Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection prevention practices that exceed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance: Balancing extra caution against impediments to care.

In a survey of infection prevention programs, leaders reported frequent clinical and infection prevention practice modifications to avoid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) exposure that exceeded national guidance. Future pandemic responses should emphasize balanced approaches to precautions, prioritize educational campaigns to manage safety concerns, and generate an evidence-base that can guide appropriate infection prevention practices.

Health Care-Associated Infections Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19, March 2020-March 2022.

Importance: The reported incidence of many health care-associated infections (HAIs) increased during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, it is unclear whether this is due to increased patient risk or to increased pressure on the health care system. Objective: To assess HAI occurrence among patients admitted to hospitals with and without COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional retrospective analysis of inpatients discharged both with and without laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection was conducted. Data were obtained between January 1, 2019, and March 31, 2022, from community hospitals affiliated with a large health care system in the US. Exposure: COVID-19 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Occurrence of central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia, and Clostridioides difficile infection as reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network. Results: Among nearly 5 million hospitalizations in 182 hospitals between 2020 and 2022, the occurrence of health care-associated infections (HAIs) was high among the 313 200 COVID-19 inpatients (median [SD] age, 57 [27.3] years; 56.0% women). Incidence per 100 000 patient-days showed higher HAIs among those with COVID-19 compared with those without. For CLABSI, the incidence for the full 9 quarters of the study was nearly 4-fold higher among the COVID-19 population than the non-COVID-19 population (25.4 vs 6.9). For CAUTI, the incidence in the COVID-19 population was 2.7-fold higher in the COVID-19 population (16.5 vs 6.1), and for MRSA, 3.0-fold higher (11.2 vs 3.7). Quarterly trends were compared with the same quarter in 2019. The greatest increase in the incidence of HAI in comparison with the same quarter in 2019 for the entire population occurred in quarter 3 of 2020 for CLABSI (11.0 vs 7.3), quarter 4 of 2021 for CAUTI (7.8 vs 6.8), and quarter 3 of 2021 for MRSA (5.2 vs 3.9). When limited to the non-COVID-19 population, the increase in CLABSI incidence vs the 2019 incidence was eliminated, and the quarterly rates of MRSA and CAUTI were lower vs the prepandemic 2019 comparator quarter. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of hospitals during the pandemic, HAI occurrence among inpatients without COVID-19 was similar to that during 2019 despite additional pressures for infection control and health care professionals. The findings suggest that patients with COVID-19 may be more susceptible to HAIs and may require additional prevention measures.

Changes in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patient characteristics and resource use in a system of community hospitals in the United States.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has migrated to regions that were initially spared, and it is likely that different populations are currently at risk for illness. Herein, we present our observations of the change in characteristics and resource use of COVID-19 patients over time in a national system of community hospitals to help inform those managing surge planning, operational management, and future policy decisions.

Real-World Effectiveness of Remdesivir in Adults Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Retrospective, Multicenter Comparative Effectiveness Study.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to understand the real-world effectiveness of remdesivir in the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: This was a retrospective comparative effectiveness study. Individuals hospitalized in a large private healthcare network in the United States from 23 February 2020 through 11 February 2021 with a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 and ICD-10 diagnosis codes consistent with symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were included. Remdesivir recipients were matched to controls using time-dependent propensity scores. The primary outcome was time to improvement with a secondary outcome of time to death. RESULTS: Of 96 859 COVID-19 patients, 42 473 (43.9%) received at least 1 remdesivir dose. The median age of remdesivir recipients was 65 years, 23 701 (55.8%) were male, and 22 819 (53.7%) were non-White. Matches were found for 18 328 patients (43.2%). Remdesivir recipients were significantly more likely to achieve clinical improvement by 28 days (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.22). Remdesivir patients on no oxygen (aHR 1.30, 95% CI, 1.22-1.38) or low-flow oxygen (aHR 1.23, 95% CI, 1.19-1.27) were significantly more likely to achieve clinical improvement by 28 days. There was no significant impact on the likelihood of mortality overall (aHR 1.02, 95% CI, .97-1.08). Remdesivir recipients on low-flow oxygen were significantly less likely to die than controls (aHR 0.85, 95% CI, .77-.92; 28-day mortality 8.4% [865 deaths] for remdesivir patients, 12.5% [1334 deaths] for controls). CONCLUSIONS: These results support the use of remdesivir for hospitalized COVID-19 patients on no or low-flow oxygen. Routine initiation of remdesivir in more severely ill patients is unlikely to be beneficial.

The Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) on Healthcare-Associated Infections.

BACKGROUND: The profound changes wrought by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on routine hospital operations may have influenced performance on hospital measures, including healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). We aimed to evaluate the association between COVID-19 surges and HAI and cluster rates. METHODS: In 148 HCA Healthcare-affiliated hospitals, from 1 March 2020 to 30 September 2020, and a subset of hospitals with microbiology and cluster data through 31 December 2020, we evaluated the association between COVID-19 surges and HAIs, hospital-onset pathogens, and cluster rates using negative binomial mixed models. To account for local variation in COVID-19 pandemic surge timing, we included the number of discharges with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis per staffed bed per month. RESULTS: Central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI), and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia increased as COVID-19 burden increased. There were 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 23-108%) more CLABSI, 43% (95% CI: 8-90%) more CAUTI, and 44% (95% CI: 10-88%) more cases of MRSA bacteremia than expected over 7 months based on predicted HAIs had there not been COVID-19 cases. Clostridioides difficile infection was not significantly associated with COVID-19 burden. Microbiology data from 81 of the hospitals corroborated the findings. Notably, rates of hospital-onset bloodstream infections and multidrug resistant organisms, including MRSA, vancomycin-resistant enterococcus, and Gram-negative organisms, were each significantly associated with COVID-19 surges. Finally, clusters of hospital-onset pathogens increased as the COVID-19 burden increased. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 surges adversely impact HAI rates and clusters of infections within hospitals, emphasizing the need for balancing COVID-related demands with routine hospital infection prevention.

Discontinuation of atorvastatin use in hospital is associated with increased risk of mortality in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Statins are a commonly used class of drugs, and reports have suggested that their use may affect COVID-19 disease severity and mortality risk. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this analysis was to determine the effect of discontinuation of previous atorvastatin therapy in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 on the risk of mortality and ventilation. METHODS: Data from 146,413 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were classified according to statin therapy. Home + in hospital atorvastatin use (continuation of therapy); home + no in hospital atorvastatin use (discontinuation of therapy); no home + no in hospital atorvastatin use (no statins). Logistic regression was performed to assess the association between atorvastatin administration and either mortality or use of mechanical ventilation during the encounter. RESULTS: Continuous use of atorvastatin (home and in hospital) was associated with a 35% reduction in the odds of mortality compared to patients who received atorvastatin at home but not in hospital (odds ratio [OR]: 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.72, p < .001). Similarly, the odds of ventilation were lower with continuous atorvastatin therapy (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.64-0.77, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation of previous atorvastatin therapy is associated with worse outcomes for COVID-19 patients. Providers should consider maintaining existing statin therapy for patients with known or suspected previous use.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Healthcare-Associated Infections

Background The profound changes wrought by COVID-19 on routine hospital operations may have influenced performance on hospital measures, including healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Objective Evaluate the association between COVID-19 surges and HAI or cluster rates Methods Design: Prospective cohort study Setting 148 HCA Healthcare-affiliated hospitals, 3/1/2020-9/30/2020, and a subset of hospitals with microbiology and cluster data through 12/31/2020 Patients All inpatients Measurements We evaluated the association between COVID-19 surges and HAIs, hospital-onset pathogens, and cluster rates using negative binomial mixed models. To account for local variation in COVID-19 pandemic surge timing, we included the number of discharges with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis per staffed bed per month at each hospital. Results Central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI), and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia increased as COVID-19 burden increased (P ≤ 0.001 for all), with 60% (95% CI, 23 to 108%) more CLABSI, 43% (95% CI, 8 to 90%) more CAUTI, and 44% (95% CI, 10 to 88%) more cases of MRSA bacteremia than expected over 7 months based on predicted HAIs had there not been COVID-19 cases. Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) was not significantly associated with COVID-19 burden. Microbiology data from 81 of the hospitals corroborated the findings. Notably, rates of hospital-onset bloodstream infections and multidrug resistant organisms, including MRSA, vancomycin-resistant enterococcus and Gram-negative organisms were each significantly associated with COVID-19 surges (P < 0.05 for all). Finally, clusters of hospital-onset pathogens increased as the COVID-19 burden increased (P = 0.02). Limitations Variations in surveillance and reporting may affect HAI data. Table 1. Effect of an increase in number of COVID-19 discharges on HAIs and hospital-onset pathogens Figure 1. Predicted mean HAI rates as COVID-19 discharges increase Predicted mean HAI rate by increasing monthly COVID-19 discharges. Panel a. CLABSI, Panel b, CAUTI Panel c. MRSA Bacteremia, Panel d. CDI. Data are stratified by small, medium and large hospitals. Figure 2. Monthly comparison of COVID discharges to clusters COVID-19 discharges and the number of clusters of hospital-onset pathogens are correlated throughout the pandemic. Conclusion COVID-19 surges adversely impact HAI rates and clusters of infections within hospitals, emphasizing the need for balancing COVID-related demands with routine hospital infection prevention. Disclosures Kenneth Sands, MD, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product) 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) 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) Edward Septimus, MD, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products)Molnlycke (Ot er Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products) Eunice J. Blanchard, MSN RN, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product) Russell Poland, PhD, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product) Micaela H. Coady, MS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product) Deborah S. Yokoe, MD, MPH, Nothing to disclose Julia Moody, MS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product) Richard Platt, MD, MSc, Medline (Research Grant or Support, Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product) Jonathan B. Perlin, MD, PhD, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product)

Hyperglycaemia increases mortality risk in non-diabetic patients with COVID-19 even more than in diabetic patients.

AIM: Diabetes has been identified as a risk factor for poor outcomes in patients with COVID-19. We examined the association of hyperglycaemia, both in the presence and absence of pre-existing diabetes, with severity and outcomes in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Data from 74,148 COVID-19-positive inpatients with at least one recorded glucose measurement during their inpatient episode were analysed for presence of pre-existing diabetes diagnosis and any glucose values in the hyperglycaemic range (>180 mg/dl). RESULTS: Among patients with and without a pre-existing diabetes diagnosis on admission, mortality was substantially higher in the presence of high glucose measurements versus all measurements in the normal range (70-180 mg/dl) in both groups (non-diabetics: 21.7% vs. 3.3%; diabetics 14.4% vs. 4.3%). When adjusting for patient age, BMI, severity on admission and oxygen saturation on admission, this increased risk of mortality persisted and varied by diabetes diagnosis. Among patients with a pre-existing diabetes diagnosis, any hyperglycaemic value during the episode was associated with a substantial increase in the odds of mortality (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.52-2.07); among patients without a pre-existing diabetes diagnosis, this risk nearly doubled (OR: 3.07, 95% CI: 2.79-3.37). CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis identified hyperglycaemia in COVID-19 patients as an independent risk factor for mortality after adjusting for the presence of diabetes and other known risk factors. This indicates that the extent of glucose control could serve as a mechanism for modifying the risk of COVID-19 morality in the inpatient environment.

A COVID-19-ready public health surveillance system: The Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System.

The US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System was established in 2009 to use routinely collected electronic health data for improving the national capability to assess post-market medical product safety. Over more than a decade, Sentinel has become an integral part of FDA's surveillance capabilities and has been used to conduct analyses that have contributed to regulatory decisions. FDA's role in the COVID-19 pandemic response has necessitated an expansion and enhancement of Sentinel. Here we describe how the Sentinel System has supported FDA's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We highlight new capabilities developed, key data generated to date, and lessons learned, particularly with respect to working with inpatient electronic health record data. Early in the pandemic, Sentinel developed a multi-pronged approach to support FDA's anticipated data and analytic needs. It incorporated new data sources, created a rapidly refreshed database, developed protocols to assess the natural history of COVID-19, validated a diagnosis-code based algorithm for identifying patients with COVID-19 in administrative claims data, and coordinated with other national and international initiatives. Sentinel is poised to answer important questions about the natural history of COVID-19 and is positioned to use this information to study the use, safety, and potentially the effectiveness of medical products used for COVID-19 prevention and treatment.

Universal Protection: Operationalizing Infection Prevention Guidance in the COVID-19 Era.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has required facilities to quickly respond to a myriad of infection prevention recommendations, as well as design their own protocols. The varied and changing guidance has been difficult for staff to absorb and has presented challenges for managing compliance. APPROACH: HCA Healthcare recognized the need for a coordinated approach to managing infection prevention guidance during the COVID-19 pandemic and a mechanism for monitoring compliance and responding to implementation challenges remotely. This innovation consisted of a bundle of infection prevention guidance referred to as the Universal Protection Framework that collated existing recommendations into an easy-to-understand structure with four domains: core infection prevention practices, access control, distancing, and patient flow. This was supported by education and clear communication. A remote monitoring program that incorporated a combination of report review and virtual observation via videoconferencing using an on-site leader as a navigator for the discussion assessed 46 survey domains for compliance. RESULTS: This framework was implemented in a large health care system, and to date compliance has been monitored at 15 facilities. Overall, compliance was high (average, 90%). High compliance was seen with oversight and distribution of personal protective equipment, cohorting of COVID-19 patients, facility access controls, and employee exposure monitoring. Challenges were identified in compliance with social distancing and universal masking. CONCLUSION: Complex infection prevention expectations for COVID-19 can be communicated and implemented by bundling into a simple framework. This innovation also demonstrated that compliance can be measured remotely, which may be useful even after the pandemic challenges have passed.

No clinical benefit in mortality associated with hydroxychloroquine treatment in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), with or without concurrent administration of azithromycin (AZM), for treatment of COVID-19 has received considerable attention. The purpose of this study was to determine whether HCQ administration is associated with improved mortality in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data collected during the care process for COVID-19 positive patients discharged from facilities affiliated with a large healthcare system in the United States as of April 27, 2020. Patients were categorized by treatment with HCQ (in addition to standard supportive therapy) or receipt of supportive therapy with no HCQ. Patient outcomes were evaluated for in-hospital mortality. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics were accounted for through a multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1669 patients were evaluated (no HCQ, n = 696; HCQ, n = 973). When adjusting for patient characteristics, receipt of AZM, and severity of disease at admission, there was no beneficial effect of receipt of HCQ on the risk of death. In this population, there was an 81% increase in the risk of mortality among patients who received HCQ at any time during their hospital stay versus no HCQ exposure (OR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.20-2.77, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis, we found that there was no benefit of administration of HCQ on mortality in COVID-19 patients. These results support recent changes to clinical trials that discourage the use of HCQ in COVID-19 patients.

Patient characteristics and admitting vital signs associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related mortality among patients admitted with noncritical illness.

OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors for mortality among COVID-19 patients admitted to a system of community hospitals in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of patient data collected from the routine care of COVID-19 patients. SETTING: System of >180 acute-care facilities in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: All admitted patients with positive identification of COVID-19 and a documented discharge as of May 12, 2020. METHODS: Determination of demographic characteristics, vital signs at admission, patient comorbidities and recorded discharge disposition in this population to construct a logistic regression estimating the odds of mortality, particular for those patients characterized as not being critically ill at admission. RESULTS: In total, 6,180 COVID-19+ patients were identified as of May 12, 2020. Most COVID-19+ patients (4,808, 77.8%) were admitted directly to a medical-surgical unit with no documented critical care or mechanical ventilation within 8 hours of admission. After adjusting for demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and vital signs at admission in this subgroup, the largest driver of the odds of mortality was patient age (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.06-1.08; P < .001). Decreased oxygen saturation at admission was associated with increased odds of mortality (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.12; P < .001) as was diabetes (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.21-2.03; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The identification of factors observable at admission that are associated with mortality in COVID-19 patients who are initially admitted to non-critical care units may help care providers, hospital epidemiologists, and hospital safety experts better plan for the care of these patients.