Implementation Of Infection Control Precautions Research Articles

Nosocomial infection of C. auris in COVID-19 Intensive Care Unit in Türkiye and Phylogenetic Analysis of Isolates.

The difficulties in the identification of C. auris and the delays in the implementation of infection control precautions contribute to outbreaks. This study analyzed 10 patients with COVID-19 and C. auris candidemia, their characteristic and clinical features and phylogenetic features, and the antifungal susceptibilities of the isolates. C. auris were detected in the COVID-19 ICU of a university hospital between January and August 2021. Identification to species level was performed using MALDI-TOF MS. Antifungal susceptibilities were determined by the Sensititre YeastOne YO10 panel. The isolates were whole genome sequenced to assess genetic relatedness and a phylogenetic tree was drawn including various C. auris clades. The mean growth time in blood cultures was 38.8h. C. auris candidemia developed on the average 27th day of ICU admission. All were susceptible to anidulafungin and micafungin, while they were resistant to fluconazole and amphotericin B. Only three isolates were found to be resistant to caspofungin. All patients died. With the WGS method, all isolates were found in a close resemblance to each other in terms of total nucleotide similarity (with a minimum of 96% pairwise alignment). Our isolates showed the closest similarity to South Asian clade (Clade I). This study is the first to evaluate the phylogenetic characteristics of C. auris using WGS and to determine antifungal susceptibilities in Türkiye on COVID-19 patients. The mortality rate was very high in patients who have both COVID-19 and C. auris candidemia.

Repeated Prevalence Surveys and Admission Screening for Candida auris at One Long-Term Acute-Care Hospital, Chicago, 2016–2019

Background: Since the initial identification of Candida auris in 2016 in Chicago, ongoing spread has been documented in the Chicago area, primarily among older adults with complex medical issues admitted to high-acuity long-term care facilities, including long-term acute-care hospitals (LTACHs). As of October 2019, 790 cases have been reported in Illinois. Knowing C. auris colonization status on admission is important for prompt implementation of infection control precautions. We describe periodic facility point-prevalence surveys (PPSs) and admission screening at LTACH A. Methods: Beginning September 2016, we conducted repeated PPSs for C. auris colonization at LTACH A. After a baseline PPS, we initiated admission screening in May 2019 for patients without prior evidence of C. auris colonization or infection. C. auris screening specimens consisted of composite bilateral axillary/inguinal swabs tested at public health laboratories. We compared a limited set of patient characteristics based on admission screening results. Results: From September 2016 through October 2019, 277 unique patients were screened at LTACH A during 10 PPSs. Overall, 36 patients (13%) were identified to be colonized. The median facility C. auris prevalence increased from 2.8% in 2016 to 37% in 2019 (Fig. 1). During May–September 2019, among 174 unique patients admitted, 151 (87%) were screened for C. auris colonization on admission, of whom 18 (12%) were found to be colonized. Overall, 14 patients were known to have C. auris colonization on admission and were not rescreened, and 9 patients were discharged before screening specimens could be collected. A significantly higher proportion of patients testing positive for C. auris on admission had a central venous catheter or a peripherally inserted central catheter or were already on contact precautions (Table 1). The PPS conducted on October 1, 2019, revealed 5 new C. auris colonized patients who had screened negative on admission. Conclusions: Repeated PPSs at LTACH A indicated control of C. auris transmission in 2016–2017, followed by increasing prevalence beginning in May 2018, likely from patients admitted with unrecognized C. auris colonization and subsequent facility spread. Admission screening allowed for early detection of C. auris colonization. However, identification during subsequent PPS of additional colonized patients indicates that facility transmission is ongoing. Both admission screening and periodic PPSs are needed for timely detection of colonized patients. Given the high C. auris prevalence in LTACHs and challenges in identifying readily apparent differences between C. auris positive and negative patients on admission, we recommend that all patients being admitted to an LTACH in endemic areas should be screened for C. auris.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

The Decrease in Healthcare-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Infections and Savings From Glycopeptide Use

We evaluated changes in the rate of healthcare-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections and healthcare-associated S. aureus infections after implementation of infection control precautions and the effect of this on glycopeptide use and expenditures for glycopeptides in a private medical center in Turkey in the years 2000-2005. A striking decrease was obtained in the number of MRSA infections, and the expenditure for glycopeptide use also decreased.

Nursing Guide for Effective Implementation of Infection Control Precautions

ISSUE: It is imperative to provide nursing with an easy guide for proper implementation of infection control precautions in order to avoid delays and unnecessary exposures. PROJECT: To improve compliance with our medical center precautions program, a new sign was developed that allows the floor nurse to implement precautions accurately. The sign includes the three current categories of Transmission Based Precautions: airborne, droplet and contact. Once the physician indicates the suspected or confirmed disease requiring precautions in the admission order sheet, the nurse locates an instruction packet containing the new sign. Our hospital also has a system for notification to nursing on readmissions of patients with certain MRO's which require precautions. Download : Download full-size image The sign is color coded by type of precautions and includes a chart on the back that provides the necessary information categorized by disease to select the appropriate precautions. The nurse finds the disease on the back of the sign and marks the appropriate option in the front of the sign. The sign is taped to the door of the patient's room and small version of the sign is taped to the patient's chart to aid communication between departments. The guide on the back of the sign provides additional information describing room placement, required personal protective equipment, indicating whether the door is open or closed, patient transport and discharge management. RESULTS: This new 8 × 11 sign was developed as a reference guide to provide information and education for the accurate implementation of Transmission Based Precautions avoiding delays and confusion. LESSONS LEARNED: The use of a reference guide on the back of the precautions sign provides information for health care workers to apply precautions in a timely manner, promotes a better Infection Control program compliance as well as saving time for the Infection Control staff.

Cluster of Cases of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Among Toronto Healthcare Workers After Implementation of Infection Control Precautions: A Case Series

To review the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) infection control practices, the types of exposure to patients with SARS, and the activities associated with treatment of such patients among healthcare workers (HCWs) who developed SARS in Toronto, Canada, after SARS-specific infection control precautions had been implemented. A retrospective review of work logs and patient assignments, detailed review of medical records of patients with SARS, and comprehensive telephone-based interviews of HCWs who met the case definition for SARS after implementation of infection control precautions. Seventeen HCWs from 6 hospitals developed disease that met the case definition for SARS after implementation of infection control precautions. These HCWs had a mean age (+/-SD) of 39+/-2.3 years. Two HCWs were not interviewed because of illness. Of the remaining 15, only 9 (60%) reported that they had received formal infection control training. Thirteen HCWs (87%) were unsure of proper order in which personal protective equipment should be donned and doffed. Six HCWs (40%) reused items (eg, stethoscopes, goggles, and cleaning equipment) elsewhere on the ward after initial use in a room in which a patient with SARS was staying. Use of masks, gowns, gloves, and eyewear was inconsistent among HCWs. Eight (54%) reported that they were aware of a breach in infection control precautions. HCWs reported fatigue due to an increased number and length of shifts; participants worked a median of 10 shifts during the 10 days before onset of symptoms. Seven HCWs were involved in the intubation of a patient with SARS. One HCW died, and the remaining 16 recovered. Multiple factors were likely responsible for SARS in these HCWs, including the performance of high-risk patient care procedures, inconsistent use of personal protective equipment, fatigue, and lack of adequate infection control training.

Evaluation of the IDI-MRSA Assay for Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus from Nasal and Rectal Specimens Pooled in a Selective Broth

Rapid detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) by PCR can be performed directly from nasal specimens with the IDI-MRSA assay. To improve the efficiency of screening, we evaluated the performance of the IDI-MRSA assay for the detection of MRSA from pooled and unpooled specimens cultured in a selective broth. Of the 287 specimens evaluated, 71 were culture and PCR positive, 203 were culture and PCR negative, 3 were culture positive and PCR negative, 8 were culture negative and PCR positive, and 2 remained inhibited. A methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus isolate was recovered from five of the eight specimens with false-positive PCR results. Compared to the results of culture, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative [corrected] predictive values of the IDI-MRSA assay for detection of MRSA from broth were 96%, 96%, 90%, and 98%, respectively. Following implementation of the IDI-MRSA assay, PCR-positive broths were subcultured for evaluation of assay performance. Of the 298 IDI-MRSA assay-positive broths, the results for 103 could not be confirmed by culture. A methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) isolate was recovered from 77 of these 103 broths. Repeat testing by the IDI-MRSA assay directly with the MSSA isolates confirmed the original positive PCR result. The positive predictive value of the IDI-MRSA assay fell from 90% during the evaluation phase to 65% postimplementation. The IDI-MRSA assay performed well for the detection of MRSA from a selective broth compared to the performance of the detection of MRSA from culture. However, because of the burden associated with implementation of infection control precautions, cultures remain essential in confirming positive IDI-MRSA results.

Infection Control in the Context of Hepatitis C Disclosure: Implications for Education of Healthcare Professionals

Previous investigation has shown that the health sector is a main source of discrimination against people with hepatitis C. This paper examines the perceptions and experiences of people with hepatitis C of their interactions with healthcare workers, particularly examining the implementation of infection control precautions. We contend that rather than applying infection control precautions universally, health care workers make judgements about individual patients and the likelihood that they are infected with hepatitis C. Thus, infection control practices can be used as a tool to discriminate against people with hepatitis C. Social identity theory is used to illustrate these insights and to propose recommendations for education of health care workers. Semi-structured interviews with 19 people who had hepatitis C were conducted. The analysis examines issues of diagnosis, discrimination and disclosure in relation to healthcare workers' use of infection control procedures during clinical interactions. Participants described non-compliance with infection control guidelines by healthcare workers in a range of settings. In some instances, participants expressed disapproval of non-compliance, at other times participants felt vulnerable and discriminated against. Participants felt obliged to disclose their infections, but some decided against future disclosure because of negative reactions from healthcare workers. Infection control procedures were used as a tool to discriminate against some participants. Non-compliance with infection control guidelines persists among healthcare workers and can be identified by patients. A minority of workers use infection control as a discriminatory tool against those with hepatitis C. Further intervention is required to ensure infection control guidelines are enacted in the manner intended.