Investigation of a Prolonged and Large Outbreak of Healthcare-Associated Mucormycosis Cases in an Acute Care Hospital-Arkansas, June 2019-May 2021.

Background: Outbreaks of healthcare-associated mucormycosis (HCM), a life-threatening fungal infection, have been attributed to multiple sources, including contaminated healthcare linens. In 2020, staff at Hospital A in Arkansas alerted public health officials of a potential HCM outbreak. Methods: We collected data on patients at Hospital A who had invasive mucormycosis during January 2017-June 2021 and calculated annual incidence of HCM (defined as mucormycosis diagnosed within ≥7 days after hospital admission). We performed targeted environmental assessments, including linen sampling at the hospital, to identify potential sources of infection. Results: During the outbreak period (June 2019-June 2021), 16 patients had HCM; clinical features were similar between HCM patients and non-HCM patients. Hospital-wide HCM incidence (per 100 000 patient-days) increased from 0 in 2018 to 3 in 2019 and 6 in 2020. For the 16 HCM patients, the most common underlying medical conditions were hematologic malignancy (56%) and recent traumatic injury (38%); 38% of HCM patients died in-hospital. Healthcare-associated mucormycosis cases were not epidemiologically linked by common procedures, products, units, or rooms. At Hospital A and its contracted offsite laundry provider, suboptimal handling of laundered linens and inadequate environmental controls to prevent mucormycete contamination were observed. We detected Rhizopus on 9 (9%) of 98 linens sampled at the hospital, including on linens that had just arrived from the laundry facility. Conclusions: We describe the largest, single-center, HCM outbreak reported to date. Our findings underscore the importance of hospital-based monitoring for HCM and increased attention to the safe handling of laundered linens.

Descriptive evaluation of antibody responses to severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in plasma and gingival crevicular fluid in a nursing home cohort-Arkansas, June-August 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize and compare severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific immune responses in plasma and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) from nursing home residents during and after natural infection. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: Nursing home. PARTICIPANTS: SARS-CoV-2-infected nursing home residents. METHODS: A convenience sample of 14 SARS-CoV-2-infected nursing home residents, enrolled 4-13 days after real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction diagnosis, were followed for 42 days. After diagnosis, plasma SARS-CoV-2-specific pan-Immunoglobulin (Ig), IgG, IgA, IgM, and neutralizing antibodies were measured at 5 time points, and GCF SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and IgA were measured at 4 time points. RESULTS: All participants demonstrated immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among 12 phlebotomized participants, plasma was positive for pan-Ig and IgG in all 12 participants. Neutralizing antibodies were positive in 11 participants; IgM was positive in 10 participants, and IgA was positive in 9 participants. Among 14 participants with GCF specimens, GCF was positive for IgG in 13 participants and for IgA in 12 participants. Immunoglobulin responses in plasma and GCF had similar kinetics; median times to peak antibody response were similar across specimen types (4 weeks for IgG; 3 weeks for IgA). Participants with pan-Ig, IgG, and IgA detected in plasma and GCF IgG remained positive throughout this evaluation, 46-55 days after diagnosis. All participants were viral-culture negative by the first detection of antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing home residents had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in plasma and GCF after infection. Kinetics of antibodies detected in GCF mirrored those from plasma. Noninvasive GCF may be useful for detecting and monitoring immunologic responses in populations unable or unwilling to be phlebotomized.

Treatment of COVID-19 Patients with Two Units of Convalescent Plasma in a Resource-Constrained State.

IMPORTANCE: Many therapies are used to treat COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2, including convalescent plasma. The clinical utility of using 2 units of convalescent plasma for COVID-19 hospitalized patients is not fully understood. OBJECTIVE: Many therapies are used to treat COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2, including convalescent plasma. The clinical utility of using 2 units of convalescent plasma for COVID-19 hospitalized patients is not fully understood. Our study aims to determine the safety and efficacy of treating hospitalized COVID-19 patients with 2 units of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP). METHOD: This was a retrospective study of Arkansas patients treated with CCP using the (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency Investigational New Drug (eIND) mechanism from April 9, 2020, through August 9, 2020. It was a multicenter, statewide study in a low-resource setting, which are areas that lack funding for health care cost coverage on various levels including individual, family, or social. Adult patients (n = 165, volunteer sample) in Arkansas who were hospitalized with severe or life-threatening acute COVID-19 disease as defined by the FDA criteria were transfused with 2 units of CCP (250 mL/unit) using the FDA eIND mechanism. The primary outcome was 7- and 30-day mortality after the second unit of CCP. RESULTS: Unadjusted mortality was 12.1% at 7 days and 23.0% at 30 days. The unadjusted mortality was reduced to 7.7% if the first CCP unit was transfused on the date of diagnosis, 8.7% if transfused within 3 days of diagnosis, and 32.0% if transfused at or after 4 or more days of diagnosis. The risk of death was higher in patients that received low, negative, or missing titer CCP units in comparison to those that received higher titer units. CONCLUSION: The provision of 2 units of CCP was associated with a reduction in mortality in patients treated with high titer units within 3 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Given the results, CCP is a viable, low-cost therapy in resource-constrained states and countries.

A Comparison of Less Invasive Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Diagnostic Specimens in Nursing Home Residents-Arkansas, June-August 2020.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing remains essential for early identification and clinical management of cases. We compared the diagnostic performance of 3 specimen types for characterizing SARS-CoV-2 in infected nursing home residents. METHODS: A convenience sample of 17 residents were enrolled within 15 days of first positive SARS-CoV-2 result by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and prospectively followed for 42 days. Anterior nasal swabs (AN), oropharyngeal swabs (OP), and saliva specimens (SA) were collected on the day of enrollment, every 3 days for the first 21 days, and then weekly for 21 days. Specimens were tested for presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA using RT-PCR and replication-competent virus by viral culture. RESULTS: Comparing the 3 specimen types collected from each participant at each time point, the concordance of paired RT-PCR results ranged from 80% to 88%. After the first positive result, SA and OP were RT-PCR-positive for ≤48 days; AN were RT-PCR-positive for ≤33 days. AN had the highest percentage of RT-PCR-positive results (21/26 [81%]) when collected ≤10 days of participants' first positive result. Eleven specimens were positive by viral culture: 9 AN collected ≤19 days following first positive result and 2 OP collected ≤5 days following first positive result. CONCLUSIONS: AN, OP, and SA were effective methods for repeated testing in this population. More AN than OP were positive by viral culture. SA and OP remained RT-PCR-positive longer than AN, which could lead to unnecessary interventions if RT-PCR detection occurred after viral shedding has likely ceased.

Mass SARS-CoV-2 Testing in a Dormitory-Style Correctional Facility in Arkansas.

Objectives. To assess SARS-CoV-2 transmission within a correctional facility and recommend mitigation strategies.Methods. From April 29 to May 15, 2020, we established the point prevalence of COVID-19 among incarcerated persons and staff within a correctional facility in Arkansas. Participants provided respiratory specimens for SARS-CoV-2 testing and completed questionnaires on symptoms and factors associated with transmission.Results. Of 1647 incarcerated persons and 128 staff tested, 30.5% of incarcerated persons (range by housing unit = 0.0%-58.2%) and 2.3% of staff tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Among those who tested positive and responded to symptom questions (431 incarcerated persons, 3 staff), 81.2% and 33.3% were asymptomatic, respectively. Most incarcerated persons (58.0%) reported wearing cloth face coverings 8 hours or less per day, and 63.3% reported close contact with someone other than their bunkmate.Conclusions. If testing remained limited to symptomatic individuals, fewer cases would have been detected or detection would have been delayed, allowing transmission to continue. Rapid implementation of mass testing and strict enforcement of infection prevention and control measures may be needed to mitigate spread of SARS-CoV-2 in this setting.

Infectious Period of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in 17 Nursing Home Residents-Arkansas, June-August 2020.

BACKGROUND: To estimate the infectious period of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in older adults with underlying conditions, we assessed duration of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms, reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) positivity, and culture positivity among nursing home residents. METHODS: We enrolled residents within 15 days of their first positive SARS-CoV-2 test (diagnosis) at an Arkansas facility from July 7 to 15, 2020 and instead them for 42 days. Every 3 days for 21 days and then weekly, we assessed COVID-19 symptoms, collected specimens (oropharyngeal, anterior nares, and saliva), and reviewed medical charts. Blood for serology was collected on days 0, 6, 12, 21, and 42. Infectivity was defined by positive culture. Duration of culture positivity was compared with duration of COVID-19 symptoms and RT-PCR positivity. Data were summarized using measures of central tendency, frequencies, and proportions. RESULTS: We enrolled 17 of 39 (44%) eligible residents. Median participant age was 82 years (range, 58-97 years). All had ≥3 underlying conditions. Median duration of RT-PCR positivity was 22 days (interquartile range [IQR], 8-31 days) from diagnosis; median duration of symptoms was 42 days (IQR, 28-49 days). Of 9 (53%) participants with any culture-positive specimens, 1 (11%) severely immunocompromised participant remained culture-positive 19 days from diagnosis; 8 of 9 (89%) were culture-positive ≤8 days from diagnosis. Seroconversion occurred in 12 of 12 (100%) surviving participants with ≥1 blood specimen; all participants were culture-negative before seroconversion. CONCLUSIONS: Duration of infectivity was considerably shorter than duration of symptoms and RT-PCR positivity. Severe immunocompromise may prolong SARS-CoV-2 infectivity. Seroconversion indicated noninfectivity in this cohort.

Performance of the BinaxNOW coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Antigen Card test relative to the severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assay among symptomatic and asymptomatic healthcare employees.

The sensitivity of the BinaxNOW coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Ag Card test (BinaxNOW) was 51.6% among asymptomatic healthcare employees relative to real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). The odds of a positive BinaxNOW test decreased as cycle threshold value increased. BinaxNOW could facilitate rapid detection and isolation of asymptomatically infected persons in some settings while rRT-PCR results are pending.

Provision of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma in a Resource-Constrained State.

BACKGROUND: Arkansas is a rural state of 3 million people. It is ranked fifth for poverty nationally. The first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Arkansas occurred on 11 March 2020. Since then, approximately 8% of all Arkansans have tested positive. Given the resource limitations of Arkansas, COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) was explored as a potentially lifesaving, therapeutic option. Therefore, the Arkansas Initiative for Convalescent Plasma was developed to ensure that every Arkansan has access to this therapy. STUDY DESIGN AND METHOD: This brief report describes the statewide collaborative response from hospitals, blood collectors, and the Arkansas Department of Health (ADH) to ensure that CCP was available in a resource-limited state. RESULTS: Early contact tracing by ADH identified individuals who had come into contact with "patient zero" in early March. Within the first week, 32 patients tested positive for COVID-19. The first set of CCP collections occurred on 9 April 2020. Donors had to be triaged carefully in the initial period, as many had recently resolved their symptoms. From our first collections, with appropriate resource and inventory management, we collected sufficient CCP to provide the requested number of units for every patient treated with CCP in Arkansas. CONCLUSIONS: The Arkansas Initiative, a statewide effort to ensure CCP for every patient in a resource-limited state, required careful coordination among key players. Collaboration and resource management was crucial to meet the demand of CCP products and potentially save lives.

Facility-Wide Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in Nursing Homes - Seven U.S. Jurisdictions, March-June 2020.

Undetected infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contributes to transmission in nursing homes, settings where large outbreaks with high resident mortality have occurred (1,2). Facility-wide testing of residents and health care personnel (HCP) can identify asymptomatic and presymptomatic infections and facilitate infection prevention and control interventions (3-5). Seven state or local health departments conducted initial facility-wide testing of residents and staff members in 288 nursing homes during March 24-June 14, 2020. Two of the seven health departments conducted testing in 195 nursing homes as part of facility-wide testing all nursing homes in their state, which were in low-incidence areas (i.e., the median preceding 14-day cumulative incidence in the surrounding county for each jurisdiction was 19 and 38 cases per 100,000 persons); 125 of the 195 nursing homes had not reported any COVID-19 cases before the testing. Ninety-five of 22,977 (0.4%) persons tested in 29 (23%) of these 125 facilities had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. The other five health departments targeted facility-wide testing to 93 nursing homes, where 13,443 persons were tested, and 1,619 (12%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. In regression analyses among 88 of these nursing homes with a documented case before facility-wide testing occurred, each additional day between identification of the first case and completion of facility-wide testing was associated with identification of 1.3 additional cases. Among 62 facilities that could differentiate results by resident and HCP status, an estimated 1.3 HCP cases were identified for every three resident cases. Performing facility-wide testing immediately after identification of a case commonly identifies additional unrecognized cases and, therefore, might maximize the benefits of infection prevention and control interventions. In contrast, facility-wide testing in low-incidence areas without a case has a lower proportion of test positivity; strategies are needed to further optimize testing in these settings.

COVID-19 in Correctional and Detention Facilities - United States, February-April 2020.

An estimated 2.1 million U.S. adults are housed within approximately 5,000 correctional and detention facilities† on any given day (1). Many facilities face significant challenges in controlling the spread of highly infectious pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Such challenges include crowded dormitories, shared lavatories, limited medical and isolation resources, daily entry and exit of staff members and visitors, continual introduction of newly incarcerated or detained persons, and transport of incarcerated or detained persons in multiperson vehicles for court-related, medical, or security reasons (2,3). During April 22-28, 2020, aggregate data on COVID-19 cases were reported to CDC by 37 of 54 state and territorial health department jurisdictions. Thirty-two (86%) jurisdictions reported at least one laboratory-confirmed case from a total of 420 correctional and detention facilities. Among these facilities, COVID-19 was diagnosed in 4,893 incarcerated or detained persons and 2,778 facility staff members, resulting in 88 deaths in incarcerated or detained persons and 15 deaths among staff members. Prompt identification of COVID-19 cases and consistent application of prevention measures, such as symptom screening and quarantine, are critical to protecting incarcerated and detained persons and staff members.