Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 247
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
BMJ Open ; 12(1): e056858, 2022 01 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1633914

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are among the risk groups for COVID-19. Determining transmission routes and risk levels during healthcare is of great importance in preventing nosocomial outbreaks. This study aimed to investigate the frequency of nosocomial transmission and factors affecting the transmission in HCW. METHODS: HCWs admitted to the infectious diseases outpatient clinic due to contact with a COVID-19 patient and diagnosed with SARS-COV-2 by reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) between 20 March 2020 and 30 June 2020 were included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 822 HCWs with 295 low, 284 intermediate and 243 high-risk exposures were included in the study. 27.1% of the HCWs were male, and the median age was 31.9 years (20-62). 89.5% of these patients were directly in charge of patient care. Of the index cases contacted, 72.6% were HCW, and 27.4% were non-HCW patients. Most of the risky exposure (51.7%) occurred in nurses. The occurrence frequency of high-risk exposure was lower in those assigned to direct patient care when compared with the occurrence frequency of moderate-risk or low-risk exposures (76.5%, 94.7, 95.3, respectively p<0.001). In most high-risk exposures (220/253), the index cases were HCWs (p<0.001). Symptoms were detected in 311 of the HCWs (37.8%) during the follow-up. The median time to perform SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was 5.3 days (IQR) after the last risky exposure. In multivariate analysis, SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positivity was 5.65 times higher in HCWs not directly involved in patient care than HCWs who are not involved in patient care (95% CI 2.437 to 13.111; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides particularly useful information on post-exposure COVID-19 follow-up and management of working schedules and procedures of HCWs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Adult , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 236, 2022 01 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621241

ABSTRACT

Healthcare facilities are vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 introductions and subsequent nosocomial outbreaks. Antigen rapid diagnostic testing (Ag-RDT) is widely used for population screening, but its health and economic benefits as a reactive response to local surges in outbreak risk are unclear. We simulate SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a long-term care hospital with varying COVID-19 containment measures in place (social distancing, face masks, vaccination). Across scenarios, nosocomial incidence is reduced by up to 40-47% (range of means) with routine symptomatic RT-PCR testing, 59-63% with the addition of a timely round of Ag-RDT screening, and 69-75% with well-timed two-round screening. For the latter, a delay of 4-5 days between the two screening rounds is optimal for transmission prevention. Screening efficacy varies depending on test sensitivity, test type, subpopulations targeted, and community incidence. Efficiency, however, varies primarily depending on underlying outbreak risk, with health-economic benefits scaling by orders of magnitude depending on the COVID-19 containment measures in place.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/diagnosis , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , SARS-CoV-2 , Antigens, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/transmission , Diagnostic Tests, Routine , Epidemiological Monitoring , Hospitals , Humans , Risk Factors , Vaccination
3.
J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc ; 10(Supplement_4): S88-S95, 2021 Dec 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1593724

ABSTRACT

Hospital outbreak investigations are high-stakes epidemiology. Contacts between staff and patients are numerous; environmental and community exposures are plentiful; and patients are highly vulnerable. Having the best data is paramount to understanding an outbreak in order to stop ongoing transmission and prevent future outbreaks. In the past 5 years, the high-resolution view of transmission offered by analyzing pathogen whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is increasingly part of hospital outbreak investigations. Concerns over speed and actionability, assay validation, liability, cost, and payment models lead to further opportunities for work in this area. Now accelerated by funding for COVID-19, the use of genomics in hospital outbreak investigations has firmly moved from the academic literature to more quotidian operations, with associated concerns involving regulatory affairs, data integration, and clinical interpretation. This review details past uses of WGS data in hospital-acquired infection outbreaks as well as future opportunities to increase its utility and growth in hospital infection prevention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Genomics , Hospitals , Humans , Molecular Epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Euro Surveill ; 26(43)2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1547185

ABSTRACT

BackgroundIn the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, viral genomes are available at unprecedented speed, but spatio-temporal bias in genome sequence sampling precludes phylogeographical inference without additional contextual data.AimWe applied genomic epidemiology to trace SARS-CoV-2 spread on an international, national and local level, to illustrate how transmission chains can be resolved to the level of a single event and single person using integrated sequence data and spatio-temporal metadata.MethodsWe investigated 289 COVID-19 cases at a university hospital in Munich, Germany, between 29 February and 27 May 2020. Using the ARTIC protocol, we obtained near full-length viral genomes from 174 SARS-CoV-2-positive respiratory samples. Phylogenetic analyses using the Auspice software were employed in combination with anamnestic reporting of travel history, interpersonal interactions and perceived high-risk exposures among patients and healthcare workers to characterise cluster outbreaks and establish likely scenarios and timelines of transmission.ResultsWe identified multiple independent introductions in the Munich Metropolitan Region during the first weeks of the first pandemic wave, mainly by travellers returning from popular skiing areas in the Alps. In these early weeks, the rate of presumable hospital-acquired infections among patients and in particular healthcare workers was high (9.6% and 54%, respectively) and we illustrated how transmission chains can be dissected at high resolution combining virus sequences and spatio-temporal networks of human interactions.ConclusionsEarly spread of SARS-CoV-2 in Europe was catalysed by superspreading events and regional hotspots during the winter holiday season. Genomic epidemiology can be employed to trace viral spread and inform effective containment strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Genome, Viral , Genomics , Germany/epidemiology , Hospitals , Humans , Phylogeny , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Infect Dis Clin North Am ; 35(4): 841-856, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506789

ABSTRACT

Despite a large volume of research in prevention, central line-associated bloodstream infections and catheter-related bloodstream infections continue to cause significant morbidity, mortality, and increased health care costs. Strategies in prevention, including decision about catheter placement, insertion bundles, adherence to standard of care guidelines, and technologic innovations, shown to decrease rates of catheter-related bloodstream infections and central line-associated bloodstream infections are described in this update. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has resulted in increased health care-acquired infections, including central line-associated bloodstream infections.


Subject(s)
Bacteremia/prevention & control , Catheter-Related Infections/prevention & control , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Bacteremia/epidemiology , Bacteremia/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Catheter-Related Infections/epidemiology , Catheter-Related Infections/etiology , Catheterization, Central Venous/standards , Clinical Decision-Making , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/etiology , Humans , Patient Care Bundles/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
6.
J Healthc Eng ; 2021: 1535046, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506321

ABSTRACT

Objective: This research aimed to explore the application of a mathematical model based on deep learning in hospital infection control of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia. Methods: First, the epidemic data of Beijing, China, were utilized to make a definite susceptible-infected-removed (SIR) model fitting to determine the estimated value of the COVID-19 removal intensity ß, which was then used to do a determined SIR model and a stochastic SIR model fitting for the hospital. In addition, the reasonable ß and γ estimates of the hospital were determined, and the spread of the epidemic in hospital was simulated, to discuss the impact of basal reproductive number changes, isolation, vaccination, and so forth on COVID-19. Results: There was a certain gap between the fitting of SIR to the remover and the actual data. The fitting of the number of infections was accurate. The growth rate of the number of infections decreased after measures, such as isolation, were taken. The effect of herd immunity was achieved after the overall immunity reached 70.9%. Conclusion: The SIR model based on deep learning and the stochastic SIR fitting model were accurate in judging the development trend of the epidemic, which can provide basis and reference for hospital epidemic infection control.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Deep Learning , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Humans , Models, Theoretical , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(9): e2985-e2991, 2021 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501042

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It is currently unclear whether severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection will remain a rare event, only occurring in individuals who fail to mount an effective immune response, or whether it will occur more frequently when humoral immunity wanes following primary infection. METHODS: A case of reinfection was observed in a Belgian nosocomial outbreak involving 3 patients and 2 healthcare workers. To distinguish reinfection from persistent infection and detect potential transmission clusters, whole genome sequencing was performed on nasopharyngeal swabs of all individuals including the reinfection case's first episode. Immunoglobulin A, immunoglobulin M, and immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralizing antibody responses were quantified in serum of all individuals, and viral infectiousness was measured in the swabs of the reinfection case. RESULTS: Reinfection was confirmed in a young, immunocompetent healthcare worker as viral genomes derived from the first and second episode belonged to different SARS-CoV-2 clades. The symptomatic reinfection occurred after an interval of 185 days, despite the development of an effective humoral immune response following symptomatic primary infection. The second episode, however, was milder and characterized by a fast rise in serum IgG and neutralizing antibodies. Although contact tracing and viral culture remained inconclusive, the healthcare worker formed a transmission cluster with 3 patients and showed evidence of virus replication but not of neutralizing antibodies in her nasopharyngeal swabs. CONCLUSIONS: If this case is representative of most patients with coronavirus disease 2019, long-lived protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 after primary infection might not be likely.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Belgium/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Reinfection , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Infect Dis Clin North Am ; 35(4): 1055-1075, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1487740

ABSTRACT

Health care-acquired viral respiratory infections are common and cause increased patient morbidity and mortality. Although the threat of viral respiratory infection has been underscored by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, respiratory viruses have a significant impact in health care settings even under normal circumstances. Studies report decreased nosocomial transmission when aggressive infection control measures are implemented, with more success noted when using a multicomponent approach. Influenza vaccination of health care personnel furthers decrease rates of transmission; thus, mandatory vaccination is becoming more common. This article discusses the epidemiology, transmission, and control of health care-associated respiratory viral infections.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/virology , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , Respiratory Tract Infections/virology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/transmission , Guideline Adherence , Health Personnel/standards , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/transmission , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Vaccination , Viruses/classification , Viruses/pathogenicity
9.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 10(1): 151, 2021 10 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1484323

ABSTRACT

Concomitant prevention of SARS-CoV-2 and extensively drug-resistant bacteria transmission is a difficult challenge in intensive care units dedicated to COVID-19 patients. We report a nosocomial cluster of four patients carrying NDM-1 plasmid-encoded carbapenemase-producing Enterobacter cloacae. Two main factors may have contributed to cross-transmission: misuse of gloves and absence of change of personal protective equipment, in the context of COVID-19-associated shortage. This work highlights the importance of maintaining infection control measures to prevent CPE cross-transmission despite the difficult context and that this type of outbreak can potentially involve several species of Enterobacterales.


Subject(s)
Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae/isolation & purification , Coinfection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Enterobacter cloacae/isolation & purification , Enterobacteriaceae Infections/epidemiology , Infection Control/methods , Bacterial Proteins , COVID-19 , Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae/genetics , Disease Outbreaks , Enterobacter cloacae/genetics , Enterobacteriaceae Infections/microbiology , Enterobacteriaceae Infections/transmission , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2 , beta-Lactamases
10.
J Korean Med Sci ; 36(40): e284, 2021 Oct 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1477788

ABSTRACT

A nosocomial outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 occurred in two general wards. One outbreak had pre-symptomatic transmission and was linked epidemiologically with an index case. The other outbreak was associated with early detection failure in a crowded room. Notably, adherence to appropriate mask wearing was not confirmed in the hospital outbreak. Confirmed cases were moved into isolation rooms, and contacts were quarantined. Quarantined cases were tested regularly and facilitated early termination of the hospital outbreak.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Quarantine , Republic of Korea/epidemiology , Tertiary Care Centers
11.
Eur Geriatr Med ; 12(5): 1045-1055, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1474202

ABSTRACT

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy of multi-component interventions for prevention of hospital-acquired pneumonia in older patients hospitalized in geriatric wards. METHODS: A randomized, parallel-group, controlled trial was undertaken in patients aged 65 and above who were admitted to a tertiary hospital geriatric unit from January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2018 for an acute non-respiratory illness. Participants were randomized by to receive either a multi-component intervention (consisting of reverse Trendelenburg position, dysphagia screening, oral care and vaccinations), or usual care. The outcome measures were the proportion of patients who developed hospital-acquired pneumonia during hospitalisation, and mean time from randomization to the next hospitalisation due to respiratory infections in 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 123 participants (median age, 85; 43.1% male) were randomized, (n = 59) to intervention group and (n = 64) to control group. The multi-component interventions did not significantly reduce the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia but did increase the mean time to next hospitalisation due to respiratory infection (11.5 months vs. 9.5 months; P = 0.049), and reduced the risk of hospitalisation in 1 year (18.6% vs. 34.4%; P = 0.049). Implementation of multi-component interventions increased diagnoses of oropharyngeal dysphagia (35.6% vs. 20.3%; P < 0.001) and improved the influenza (54.5% vs 17.2%; P < 0.001) and pneumococcal vaccination rates (52.5% vs. 20.3%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The nosocomial pneumonia multi-component intervention did not significantly reduce the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia during hospitalisation but reduce subsequent hospitalisations for respiratory infections. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT04347395.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Healthcare-Associated Pneumonia , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Female , Healthcare-Associated Pneumonia/epidemiology , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
12.
BMC Med ; 19(1): 211, 2021 08 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1470617

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Emergence of more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants requires more efficient control measures to limit nosocomial transmission and maintain healthcare capacities during pandemic waves. Yet the relative importance of different strategies is unknown. METHODS: We developed an agent-based model and compared the impact of personal protective equipment (PPE), screening of healthcare workers (HCWs), contact tracing of symptomatic HCWs and restricting HCWs from working in multiple units (HCW cohorting) on nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The model was fit on hospital data from the first wave in the Netherlands (February until August 2020) and assumed that HCWs used 90% effective PPE in COVID-19 wards and self-isolated at home for 7 days immediately upon symptom onset. Intervention effects on the effective reproduction number (RE), HCW absenteeism and the proportion of infected individuals among tested individuals (positivity rate) were estimated for a more transmissible variant. RESULTS: Introduction of a variant with 56% higher transmissibility increased - all other variables kept constant - RE from 0.4 to 0.65 (+ 63%) and nosocomial transmissions by 303%, mainly because of more transmissions caused by pre-symptomatic patients and HCWs. Compared to baseline, PPE use in all hospital wards (assuming 90% effectiveness) reduced RE by 85% and absenteeism by 57%. Screening HCWs every 3 days with perfect test sensitivity reduced RE by 67%, yielding a maximum test positivity rate of 5%. Screening HCWs every 3 or 7 days assuming time-varying test sensitivities reduced RE by 9% and 3%, respectively. Contact tracing reduced RE by at least 32% and achieved higher test positivity rates than screening interventions. HCW cohorting reduced RE by 5%. Sensitivity analyses show that our findings do not change significantly for 70% PPE effectiveness. For low PPE effectiveness of 50%, PPE use in all wards is less effective than screening every 3 days with perfect sensitivity but still more effective than all other interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In response to the emergence of more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants, PPE use in all hospital wards might still be most effective in preventing nosocomial transmission. Regular screening and contact tracing of HCWs are also effective interventions but critically depend on the sensitivity of the diagnostic test used.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Netherlands/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
13.
PLoS Med ; 18(10): e1003816, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463303

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nosocomial spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been widely reported, but the transmission pathways among patients and healthcare workers (HCWs) are unclear. Identifying the risk factors and drivers for these nosocomial transmissions is critical for infection prevention and control interventions. The main aim of our study was to quantify the relative importance of different transmission pathways of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital setting. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This is an observational cohort study using data from 4 teaching hospitals in Oxfordshire, United Kingdom, from January to October 2020. Associations between infectious SARS-CoV-2 individuals and infection risk were quantified using logistic, generalised additive and linear mixed models. Cases were classified as community- or hospital-acquired using likely incubation periods of 3 to 7 days. Of 66,184 patients who were hospitalised during the study period, 920 had a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test within the same period (1.4%). The mean age was 67.9 (±20.7) years, 49.2% were females, and 68.5% were from the white ethnic group. Out of these, 571 patients had their first positive PCR tests while hospitalised (62.1%), and 97 of these occurred at least 7 days after admission (10.5%). Among the 5,596 HCWs, 615 (11.0%) tested positive during the study period using PCR or serological tests. The mean age was 39.5 (±11.1) years, 78.9% were females, and 49.8% were nurses. For susceptible patients, 1 day in the same ward with another patient with hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 was associated with an additional 7.5 infections per 1,000 susceptible patients (95% credible interval (CrI) 5.5 to 9.5/1,000 susceptible patients/day) per day. Exposure to an infectious patient with community-acquired Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) or to an infectious HCW was associated with substantially lower infection risks (2.0/1,000 susceptible patients/day, 95% CrI 1.6 to 2.2). As for HCW infections, exposure to an infectious patient with hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 or to an infectious HCW were both associated with an additional 0.8 infection per 1,000 susceptible HCWs per day (95% CrI 0.3 to 1.6 and 0.6 to 1.0, respectively). Exposure to an infectious patient with community-acquired SARS-CoV-2 was associated with less than half this risk (0.2/1,000 susceptible HCWs/day, 95% CrI 0.2 to 0.2). These assumptions were tested in sensitivity analysis, which showed broadly similar results. The main limitations were that the symptom onset dates and HCW absence days were not available. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that exposure to patients with hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 is associated with a substantial infection risk to both HCWs and other hospitalised patients. Infection control measures to limit nosocomial transmission must be optimised to protect both staff and patients from SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Community-Acquired Infections , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Hospitals , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional , Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/transmission , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospitalization , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Nurses , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
14.
Ann Med ; 53(1): 1779-1786, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462157

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: An unexpected high prevalence of enterococcal bloodstream infection (BSI) has been observed in critically ill patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The primary objective was to describe the characteristics of ICU-acquired enterococcal BSI in critically ill patients with COVID-19. A secondary objective was to exploratorily assess the predictors of 30-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients with ICU-acquired enterococcal BSI. RESULTS: During the study period, 223 patients with COVID-19 were admitted to COVID-19-dedicated ICUs in our centre. Overall, 51 episodes of enterococcal BSI, occurring in 43 patients, were registered. 29 (56.9%) and 22 (43.1%) BSI were caused by Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium, respectively. The cumulative incidence of ICU-acquired enterococcal BSI was of 229 episodes per 1000 ICU admissions (95% mid-p confidence interval [CI] 172-298). Most patients received an empirical therapy with at least one agent showing in vitro activity against the blood isolate (38/43, 88%). The crude 30-day mortality was 42% (18/43) and 57% (4/7) in the entire series and in patients with vancomycin-resistant E. faecium BSI, respectively. The sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score showed an independent association with increased mortality (odds ratio 1.32 per one-point increase, with 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.66, p = .021). CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative incidence of enterococcal BSI is high in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Our results suggest a crucial role of the severity of the acute clinical conditions, to which both the underlying viral pneumonia and the enterococcal BSI may contribute, in majorly influencing the outcome.KEY MESSAGESThe cumulative incidence of enterococcal BSI is high in critically ill patients with COVID-19.The crude 30-day mortality of enterococcal BSI in critically ill patients with COVID-19 may be higher than 40%.There could be a crucial role of the severity of the acute clinical conditions, to which both the underlying viral pneumonia and the enterococcal BSI may contribute, in majorly influencing the outcome.


Subject(s)
Bacteremia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Enterococcus faecalis , Enterococcus faecium , Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections/epidemiology , Mortality , Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci , Aged , Bacteremia/microbiology , Critical Illness , Female , Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections/microbiology , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Microbial Sensitivity Tests , Middle Aged , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Euro Surveill ; 26(39)2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1448679

ABSTRACT

A nosocomial outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant infected 42 patients, staff and family members; 39 were fully vaccinated. The attack rate was 10.6% (16/151) among exposed staff and reached 23.7% (23/97) among exposed patients in a highly vaccinated population, 16-26 weeks after vaccination (median: 25 weeks). All cases were linked and traced to one patient. Several transmissions occurred between individuals wearing face masks. Fourteen of 23 patients became severely sick or died, raising a question about possible waning immunity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Israel , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(19)2021 Sep 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1444194

ABSTRACT

Hospitals are increasingly challenged by nosocomial infection (NI) outbreaks during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Although standardized guidelines and manuals regarding infection prevention and control (IPC) measures are available worldwide, case-studies conducted at specified hospitals that are required to cope with real settings are limited. In this study, we analyzed three hospitals in Japan where large-scale NI outbreaks occurred for hints on how to prevent NI outbreaks. We reviewed openly available information from each hospital and analyzed it applying a three domain framework: operation management; identification of infection status; and infection control measures. We learned that despite having authorized infection control teams and using existing standardized IPC measures, SARS-CoV-2 may still enter hospitals. Early detection of suspected cases and confirmation by PCR test, carefully dealing with staff-to-staff transmission were the most essential factors to prevent NI outbreaks. It was also suggested that ordinary training on IPC for staff does not always provide enough practical knowledge and skills; in such cases external technical and operational supports are crucial. It is expected that our results will provide insights into preventing NI outbreaks of COVID-19, and contribute to mitigate the damage to health care delivery systems in various countries.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Hospitals , Humans , Japan/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Pediatr Pulmonol ; 57(1): 200-208, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1442039

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to test the hypothesis that in-hospital respiratory viral infections (RVI) would be significantly lower in a cohort of patients with established bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) exposed to a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection prevention protocol when compared to historical controls. STUDY DESIGN: On April 1, 2020, we implemented a universal infection prevention protocol to minimize the risk of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a dedicated BPD intensive care unit. We performed a retrospective cohort study and included patients with established BPD, as defined by the 2019 Neonatal Research Network criteria, admitted to our center who underwent real-time polymerase-chain-reaction RVI testing between January 1, 2015 and March 31, 2021. We excluded patients readmitted from home. We compared the proportion of positive tests to the number of tests performed and the distribution of viral respiratory pathogens in the pre- and post-SARS-CoV-2 eras. RESULTS: Among 176 patients included in the study, 663 RVI tests were performed and 172 (26%) tests were positive. The median number of tests performed, measured in tests per patient per month, in the SARS-CoV-2 era was not significantly different compared to the pre-SARS-CoV-2 era (0.45 vs. 0.34 tests per patient per month, p = .07). The proportion of positive RVI tests was significantly lower in the SARS-CoV-2 era when compared to the pre-SARS-CoV-2 era (0.06 vs. 0.30, p < .0001). No patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the SARS-CoV-2 era. CONCLUSIONS: Infection prevention measures developed in response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic may reduce the risk of RVIs in hospitalized patients with established BPD.


Subject(s)
Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia , COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Hospitals , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 10(1): 137, 2021 09 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440955

ABSTRACT

We describe the lessons learned during a SARS-CoV-2 variant-of-concern Alpha outbreak investigation at a normal care unit in a university hospital in Amsterdam in December 2020. The outbreak consisted of nine nurses and two roomed-in patient family members. (attack rate 18%). One nurse tested positive with a phylogenetically distinct variant, after a documented infection 83 days prior. Three key points were taken from this investigation. First, it was controlled by adherence to existing guidelines, despite increased transmissibility of the variant. Second, viral sequencing can inform transmission cluster inference, but the epidemiological context is essential to draw appropriate conclusions. Third, reinfections with Alpha variants can occur rapidly after primary infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Reinfection/virology , COVID-19/virology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/virology , Disease Outbreaks , Guideline Adherence , Humans , Infection Control , Inpatients , Netherlands , Nurses , Phylogeny , Reinfection/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
19.
J Med Virol ; 94(1): 372-379, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1437057

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by dysregulated hyperimmune response and steroids have been shown to decrease mortality. However, whether higher dosing of steroids results in better outcomes has been debated. This was a retrospective observation of COVID-19 admissions between March 1, 2020, and March 10, 2021. Adult patients (≥18 years) who received more than 10 mg daily methylprednisolone equivalent dosing (MED) within the first 14 days were included. We excluded patients who were discharged or died within 7 days of admission. We compared the standard dose of steroids (<40 mg MED) versus the high dose of steroids (>40 mg MED). Inverse probability weighted regression adjustment (IPWRA) was used to examine whether higher dose steroids resulted in improved outcomes. The outcomes studied were in-hospital mortality, rate of acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring hemodialysis, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), hospital-associated infections (HAI), and readmissions. Of the 1379 patients meeting study criteria, 506 received less than 40 mg of MED (median dose 30 mg MED) and 873 received more than or equal to 40 mg of MED (median dose 78 mg MED). Unadjusted in-hospital mortality was higher in patients who received high-dose corticosteroids (40.7% vs. 18.6%, p < 0.001). On IPWRA, the use of high-dose corticosteroids was associated with higher odds of death (odds ratio [OR] 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-3.14, p < 0.001) but not with the development of HAI, readmissions, or requirement of IMV. High-dose corticosteroids were associated with lower rates of AKI requiring hemodialysis (OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.18-0.63). In COVID-19, corticosteroids more than or equal to 40 mg MED were associated with higher in-hospital mortality.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , Methylprednisolone/therapeutic use , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/administration & dosage , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Methylprednisolone/administration & dosage , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects
20.
Microbiol Spectr ; 9(2): e0108221, 2021 10 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1434911

ABSTRACT

We describe the results of testing health care workers, from a tertiary care hospital in Japan that had experienced a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak during the first peak of the pandemic, for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibody seroconversion. Using two chemiluminescent immunoassays and a confirmatory surrogate virus neutralization test, serological testing revealed that a surprising 42% of overlooked COVID-19 diagnoses (27/64 cases) occurred when case detection relied solely on SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT). Our results suggest that the NAAT-positive population is only the tip of the iceberg and the portion left undetected might potentially have led to silent transmissions and triggered the spread. A questionnaire-based risk assessment was further indicative of exposures to specific aerosol-generating procedures (i.e., noninvasive ventilation and airway suctioning) having mediated transmission and served as the origins of the outbreak. Our observations are supportive of a multitiered testing approach, including the use of serological diagnostics, in order to accomplish exhaustive case detection along the whole COVID-19 spectrum. IMPORTANCE We describe the results of testing frontline health care workers, from a hospital in Japan that had experienced a COVID-19 outbreak, for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. Antibody testing revealed that a surprising 42% of overlooked COVID-19 diagnoses occurred when case detection relied solely on PCR-based viral detection. COVID-19 clusters have been continuously striking the health care system around the globe. Our findings illustrate that such clusters are lined with hidden infections eluding detection with diagnostic PCR and that the cluster burden in total is more immense than actually recognized. The mainstays of diagnosing infectious diseases, including COVID-19, generally consist of two approaches, one aiming to detect molecular fragments of the invading pathogen and the other to measure immune responses of the host. Considering antibody testing as one trustworthy option to test our way through the pandemic can aid in the exhaustive case detection of COVID-19 patients with variable presentations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Serological Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Cost of Illness , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Japan/epidemiology , Male , Neutralization Tests , Occupational Exposure , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Seroconversion , Surveys and Questionnaires , Tertiary Care Centers
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...