NHs: 43 of 56 (77%) in the baseline period and 46 of 56 (82%) in the intervention period. In contrast, decolonization NHs had similar baseline contamination (45 of 56, 80%) but lower intervention MDRO contamination (29 of 48, 60%). When evaluating the intervention impact using multivariable models, decolonization was associated with significantly less room contamination for any MDRO (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.06–0.96; P = .04) and MRSA (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05–0.55; P = .004) but nonsignificant reductions in VRE contamination (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.23–3.13) and ESBL contamination (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.01–1.62). CRE was not modeled due to rare counts (2 rooms total). In addition, room type was important, with common areas associated with 5-fold, 9-fold, and 3-fold higher contamination with any MDRO, MRSA, and VRE, respectively, compared with short-stay rooms. Conclusions: The high burden of MDROs in NHs calls for universal prevention strategies that can protect all residents. Although decolonization was associated with an 84% reduction in odds of MRSA contamination of inanimate room objects, significant reductions in VRE or ESBL contamination were not seen, possibly due to the lower proportion of baseline contamination due to these organisms. Multimodal strategies are needed to address high levels of MDRO contamination in NHs.Funding: NoneDisclosures: Gabrielle Gussin: Stryker (Sage Products): Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Clorox: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Medline: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Xttrium: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes.

Abstract Background Patient movement between hospitals, nursing homes (NH), and long-term acute care facilities (LTACs) contributes to MDRO spread. SHIELD OC is a regional decolonization collaborative among adult facilities with high patient sharing designed to reduce countywide MDRO prevalence. We report pre- and post-intervention MDRO colonization prevalence. Methods Decolonization included chlorhexidine bath (CHG) (4% liquid or 2% cloth) and twice-daily nasal swab 10% povidone–iodine (PI). LTAC and NH used CHG for all baths and PI 5 days on admission and Monday–Friday every other week. Patients in contact precautions (CP) at hospitals had daily CHG and 5-days PI on admission. Point-prevalence screening for MRSA, VRE, ESBL, and CRE using nares, axilla/groin, and peri-rectal swabs was conducted pre-intervention (September 2016–March 2017) and post-intervention (August 2018–April 2019); 50 random LTAC and 50 CP hospitalized patients were sampled; for NH up to 50 were sampled at baseline and all residents post-intervention. Raw impact of the intervention was assessed by the average change in colonization prevalence, with each facility carrying equal weight. Generalized linear mixed models (GLM) stratified by facility type were used to assess the impact on MDRO colonization when clustering by facility. Results Across 35 facilities (16 hospitals, 16 NHs, 3 LTACs), the overall MDRO prevalence was reduced 22% in NHs (OR 0.58, P < 0.001), 34% LTACs (OR = 0.27, P < 0.001), and 11% CP patients (OR = 0.67, P < 0.001, Table 1). For MRSA, raw reductions were 31% NHs (OR = 0.58, P < 0.001), 39% LTACs (OR = 0.51, P = 0.01), and 3% CP patients (OR = 0.88, P = NS). For VRE, raw reductions were 40% NHs (OR = 0.62, P = 0.001), 55% LTACs (OR = 0.26, P < 0.001), and 15% CP patients (OR = 0.67, P = 0.004). For ESBLs, raw reductions were 24% NHs (OR = 0.65, P < 0.001), 34% LTACs (OR = 0.53, P = 0.01), and 26% CP patients (OR = 0.64, P < 0.001). For CRE, raw reductions were 24% NHs (OR = 0.70, P = NS), and 23% LTACs (OR = 0.75, P = NS). CRE increased by 26% in CP averaged across hospitals, although patient -level CRE declined 2.4% to 1.8% (OR = 0.74, P = NS). Conclusion MDRO carriage was common in highly inter-connected NHs, LTACs and hospitals. A regional collaborative of universal decolonization in long-term care and targeted decolonization of CP patients in hospitals led to sizeable reductions in MDRO carriage. Disclosures All Authors: No reported Disclosures.

BackgroundMultidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) spread between hospitals, nursing homes (NHs), and long-term acute care facilities (LTACs) via patient transfers. The Shared Healthcare Intervention to Eliminate Life-threatening Dissemination of MDROs in Orange County is a regional public health collaborative involving decolonization at 38 healthcare facilities selected based on their high degree of patient sharing. We report baseline MDRO prevalence in 21 NHs/LTACs.MethodsA random sample of 50 adults for 21 NHs/LTACs (18 NHs, 3 LTACs) were screened for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE), extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing organisms (ESBL), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) using nares, skin (axilla/groin), and peri-rectal swabs. Facility and resident characteristics associated with MDRO carriage were assessed using multivariable models clustering by person and facility.ResultsPrevalence of MDROs was 65% in NHs and 80% in LTACs. The most common MDROs in NHs were MRSA (42%) and ESBL (34%); in LTACs they were VRE (55%) and ESBL (38%). CRE prevalence was higher in facilities that manage ventilated LTAC patients and NH residents (8% vs

BackgroundHospitalized patients who are colonized with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are at high risk for infection after discharge.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of postdischarge hygiene education, as compared with education plus decolonization, in patients colonized with MRSA (carriers). Decolonization involved chlorhexidine mouthwash, baths or showers with chlorhexidine, and nasal mupirocin for 5 days twice per month for 6 months. Participants were followed for 1 year. The primary outcome was MRSA infection as defined according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria. Secondary outcomes included MRSA infection determined on the basis of clinical judgment, infection from any cause, and infection-related hospitalization. All analyses were performed with the use of proportional-hazards models in the per-protocol population (all participants who underwent randomization, met the inclusion criteria, and survived beyond the recruitment hospitalization) and as-treated population (participants stratified according to adherence).ResultsIn the per-protocol population, MRSA infection occurred in 98 of 1063 participants (9.2%) in the education group and in 67 of 1058 (6.3%) in the decolonization group; 84.8% of the MRSA infections led to hospitalization. Infection from any cause occurred in 23.7% of the participants in the education group and 19.6% of those in the decolonization group; 85.8% of the infections led to hospitalization. The hazard of MRSA infection was significantly lower in the decolonization group than in the education group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.96; P=0.03; number needed to treat to prevent one infection, 30; 95% CI, 18 to 230); this lower hazard led to a lower risk of hospitalization due to MRSA infection (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.99). The decolonization group had lower likelihoods of clinically judged infection from any cause (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.99) and infection-related hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.93); treatment effects for secondary outcomes should be interpreted with caution owing to a lack of prespecified adjustment for multiple comparisons. In as-treated analyses, participants in the decolonization group who adhered fully to the regimen had 44% fewer MRSA infections than the education group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.86) and had 40% fewer infections from any cause (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.78). Side effects (all mild) occurred in 4.2% of the participants.ConclusionsPostdischarge MRSA decolonization with chlorhexidine and mupirocin led to a 30% lower risk of MRSA infection than education alone. (Funded by the AHRQ Healthcare-Associated Infections Program and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01209234 .).

Background: Charcot neuroosteoarthropathy (CNO) is characterized with increased osteoclastic activity that can be curbed with antiresorptive agents. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) precludes bisphosphonates but anti–receptor activator of nuclear factor-B ligand (anti-RANKL) antibody, denosumab, can be contemplated in CKD. We investigated denosumab for active CNO of foot in CKD for CNO remission. Methods: During the study period, 446 persons of diabetes with unilateral, active CNO of foot and CKD were identified and 78 were finally enrolled. Patients received either 60 mg denosumab (single-dose, subcutaneous) along with standard of care (SoC) as total contact cast (TCC) (group A; n = 26) or SoC (group B; n = 52) only. Patients were followed every 4 weeks until CNO remission and subsequently every 8 weeks until 48 weeks following remission. Remission was defined as temperature difference <2 °C between 2 feet confirmed twice (4 weeks apart) with clinical resolution of signs of inflammation. The primary outcome studied was proportion of patients achieving remission within 48 weeks and the time to remission. Results: Median age was 56.5 (48.8-65) and 57 (48.5-61.2) years, P =.57; duration of diabetes 16 (10-25.3) and 14.9 (10-19) years, P =.151; and estimated glomerular filtration rate 44.8 (21.1-65.6) and 45.7 (32.9-55.7) mL/min/1.73 m2, P =.771, in group A and B, respectively. Median temperature difference at presentation between the affected and opposite foot was 3.4 °C (2.7-6.9) and 3.2 °C (2.2-4.0), P =.119, respectively. All patients achieved remission in group A (100%) compared with 42 (80.8%) in group B (P =.006) (hazard ratio 0.52, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87; P =.012). The median time to remission was similar in the 2 groups (15 [11-25] and 17.5 [14-31.5] weeks, P =.229, respectively). 25-Hydroxyvitamin D3 >14 ng/mL was significantly associated (OR 9.5, 95% CI 1.04-87.5, P =.045) with remission. Conclusion: Anti-RANKL antibody added to SoC (TCC) induces remission of active foot CNO in greater proportions of patients with diabetes and CKD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundThe east-to-west spread of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) represents an opportunity to explore strategies to limit spread in nonendemic areas. We evaluated CRE emergence and regional support for containment strategies.MethodsA 17-question cross-sectional survey was administered to infection prevention programs in Orange County, CA (31 hospitals serving 3 million residents), between January and September 2014. Questions addressed newly detected hospital- and community-onset CRE cultures (2008-2013), current CRE control strategies, and support for prevention strategies for a hypothetical regional intervention.ResultsAmong 31 hospitals, 21 (68%, representing 17 infection prevention programs) completed the survey. CRE was scarcely detected between 2009-2010; within 4 years, 90% of hospitals reported CRE, with 2.5-fold higher community-onset than hospital-onset CRE. Between 2011 and 2013, annual CRE incidence increased 4.7-fold (1.4-6.3 cases/10,000 admissions). Support for a regional CRE prevention bundle was unanimous. Although 22% bathed patients positive for CRE with chlorhexidine gluconate and 11% actively screened for CRE, 86% and 57%, respectively, would consider these strategies in a regional intervention.ConclusionsCRE epidemiology in Orange County parallels early progression previously seen in now-endemic areas, representing an opportunity to consider interventions to prevent endemic spread. Many facilities would consider proactive strategies, such as chlorhexidine bathing, in the setting of a regional collaborative.

Abstract Background MDROs can spread between hospitals, nursing homes (NH), and long-term acute care facilities (LTACs) via shared patients. SHIELD OC is a regional decolonization collaborative involving 38 of 104 countywide adult facilities identified by their high degree of direct and indirect patient sharing with one another. We report baseline MDRO prevalence in these facilities. Methods Adult patients in 38 facilities (17 hospitals, 18 NHs, 3 LTACs) underwent point-prevalence screening between September 2016–April 2017 for MRSA, VRE, ESBL, and CRE using nares, skin (axilla/groin), and peri-rectal swabs. In NHs and LTACs, residents were randomly selected until 50 sets of swabs were obtained. Swabbing in hospitals involved all patients in contact precautions. An additional set of swabs were also performed for all LTAC admissions from November 2016–February 2017. Results The overall prevalence of any MDRO among patients was 64% (44%–88%) in NHs, 80% (range 72%–86%) in LTACs, and 64% (54–84%) in hospitals (contact precaution patients) (Table 1). Only 25%, 64%, and 81% of patients were already known to harbor an MDRO in NHs, LTACs, and hospitals, respectively. Known MDRO patients also harbored another MDRO 49%, 63%, and 34% of the time for NHs, LTACs, and hospitals, respectively. In LTACs, MDRO point prevalence was 38% higher than the usual admission prevalence (65% higher for MRSA, 34% higher for VRE, 95% higher for ESBL, and 50% higher for CRE). Conclusion MDRO carriage in highly inter-connected NHs and LTACs was widespread, rivaling that found in hospitalized patients on contact precautions. MRSA, VRE, and ESBL carriage far outnumbered CRE carriage. A history of MDRO was insensitive for identifying MDRO carriers, and many patients carried multiple MDROs. The extensive MDRO burden and transmission in long-term care settings suggests that regional MDRO prevention efforts must include MDRO control in long-term care facilities. Disclosures R. D. Singh, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. A. McKinnell, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. G. Miller, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; K. Kleinman, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. Heim, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. D. Dutciuc, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; M. Estevez, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; G. Gussin, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L’Oreal: Consultant, Consulting fee; J. Chang, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; E. M. Peterson, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; B. Y. Lee, GSK: Consultant, Consulting fee; R. A. Weinstein, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; OpGen Company: Study support, Provided services at no charge; M. K. Hayden, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Sage is contributing product to healthcare facilities participating in a regional collaborative on which I am a co-investigator. Neither I nor my hospital receive product.; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Research support; CDC: Grant Investigator and Receipt of contributed product, Research grant; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; OpGen Company: Study support, Provided services at no charge for studies; S. K. Gohil, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Park, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Tam, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. Saavedra, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Yamaguchi, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; H. Custodio, Xttrium Laboratories: Study coordination, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Study coordination, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Study coordination, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Nguyen, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. Tjoa, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. He, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; M. H. Coady, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. Platt, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; receive research funds from Clorox, but Clorox has no role in the design; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. S. Huang, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product

Abstract Background The majority of healthcare-associated infections due to MDROs occur in the post-discharge setting. Understanding MDRO spread and containment in NHs can help identify infection prevention activities needed to care for vulnerable patients in a medical home setting. Methods We conducted a baseline point prevalence study of MDRO colonization in residents of 28 Southern California NHs participating in a decolonization trial. In Fall 2016, residents were randomly sampled to obtain a set of 50 nares and skin (axilla/groin) swabs from each NH. Nasal swabs were processed for MRSA and skin swabs were processed for MRSA, VRE, ESBL, and CRE. In addition, environmental swabs were collected from high touch objects in resident rooms (bedrail, call button/TV remote, door knobs, light switch, bathroom) and common areas (nursing station, table, chair, railing, and drinking fountain). Results A total of 2,797 body swabs were obtained from 1400 residents. Overall, 48.6% (N = 680) of residents harbored MDROs. MRSA was found in 37% of residents (29.5% nares, 24.4% skin), followed by ESBL in 16% (Table 1). Resident MDRO status was only known for 11% of MRSA (59/518), 18% ESBL (40/228), 4% VRE (4/99), and none of the CRE (0/13) carriers. Colonization did not differ between long stay (48.8%, 534/1094) vs. post-acute (47.7%, 146/306) residents (P = NS), but bedbound residents were more likely to be MDRO colonized (58.7%, 182/310) vs. ambulatory residents (45.7%, 497/1088, P

Nursing home residents are at risk for acquiring and transmitting MDROs. A serial point-prevalence study of 605 residents in 3 facilities using random sampling found MDRO colonization in 45% of residents: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA, 26%); extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL, 17%); vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE, 16%); carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE, 1%). MDRO colonization was associated with history of MDRO, care needs, incontinence, and catheters. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1485-1488.

Key Points: Question: Is implementation of a regional hospital and nursing home decolonization collaborative (coordinated intervention adopted by participating health care facilities) associated with a reduction in multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs), infection-related hospitalizations, costs, and deaths? Findings: In this quality improvement study of 35 health care facilities in Orange County, California, using quasi-experimental design, chlorhexidine bathing and nasal decolonization were associated with significantly lower MDRO prevalence and incident clinical cultures. Infection-related hospitalizations, associated costs, and deaths among nursing home residents also decreased. Meaning: In this study, a regional decolonization collaborative involving universal decolonization in long-term care facilities and targeted decolonization among hospital patients in contact precautions was associated with lower MDRO carriage, infections, hospitalizations, costs, and deaths. Importance: Infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, length of hospitalization, and health care costs. Regional interventions may be advantageous in mitigating MDROs and associated infections. Objective: To evaluate whether implementation of a decolonization collaborative is associated with reduced regional MDRO prevalence, incident clinical cultures, infection-related hospitalizations, costs, and deaths. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted from July 1, 2017, to July 31, 2019, across 35 health care facilities in Orange County, California. Exposures: Chlorhexidine bathing and nasal iodophor antisepsis for residents in long-term care and hospitalized patients in contact precautions (CP). Main Outcomes and Measures: Baseline and end of intervention MDRO point prevalence among participating facilities; incident MDRO (nonscreening) clinical cultures among participating and nonparticipating facilities; and infection-related hospitalizations and associated costs and deaths among residents in participating and nonparticipating nursing homes (NHs). Results: Thirty-five facilities (16 hospitals, 16 NHs, 3 long-term acute care hospitals [LTACHs]) adopted the intervention. Comparing decolonization with baseline periods among participating facilities, the mean (SD) MDRO prevalence decreased from 63.9% (12.2%) to 49.9% (11.3%) among NHs, from 80.0% (7.2%) to 53.3% (13.3%) among LTACHs (odds ratio [OR] for NHs and LTACHs, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40-0.57), and from 64.1% (8.5%) to 55.4% (13.8%) (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.93) among hospitalized patients in CP. When comparing decolonization with baseline among NHs, the mean (SD) monthly incident MDRO clinical cultures changed from 2.7 (1.9) to 1.7 (1.1) among participating NHs, from 1.7 (1.4) to 1.5 (1.1) among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 30.4%; 95% CI, 16.4%-42.1%), from 25.5 (18.6) to 25.0 (15.9) among participating hospitals, from 12.5 (10.1) to 14.3 (10.2) among nonparticipating hospitals (group × period interaction reduction, 12.9%; 95% CI, 3.3%-21.5%), and from 14.8 (8.6) to 8.2 (6.1) among LTACHs (all facilities participating; 22.5% reduction; 95% CI, 4.4%-37.1%). For NHs, the rate of infection-related hospitalizations per 1000 resident-days changed from 2.31 during baseline to 1.94 during intervention among participating NHs, and from 1.90 to 2.03 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.7%; 95% CI, 19.0%-34.5%). Associated hospitalization costs per 1000 resident-days changed from $64 651 to $55 149 among participating NHs and from $55 151 to $59 327 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.8%; 95% CI, 26.7%-26.9%). Associated hospitalization deaths per 1000 resident-days changed from 0.29 to 0.25 among participating NHs and from 0.23 to 0.24 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 23.7%; 95% CI, 4.5%-43.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: A regional collaborative involving universal decolonization in long-term care facilities and targeted decolonization among hospital patients in CP was associated with lower MDRO carriage, infections, hospitalizations, costs, and deaths. This quality improvement study evaluates whether implementation of a decolonization collaborative is associated with reduced regional multidrug-resistant organism prevalence, incident clinical cultures, infection-related hospitalizations, costs, and deaths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Environmental contamination is suspected to play an important role in Candida auris transmission. Understanding speed and risks of contamination after room disinfection could inform environmental cleaning recommendations. Methods We conducted a prospective multicenter study of environmental contamination associated with C. auris colonization at 6 ventilator-capable skilled nursing facilities and 1 acute care hospital in Illinois and California. Known C. auris carriers were sampled at 5 body sites followed by sampling of nearby room surfaces before disinfection and at 0, 4, 8, and 12 hours after disinfection. Samples were cultured for C. auris and bacterial multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Odds of surface contamination after disinfection were analyzed using multilevel generalized estimating equations. Results Among 41 known C. auris carriers, colonization was detected most frequently on palms/fingertips (76%) and nares (71%). C. auris contamination was detected on 32.2% (66/205) of room surfaces before disinfection and 20.5% (39/190) of room surfaces by 4 hours after disinfection. A higher number of C. auris –colonized body sites was associated with higher odds of environmental contamination at every time point following disinfection, adjusting for facility of residence. In the rooms of 38 (93%) C. auris carriers co-colonized with a bacterial MDRO, 2%–24% of surfaces were additionally contaminated with the same MDRO by 4 hours after disinfection. Conclusions C. auris can contaminate the healthcare environment rapidly after disinfection, highlighting the challenges associated with environmental disinfection. Future research should investigate long-acting disinfectants, antimicrobial surfaces, and more effective patient skin antisepsis to reduce the environmental reservoir of C. auris and bacterial MDROs in healthcare settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]