Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 370
Filter
1.
Epidemiol Infect ; 150: e186, 2022 Nov 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2185373

ABSTRACT

Healthcare workers (HCWs) have increased exposure and subsequent risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This case-control study was conducted to investigate the contemporaneous risks associated with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection amongst HCWs following in-work exposure to a confirmed coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) case. We assessed the influence of demographic (age, sex, nationality, high risk co-morbidities and vaccination status) and work-related factors (job role, exposure location, contact type, personal protective equipment (PPE) use) on infection risk following nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 exposure. All contact tracing records within the hospital site during waves 1-3 of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland were screened to identify exposure events, cases and controls. In total, 285 cases and 1526 controls were enrolled, as a result of 1811 in-work exposure events with 745 index cases. We demonstrate that male sex, Eastern European nationality, exposure location, PPE use and vaccination status all impact the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection following nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 exposure. The findings draw attention to the need for continuing emphasis on PPE use and its persisting benefit in the era of COVID-19 vaccinations. We suggest that non-work-related factors may influence infection risk seen in certain ethnic groups and that infection risk in high-risk HCW roles (e.g. nursing) may be the result of repeated exposures rather than risks inherent to a single event.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Male , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Case-Control Studies , Ireland/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Risk Factors , Hospitals
2.
Euro Surveill ; 27(18)2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2141535

ABSTRACT

In November 2021, a clonal outbreak of Pseudomonas aeruginosa of novel sequence type ST3875 was detected in three patients who died of bloodstream infections in one hospital. By 25 April 2022, the outbreak included 339 cases from 38 hospitals across Norway. Initial hospital reports indicate Pseudomonas infection as the main contributing cause in seven deaths. In March 2022, the outbreak strain was identified in non-sterile pre-moistened disposable washcloths, used to clean patients, from three lots from the same international manufacturer.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection , Pseudomonas Infections , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Hospitals , Humans , Pseudomonas Infections/epidemiology , Pseudomonas aeruginosa
3.
PLoS One ; 17(11): e0277816, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2140665

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic becomes a cause of concern for hospital transmission. Caregivers may play an important role as vectors for nosocomial infections; however, infection control for caregivers often is neglected. A nosocomial COVID-19 outbreak occurred in a 768-bed hospital from March 20, 2020, to April 14, 2020. We conducted a retrospective chart review and epidemiologic investigation on all cases. A total of 54 cases of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in the community-based hospital. They included 26 (48.1%) patients, 21 (38.9%) caregivers, and 7 (13.0%) healthcare workers. These 21 caregivers cared for 18 patients, and of these, 9 were positive for COVID-19, 6 were negative, and 3 died before testing. Of the 6 negative patients, 3 had no exposure because the caregiver began to show symptoms at least 5 days after their discharge. Of the 9 positive patients, 4 cases of transmission took place from patient to caregiver (one patient transmitted COVID-19 to two caregivers), and 6 cases of transmission occurred from caregiver to patient. Of the 54 hospital-acquired cases, 38 occurred in the 8th-floor ward and 8 occurred in the 4th-floor ward. The index case of each ward was a caregiver. Counting the number of cases where transmission occurred only between patients and their own caregivers, 9 patients were suspected of having exposure to COVID-19 from their own caregivers. Six patients (66.7%) were infected by COVID-19-confirmed caregivers, and 3 patients were uninfected. Fewer patients among the infected were able to perform independent activities compared to uninfected patients. Not only patients and healthcare workers but also caregivers groups may be vulnerable to COVID-19 and be transmission sources of nosocomial outbreaks. Therefore, infection control programs for caregivers in addition to patients and healthcare workers can be equally important.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Humans , Cross Infection/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Caregivers , Retrospective Studies , Pandemics , Disease Outbreaks , Hospitals, Community
4.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 22(1): 1416, 2022 Nov 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2139269

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The states of IPC (Infection Prevention and Control) is serious under the COVID-19 pandemic. Nosocomial infection reporting is of great significance to transparent management of IPC in regard to the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to explore the relationship between communication openness and nosocomial infection reporting, explore the mediating effect of team cohesion in the two, and provide evidence-based organizational perspective for improving IPC management in the hospitals. METHOD: A questionnaire was used to collect data on communication openness, team cohesion and nosocomial infection reporting in 3512 medical staff from 239 hospitals in Hubei, China. Structural Equation Model (SEM) was conducted to examine the hypothetical model. RESULT: Communication openness was positively related to nosocomial infection reporting (ß = 0.540, p < 0.001), and was positively related to team cohesion (ß = 0.887, p < 0.001). Team cohesion was positively related to nosocomial infection reporting (ß = 0.328, p < 0.001). The partial mediating effect of team cohesion was significant (ß = 0.291, SE = 0.055, 95% CI = [ 0.178,0.392 ]), making up 35.02% of total effect. CONCLUSION: Communication openness was not only positively related to nosocomial infection reporting. Team cohesion can be regarded as a mediator between communication openness and nosocomial infection reporting. It implies that strengthening communication openness and team cohesion is the strategy to promote IPC management from the new organizational perspective.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Humans , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Pandemics , Communication , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 841, 2022 Nov 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2119179

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. We evaluate incidence of community- and hospital-onset BSI rates and outcomes before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study evaluating patients who were hospitalized for ≥ 1 day with discharge or death between June 1, 2019, and September 4, 2021, across 271 US health care facilities. Community- and hospital-onset BSI and related outcomes before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, including intensive care admission rates, and overall and ICU-specific length of stay (LOS) was evaluated. Bivariate correlations were calculated between the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods overall and by SARS-CoV-2 testing status. RESULTS: Of 5,239,692 patient admissions, there were 20,113 community-onset BSIs before the pandemic (11.2/1000 admissions) and 39,740 (11.5/1000 admissions) during the pandemic (P ≤ 0.0062). Corresponding rates of hospital-onset BSI were 2,771 (1.6/1000 admissions) and 6,864 (2.0/1000 admissions; P < 0.0062). Compared to the pre-pandemic period, rates of community-onset BSI were higher in patients who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (15.8/1000 admissions), compared with 9.6/1000 BSI admissions among SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. Compared with patients in the pre-pandemic period, SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with community-onset BSI experienced greater ICU admission rates (36.6% vs 32.8%; P < 0.01), greater ventilator use (10.7% vs 4.7%; P < 0.001), and longer LOS (12.2 d vs 9.1 d; P < 0.001). Rates of hospital-onset BSI were higher in the pandemic vs the pre-pandemic period (2.0 vs 1.5/1000; P < 0.001), with rates as high a 7.3/1000 admissions among SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. Compared to the pre-pandemic period, SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with hospital-onset BSI had higher rates of ICU admission (72.9% vs 55.4%; P < 0.001), LOS (34.8 d vs 25.5 d; P < 0.001), and ventilator use (52.9% vs 21.5%; P < 0.001). Enterococcus species, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Candida albicans were more frequently detected in the pandemic period. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This nationally representative study found an increased risk of both community-onset and hospital-onset BSI during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic period, with the largest increased risk in hospital-onset BSI among SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. SARS-CoV-2 positivity was associated with worse outcomes.


Subject(s)
Bacteremia , COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Bacteremia/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19/epidemiology
6.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(11): 1575-1579, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2118588

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To measure the impact of exposure to patients using carbapenem on the acquisition of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli (CR-GNB) among patients not using carbapenems. DESIGN: An ecological study and a cohort study. SETTING: Two medical surgical intensive care units (ICUs) in inner Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted to 2 ICUs from 2013 through 2018 to whom carbapenem was not prescribed. METHODS: In the ecologic study, the monthly use of carbapenems (days of therapy [DOT] per 1,000 patient days) was tested for linear correlation with the 2-month moving average of incidence CR-GNB among patients to whom carbapenem was not prescribed. In the cohort study, those patients were addressed individually for risk factors (demographics, invasive interventions, use of antimicrobials) for acquisition of CR-GNB, including time at risk and the "carbapenem pressure," described as the aggregate DOT among other ICU patients during time at risk. The analysis was performed in univariate and multivariable Poisson regression models. RESULTS: The linear regression model revealed an association of total carbapenem use and incidence of CR-GNB (coefficient, 0.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.06; P = .001). In the cohort model, the adjusted rate ratio (RR) for carbapenem DOT was 1.009 (95% CI, 1.001-1.018; P = .03). Other significant risk factors were mechanical ventilation and the previous use of ceftazidime (with or without avibactam). CONCLUSIONS: Every additional DOT of total carbapenem use increased the risk of CR-GNB acquisition by patients not using carbapenems by nearly 1%. We found evidence for a population ("herd effect"-like) impact of antimicrobial use in the ICUs.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections , Humans , Carbapenems/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Cross Infection/drug therapy , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Gram-Negative Bacteria , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Intensive Care Units , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections/drug therapy , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections/epidemiology
12.
Viruses ; 14(10)2022 10 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2081925

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infections need to be explored further. Our study is an analysis of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) and ambulatory healthcare workers (aHCWs) with SARS-CoV-2 across the pandemic in a Belgian university hospital. METHODS: We compared HAIs with community-associated infections (CAIs) to identify the factors associated with having an HAI. We then performed a genomic cluster analysis of HAIs and aHCWs. We used this alongside the European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) case source classifications of an HAI. RESULTS: Between March 2020 and March 2022, 269 patients had an HAI. A lower BMI, a worse frailty index, lower C-reactive protein (CRP), and a higher thrombocyte count as well as death and length of stay were significantly associated with having an HAI. Using those variables to predict HAIs versus CAIs, we obtained a positive predictive value (PPV) of 83.6% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 82.2%; the area under the ROC was 0.89. Genomic cluster analyses and representations on epicurves and minimal spanning trees delivered further insights into HAI dynamics across different pandemic waves. The genomic data were also compared with the clinical ECDC definitions for HAIs; we found that 90.0% of the 'definite', 87.8% of the 'probable', and 70.3% of the 'indeterminate' HAIs belonged to one of the twenty-two COVID-19 genomic clusters we identified. CONCLUSIONS: We propose a novel prediction model for HAIs. In addition, we show that the management of nosocomial outbreaks will benefit from genome sequencing analyses.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , C-Reactive Protein , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care , Genomics
13.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 319, 2022 10 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2079528

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to describe the epidemiology and outcomes of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HABSIs) between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 critically ill patients. METHODS: We used data from the Eurobact II study, a prospective observational multicontinental cohort study on HABSI treated in ICU. For the current analysis, we selected centers that included both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 critically ill patients. We performed descriptive statistics between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 in terms of patients' characteristics, source of infection and microorganism distribution. We studied the association between COVID-19 status and mortality using multivariable fragility Cox models. RESULTS: A total of 53 centers from 19 countries over the 5 continents were eligible. Overall, 829 patients (median age 65 years [IQR 55; 74]; male, n = 538 [64.9%]) were treated for a HABSI. Included patients comprised 252 (30.4%) COVID-19 and 577 (69.6%) non-COVID-19 patients. The time interval between hospital admission and HABSI was similar between both groups. Respiratory sources (40.1 vs. 26.0%, p < 0.0001) and primary HABSI (25.4% vs. 17.2%, p = 0.006) were more frequent in COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 patients had more often enterococcal (20.5% vs. 9%) and Acinetobacter spp. (18.8% vs. 13.6%) HABSIs. Bacteremic COVID-19 patients had an increased mortality hazard ratio (HR) versus non-COVID-19 patients (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.49-2.45). CONCLUSIONS: We showed that the epidemiology of HABSI differed between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Enterococcal HABSI predominated in COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 patients with HABSI had elevated risk of mortality. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.org number NCT03937245 . Registered 3 May 2019.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Sepsis , Aged , Humans , Male , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units , Sepsis/epidemiology
14.
Clinics (Sao Paulo) ; 77: 100130, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2068802

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The relationship between Multidrug Resistant-Gram Negative Bacteria (MDR-GNB) infection and colonization in critically ill COVID-19 patients has been observed, however, it is still poorly understood. This study evaluated the risk factors for acquiring MDR-GNB in patients with severe COVID-19 in Intensive Care Units (ICU). METHODS: This is a nested case-control study in a cohort of 400 adult patients (≥ 18 years old) with COVID-19, hospitalized in the ICU of 4 hospitals in the city of Curitiba, Brazil. Cases were critical COVID-19 patients with one or more MDR GNB from any surveillance and/or clinical cultures were taken during their ICU stay. Controls were patients from the same units with negative cultures for MDR-GNB. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were done. RESULTS: Sixty-seven cases and 143 controls were included. Independent risk factors for MDR bacteria were: male gender (OR = 2.6; 95% CI 1.28‒5.33; p = 0.008); the hospital of admission (OR = 3.24; 95% CI 1.39‒7.57; p = 0.006); mechanical ventilation (OR = 25.7; 95% CI 7.26‒91; p < 0.0001); and desaturation on admission (OR = 2.6; 95% CI 1.27‒5.74; p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Male gender, desaturation, mechanical ventilation, and the hospital of admission were the independent factors associated with MDR-GNB in patients in the ICU with COVID-19. The only modifiable factor was the hospital of admission, where a newly opened hospital posed a higher risk. Therefore, coordinated actions toward a better quality of care for critically ill COVID-19 patients are essential.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections , Adult , Humans , Male , Adolescent , Gram-Negative Bacteria , Critical Illness , Case-Control Studies , Cross Infection/drug therapy , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/microbiology , Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections/microbiology , Risk Factors , Intensive Care Units , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology
15.
J Nurs Care Qual ; 37(4): 295-299, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2063088

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Existing best practices to monitor and prevent health care-associated infections (HAIs) were ineffective during the COVID-19 pandemic due to increased patient susceptibility toward infections, reduced resources, and increased use of agency nurses. PROBLEM: A review of the US hospitals revealed a 60% increase in central line-associate bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and a 43% increase in catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) in 2020. A large, academic, level 1 trauma center in Houston, Texas, experienced similar challenges at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. APPROACH: An interdisciplinary team of nurses, infection preventionists, and hospital educators combined and adapted existing evidence-based practices in a novel way to create a nursing-led toolkit for quality improvement tracking, improving, and sustaining HAI improvements. OUTCOMES: CLABSI and CAUTI rates were reduced over time following the introduction of the Nurse-Sensitive Indicator Quality Improvement (NSIQI) Toolkit. The CLABSI standardized infection ratio (SIR) decreased by 19%, and the CAUTI SIR decreased by 19.4%. CONCLUSIONS: The novel NSIQI Toolkit is a scalable tool for improving and sustaining CLABSI and CAUTI rates, which may have the potential for other nurse-sensitive quality indicators.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Catheter-Related Infections , Cross Infection , Urinary Tract Infections , COVID-19/epidemiology , Catheter-Related Infections/epidemiology , Catheter-Related Infections/prevention & control , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Pandemics , Quality Improvement , Urinary Tract Infections/epidemiology , Urinary Tract Infections/prevention & control
16.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 17007, 2022 Oct 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2062267

ABSTRACT

An ongoing healthcare debate is whether controlling hospital-acquired infection (HAI) from methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) will result in lowering the global HAI rate, or if MRSA will simply be replaced by another pathogen and there will be no change in overall disease burden. With surges in drug-resistant hospital-acquired pathogens during the COVID-19 pandemic, this remains an important issue. Using a dataset of more than 1 million patients in 51 acute care facilities across the USA, and with the aid of a threshold model that models the nonlinearity in outbreaks of diseases, we show that MRSA is additive to the total burden of HAI, with a distinct 'epidemiological position', and does not simply replace other microbes causing HAI. Critically, as MRSA is reduced it is not replaced by another pathogen(s) but rather lowers the overall HAI burden. The analysis also shows that control of MRSA is a benchmark for how well all non-S. aureus nosocomial infections in the same hospital are prevented. Our results are highly relevant to healthcare epidemiologists and policy makers when assessing the impact of MRSA on hospitalized patients. These findings further stress the major importance of MRSA as a unique cause of nosocomial infections, as well as its pivotal role as a biomarker in demonstrating the measured efficacy (or lack thereof) of an organization's Infection Control program.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Staphylococcal Infections , Biomarkers , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics , Staphylococcal Infections/epidemiology , Staphylococcal Infections/prevention & control
17.
J Hosp Infect ; 129: 82-88, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2061534

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Avoiding in-hospital transmissions has been crucial in the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known on the extent to which hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 variants have caused infections in Germany. AIM: To analyse the occurrence and the outcomes of HAI with regard to different SARS-CoV-2 variants. METHODS: Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections hospitalized between March 1st, 2020 and May 17th, 2022 in 79 hospitals of the Helios Group were included. Information on patients' characteristics and outcomes were retrieved from claims data. In accordance with the Robert Koch Institute, infections were classified as hospital-acquired when tested positive >6 days after admission and if no information hinted at a different source. FINDINGS: In all, 62,875 SARS-CoV-2 patients were analysed, of whom 10.6% had HAI. HAIs represented 14.7% of SARS-CoV-2 inpatients during the Wildtype period, 3.5% during Alpha (odds ratio: 0.21; 95% confidence interval: 0.19-0.24), 8.8% during Delta (2.70; 2.35-3.09) and 10.1% during Omicron (1.10; 1.03-1.19). When age and comorbidities were accounted for, HAI had lower odds for death than community-acquired infections (0.802; 0.740-0.866). Compared to the Wildtype period, HAIs during Omicron were associated with lower odds for ICU (0.78; 0.69-0.88), ventilation (0.47; 0.39-0.56), and death (0.33; 0.28-0.40). CONCLUSION: Hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred throughout the pandemic, affecting highly vulnerable patients. Although transmissibility increased with newer variants, the proportion of HAIs decreased, indicating improved infection prevention and/or the effect of immunization. Furthermore, the Omicron period was associated with improved outcomes. However, the burden of hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections remains high.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Germany/epidemiology , Hospitals
18.
Curr Opin Infect Dis ; 35(6): 605-613, 2022 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2051764

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: SARS-CoV-2 deeply modified the risk of bacterial infection, bacterial resistance, and antibiotic strategies. This review summarized what we have learned. RECENT FINDINGS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed an increase in healthcare-acquired infection and multidrug-resistant organism-related infection, triggered by several factors: structural factors, such as increased workload and ongoing outbreaks, underlying illnesses, invasive procedures, and treatment-induced immunosuppression. The two most frequently healthcare-acquired infections described in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were bloodstream infection, related or not to catheters, health-acquired pneumonia (in ventilated or nonventilated patients). The most frequent species involved in bacteremia were Gram-positive cocci and Gram-negative bacilli in health-acquired pneumonia. The rate of Gram-negative bacilli is particularly high in late-onset ventilator-associated pneumonia, and the specific risk of Pseudomonas aeruginosa- related pneumonia increased when the duration of ventilation was longer than 7 days. A specificity that remains unexplained so far is the increase in enterococci bacteremia. SUMMARY: The choice of empiric antibiotimicrobials depends on several factors such as the site of the infection, time of onset and previous length of stay, previous antibiotic therapy, and known multidrug-resistant organism colonization. Pharmacokinetics of antimicrobials could be markedly altered during SARS-CoV-2 acute respiratory failure, which should encourage to perform therapeutic drug monitoring.


Subject(s)
Bacteremia , COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections , Humans , COVID-19/drug therapy , Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections/drug therapy , Cross Infection/drug therapy , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/microbiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Gram-Negative Bacteria , Bacteremia/drug therapy , Bacteremia/epidemiology , Bacteremia/microbiology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Risk Assessment
19.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 11(1): 118, 2022 09 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2043142

ABSTRACT

Private sector facilities in the United States have experienced a resurgence of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) hospital-onset infections during the COVID-19 pandemic, which eliminated all gains that were achieved over the last decade. The third quarter of 2021, the Standardized Infection Ratio for hospital onset MRSA bloodstream infections was 1.17, well above the baseline value of 1.0. In contrast, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has been able to maintain its mitigation efforts and low rates of MRSA hospital-onset infections through the second quarter of fiscal year 2022 (Mar. 31, 2022), the most recent available data. The difference may be explained not only by the VHA's use of uniform mitigating policies which rely on active surveillance and contact precautions, but also on the VAH's ability to maintain adequate staffing during the pandemic. Future research into MRSA mitigation is warranted and this data supports the need for healthcare system transformation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Staphylococcal Infections , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Humans , Infection Control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Staphylococcal Infections/epidemiology , Staphylococcal Infections/prevention & control , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL