Patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) aerosolize severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) via respiratory efforts, expose, and possibly infect healthcare personnel (HCP). To prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 HCP have been required to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) during patient care. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, face shields were used as an approach to control HCP exposure to SARS-CoV-2, including eye protection.

An MS2 bacteriophage was used as a surrogate for SARS-CoV-2 and was aerosolized using a coughing machine. A simulated HCP wearing a disposable plastic face shield was placed 0.41 m (16 inches) away from the coughing machine. The aerosolized virus was sampled using SKC biosamplers on the inside (near the mouth of the simulated HCP) and the outside of the face shield. The aerosolized virus collected by the SKC Biosampler was analyzed using a viability assay. Optical particle counters (OPCs) were placed next to the biosamplers to measure the particle concentration.

There was a statistically significant reduction (P < .0006) in viable virus concentration on the inside of the face shield compared to the outside of the face shield. The particle concentration was significantly lower on the inside of the face shield compared to the outside of the face shield for 12 of the 16 particle sizes measured (P < .05).

Reductions in virus and particle concentrations were observed on the inside of the face shield; however, viable virus was measured on the inside of the face shield, in the breathing zone of the HCP. Therefore, other exposure control methods need to be used to prevent transmission from virus aerosol.

We sought to evaluate whether implementing mandatory indications for outpatient electronic antibiotic orders or using encounter International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD10) codes more accurately reflected clinicians’ charted diagnosis in encounter notes. Secondarily, we examined the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions.

Cross-sectional study.

Mandatory indications were added to all outpatient electronic antibiotic orders on May 18, 2022. A randomly selected convenience sample of 1300 outpatient encounters with antibiotics from walk-in clinics was reviewed. Adjusted logistic regression was used to compare the congruence between encounter ICD10 code and charted diagnosis for encounters from July 15 to September 15, 2021 (pre-implementation period) to the congruence between encounter ICD10 code, charted diagnosis, and mandatory indication for encounters from July 15 to September 15, 2022 (post-implementation period). Antibiotic appropriateness based on charted diagnosis was also evaluated.

Among 1300 outpatient encounters, congruence between charted diagnosis and ICD10 code significantly increased in the post-implementation period (87.7% (565/644)) versus pre-implementation (83.3% (540/648), adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.52; 95% CI 1.03–2.25). Congruence between charted diagnosis and mandatory indication during post-implementation was 95.2% (613/644) and >5 times more likely to be congruent than charted diagnosis and ICD10 code during pre-implementation (aOR 5.45; 95% CI 3.26–9.11). Antibiotic prescribing based on charted diagnosis was twice as likely to be appropriate in the post-implementation period (aOR1.99; 95% CI 1.32–2.98).

Mandatory indications within antibiotic orders show better congruence with charted diagnosis than ICD10 codes and may increase antibiotic appropriateness and congruence between ICD10 code and charted diagnosis.

To compare clinical outcomes over time of inpatients with healthcare-associated coronavirus disease 2019 (HA-COVID-19) versus community-acquired COVID-19 (CA-COVID-19).

We conducted a multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of inpatients with COVID-19.

The study was conducted across 16 acute-care hospitals in Switzerland.

We compared HA-COVID-19 cases, defined as patients with a positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test > 5 days after hospital admission, with hospitalized CA-COVID-19 cases, defined as those who tested positive within 5 days of admission. The composite primary outcome was patient transfer to an intensive care unit (ICU) or an intermediate care unit (IMCU) and/or all-cause in-hospital mortality. We used cause-specific Cox regression and Fine-Gray regression to model the time to the composite clinical outcome, adjusting for confounders and accounting for the competing event of discharge from hospital. We compared our results to those from a conventional approach using an adjusted logistic regression model where time-varying effects and competitive risk were ignored.

Between February 19, 2020, and December 31, 2020, we included 1,337 HA-COVID-19 cases and 9,068 CA-COVID-19 cases. HA-COVID-19 patients were significantly older: median, 80 (interquartile range [IQR], 71–87) versus median 70 (IQR, 57–80) (P < .001). A greater proportion of HA-COVID-19 patients had a Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 5 (79% vs 55%; P < .001) than did CA-COVID-19 patients. In time-varying analyses, between day 0 and 8, HA-COVID-19 cases had a decreased risk of death or ICU or IMCU transfer compared to CA-COVID-19 cases (cause-specific hazard ratio [csHR], 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33–0.56). In contrast, from day 8 to 30, HA-COVID-19 cases had an increased risk of death or ICU or IMCU transfer (csHR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.20–1.85), with no significant effect on the rate of discharge (csHR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.61–1.14). In the conventional logistic regression model, HA-COVID-19 was protective against transfer to an ICU or IMCU and/or all-cause in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.79, 95% CI, 0.67–0.93).

The risk of adverse clinical outcomes for HA-COVID-19 cases increased substantially over time in hospital and exceeded that for CA-COVID-19. Using approaches that do not account for time-varying effects or competing events may not fully capture the true risk of HA-COVID-19 compared to CA-COVID-19.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention encourages nurses to evaluate penicillin allergies as part of hospital-based antibiotic stewardship programs. We evaluated the feasibility of an implementation strategy to improve nurses’ comprehensive documentation of penicillin allergies. We defined feasibility as the uptake and acceptability of documentation procedures.

Six-month pre-post feasibility implementation study.

Outpatient surgical areas of an academic medical center located in the U.S.

The implementation strategy was guided by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation Model for Behavior Change and included, building an interdisciplinary coalition to iteratively evaluate the implementation effort, educational meetings with surgical prescribers and perioperative nurses, the development and distribution of educational pocket cards, and structured communication messages in the electronic medical record.

A total of 426 patients with 487 penicillin allergy records (216 records pre-implementation period, 271 records post-implementation period) were analyzed. Penicillin allergy documentation contained the following information in the pre- versus post-implementation period: symptoms of the reaction (87% vs 87%), timing/years since reaction (8% vs 26%), onset of reaction in relation to taking penicillin (0% vs 21%), how symptoms resolved (0% vs 21%), and penicillin re-exposure (3% vs 21%). Focus groups revealed nurses perceived documentation procedures as highly acceptable. Major drivers of acceptability included the perceived effectiveness of a detailed allergy history and self-efficacy in conducting a detailed allergy history.

Nurses perceived the comprehensive documentation of penicillin allergy history intervention as acceptable, and uptake improved following a theory-informed implementation strategy. We offer implementation strategy components to facilitate nurses’ engagement in penicillin allergy evaluation.

Tuberculosis (TB) infection prevention and control (IPC) in healthcare facilities is key to reducing transmission risk. A framework for systematically improving TB IPC through training and mentorship was implemented in 9 healthcare facilities in China from 2017 to 2019.

Facilities conducted standardized TB IPC assessments at baseline and quarterly thereafter for 18 months. Facility-based performance was assessed using quantifiable indicators for IPC core components and administrative, environmental, and respiratory protection controls, and as a composite of all control types We calculated the percentage changes in scores over time and differences by IPC control type and facility characteristics.

Scores for IPC core components increased by 72% during follow-up when averaged across facilities. The percentage changes for administrative, environmental, and respiratory protection controls were 39%, 46%, and 30%, respectively. Composite scores were 45% higher after the intervention. Overall, scores increased most during the first 6 months. There was no association between IPC implementation and provincial economic development or volume of TB services.

TB IPC policies and practices showed most improvement early during implementation and did not differ consistently by facility characteristics. The training component of the project helped increase the capacity of healthcare professionals to manage TB transmission risks. Lessons learned here will inform national TB IPC guidance.

To characterize residential social vulnerability among healthcare personnel (HCP) and evaluate its association with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

Case–control study.

This study analyzed data collected in May–December 2020 through sentinel and population-based surveillance in healthcare facilities in Colorado, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, and Oregon.

Data from 2,168 HCP (1,571 cases and 597 controls from the same facilities) were analyzed.

HCP residential addresses were linked to the social vulnerability index (SVI) at the census tract level, which represents a ranking of community vulnerability to emergencies based on 15 US Census variables. The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection, confirmed by positive antigen or real-time reverse-transcriptase– polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test on nasopharyngeal swab. Significant differences by SVI in participant characteristics were assessed using the Fisher exact test. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between case status and SVI, controlling for HCP role and patient care activities, were estimated using logistic regression.

Significantly higher proportions of certified nursing assistants (48.0%) and medical assistants (44.1%) resided in high SVI census tracts, compared to registered nurses (15.9%) and physicians (11.6%). HCP cases were more likely than controls to live in high SVI census tracts (aOR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.37–2.26).

These findings suggest that residing in more socially vulnerable census tracts may be associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection risk among HCP and that residential vulnerability differs by HCP role. Efforts to safeguard the US healthcare workforce and advance health equity should address the social determinants that drive racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic health disparities.

To identify and report the pathogens and sources of contamination associated with bronchoscopy-related outbreaks and pseudo-outbreaks.

Systematic review.

Inpatient and outpatient outbreaks and pseudo-outbreaks after bronchoscopy.

PubMed/Medline databases were searched according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, using the search terms “bronchoscopy,” “outbreak,” and “pseudo-outbreak” from inception until December 31, 2022. From eligible publications, data were extracted regarding the type of event, pathogen involved, and source of contamination. Pearson correlation was used to identify correlations between variables.

In total, 74 studies describing 23 outbreaks and 52 pseudo-outbreaks were included in this review. The major pathogens identified in these studies were Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM), Klebsiella pneumoniae, Serratia marcescens, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Legionella pneumophila, and fungi. The primary sources of contamination were the use of contaminated water or contaminated topical anesthetics, dysfunction and contamination of bronchoscopes or automatic endoscope reprocessors, and inadequate disinfection of the bronchoscopes following procedures. Correlations were identified between primary bronchoscope defects and the identification of P. aeruginosa (r = 0.351; P = .002) and K. pneumoniae (r = 0.346; P = .002), and between the presence of a contaminated water source and NTM (r = 0.331; P = .004) or L. pneumophila (r = 0.280; P = .015).

Continued vigilance in bronchoscopy disinfection practices remains essential because outbreaks and pseudo-outbreaks continue to pose a significant risk to patient care, emphasizing the importance of stringent disinfection and quality control measures.

The US National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria established a goal to decrease unnecessary outpatient antibiotic use by 50%. However, data to inform this goal have been limited to medical settings and have not included dental prescribing. Thus, we sought to identify the proportion of antibiotics prescribed inappropriately by dentists to inform outpatient stewardship efforts.

Cross-sectional analysis of 2019 Veterans’ Affairs (VA) national electronic health record data. Antibiotics prescribed by dentists were evaluated for appropriateness based on 2 definitions: one derived from current guidelines (consensus-based recommendations) and the other based on relevant clinical literature (nonconsensus). A clustered binomial logistic regression model determined factors associated with discordant prescribing.

In total, 92,224 antibiotic prescriptions (63% amoxicillin; mean supply, 8.0 days) were associated with 88,539 dental visits. Prophylaxis for complications in medically compromised patients was associated with the most (30.9%) antibiotic prescriptions, followed by prevention of postsurgical complications (20.1%) and infective endocarditis (18.0%). At the visit level, 15,476 (17.5%) met the consensus-based definition for appropriate antibiotic usage and 56,946 (64.3%) met the nonconsensus definition.

More than half of antibiotics prescribed by dentists do not have guidelines supporting their use. Regardless of definition applied, antibiotics prescribed by dentists were commonly unnecessary. Improving prescribing by dentists is critical to reach the national goal to decrease unnecessary antibiotic use.

COVID-19 changed the epidemiology of community-acquired respiratory viruses. We explored patterns of respiratory viral testing to understand which tests are most clinically useful in the postpandemic era.

We conducted a retrospective observational study of discharge data from PINC-AI (formerly Premier), a large administrative database. Use of multiplex nucleic acid amplification respiratory panels in acute care, including small (2–5 targets), medium (6–11), and large panels (>11), were compared between the early pandemic (03/2020–10/2020), late pandemic (11/2020–4/2021), and prepandemic respiratory season (11/2019 - 02/2020) using ANOVA.

A median of 160.5 facilities contributed testing data per quarter (IQR 155.5–169.5). Prepandemic, facilities averaged 103 respiratory panels monthly (sd 138), including 79 large (sd 126), 7 medium (sd 31), and 16 small panels (sd 73). Relative to prepandemic, utilization decreased during the early pandemic (62 panels monthly/facility; sd 112) but returned to the prepandemic baseline by the late pandemic (107 panels monthly/facility; sd 211). Relative to prepandemic, late pandemic testing involved more small panel use (58 monthly/facility, sd 156) and less large panel use (47 monthly/facility, sd 116). Comparisons among periods demonstrated significant differences in overall testing (P < 0.0001), large panel use (P < 0.0001), and small panel use (P < 0.0001).

Postpandemic, clinical use of respiratory panel testing shifted from predominantly large panels to predominantly small panels. Factors driving this change may include resource availability, costs, and the clinical utility of targeting important pathogenic viruses instead of testing “for everything.”

The oral cavity contains numerous microorganisms, including antimicrobial-resistant bacteria. These microorganisms can be transmitted via respiratory particles from patients to healthcare providers and vice versa during dental care. We evaluated the spread of Staphylococcus aureus during standardized dental procedures using different scaling devices and rinsing solutions.

During systematic therapy for dental biofilm removal (guided biofilm therapy), using an airflow or ultrasound device to a model simulation head. Staphylococcus aureus suspension was injected into the mouth of the model to mimic saliva. Different suction devices (conventional saliva ejector or a prototype) and rising solutions (water or chlorhexidine) were used. To assess contamination with S. aureus, an air-sampling device was placed near the oral cavity and samples of surface areas were collected.

S. aureus was only detected by air sampling when the conventional saliva ejector with airflow was used. No growth was observed during treatments with the ultrasonic piezo instrument or the prototype suction device. Notably, a rinsing solution of chlorhexidine digluconate decreased the bacterial load compared to water. Surface contamination was rarely detected (1 of 120 samples).

Although our findings indicate potential airborne bacterial transmission during routine prophylactic procedures, specific treatment options during biofilm removal appear to reduce air contamination. These options include ultrasonic piezo devices or the prototype suction device. The use of chlorhexidine reduced the CFU counts of S. aureus detected by air sampling. Surface contamination during dental procedures was a rare occurrence.

Female patients using indwelling urinary catheters (IUCs) are disproportionately at risk for developing catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) compared to males. Female external urine wicking devices (FEUWDs) have emerged as potential alternatives to IUCs for incontinence management.

To assess the clinical risks and benefits of FEUWDs as alternatives to IUCs.

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL Complete, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to July 10, 2023. Included studies used FEUWDs as an intervention and reported measures of urinary tract infections and secondary outcomes related to incontinence management.

Of 2,580 returned records, 50 were systematically reviewed. Meta-analyses assessed rates of indwelling CAUTIs and IUC utilization. Following FEUWD implementation, IUC utilization rates decreased 14% (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = [0.76, 0.97]) and indwelling CAUTI rates nonsignificantly decreased up to 32% (IRR = 0.68, 95% CI = [0.39, 1.17]). Limited only to studies that described protocols for implementation, the incidence rate of indwelling CAUTIs decreased significantly up to 54% (IRR = 0.46, 95% CI = [0.32, 0.66]). Secondary outcomes were reported less routinely.

Overall, FEUWDs nonsignificantly reduced indwelling CAUTI rates, though reductions were significant among studies describing FEUWD implementation protocols. We recommend developing standard definitions for consistent reporting of non-indwelling CAUTI complications such as FEUWD-associated UTIs, skin injuries, and mobility-related complications.