Epidemiology and risk factors of 28-day mortality of hospital-acquired bloodstream infection in Turkish intensive care units: a prospective observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To uncover clinical epidemiology, microbiological characteristics and outcome determinants of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HA-BSIs) in Turkish ICU patients. METHODS: The EUROBACT II was a prospective observational multicontinental cohort study. We performed a subanalysis of patients from 24 Turkish ICUs included in this study. Risk factors for mortality were identified using multivariable Cox frailty models. RESULTS: Of 547 patients, 58.7% were male with a median [IQR] age of 68 [55-78]. Most frequent sources of HA-BSIs were intravascular catheter [182, (33.3%)] and lower respiratory tract [175, (32.0%)]. Among isolated pathogens (n = 599), 67.1% were Gram-negative, 21.5% Gram-positive and 11.2% due to fungi. Carbapenem resistance was present in 90.4% of Acinetobacter spp., 53.1% of Klebsiella spp. and 48.8% of Pseudomonas spp. In monobacterial Gram-negative HA-BSIs (n = 329), SOFA score (aHR 1.20, 95% CI 1.14-1.27), carbapenem resistance (aHR 2.46, 95% CI 1.58-3.84), previous myocardial infarction (aHR 1.86, 95% CI 1.12-3.08), COVID-19 admission diagnosis (aHR 2.95, 95% CI 1.25-6.95) and not achieving source control (aHR 2.02, 95% CI 1.15-3.54) were associated with mortality. However, availability of clinical pharmacists (aHR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06-0.90) and source control (aHR 0.46, 95% CI 0.28-0.77) were associated with survival. In monobacterial Gram-positive HA-BSIs (n = 93), SOFA score (aHR 1.29, 95% CI 1.17-1.43) and age (aHR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.08) were associated with mortality, whereas source control (aHR 0.41, 95% CI 0.20-0.87) was associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: Considering high antimicrobial resistance rate, importance of source control and availability of clinical pharmacists, a multifaceted management programme should be adopted in Turkish ICUs.

Variation in Communication and Family Visiting Policies in Italian Intensive Care Units during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Secondary Analysis of the COVISIT International Survey

Background: During COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions to in-person visiting of caregivers to patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) were applied in many countries. Our aim was to describe the variations in communication and family visiting policies in Italian ICUs during the pandemic. Methods: A secondary analysis from the COVISIT international survey was conducted, focusing on data from Italy. Results: Italian ICUs provided 118 (18%) responses out of 667 responses collected worldwide. A total of 12 Italian ICUs were at the peak of COVID-19 admissions at the time of the survey and 42/118 had 90% or more of patients admitted to ICU affected by COVID-19. During the COVID-19 peak, 74% of Italian ICUs adopted a no-in-person-visiting policy. This remained the most common strategy (67%) at the time of the survey. Information to families was provided by regular phone calls (81% in Italy versus 47% for the rest of the world). Virtual visiting was available for 69% and most commonly performed using devices provided by the ICU (71% in Italy versus 36% outside Italy). Conclusion: Our study showed that restrictions to the ICU applied during the COVID-19 pandemic were still in use at the time of the survey. The main means of communication with caregivers were telephone and virtual meetings.

Variation in Communication and Family Visiting Policies in Italian Intensive Care Units during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Secondary Analysis of the COVISIT International Survey.

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions to in-person visiting of caregivers to patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) were applied in many countries. Our aim was to describe the variations in communication and family visiting policies in Italian ICUs during the pandemic. METHODS: A secondary analysis from the COVISIT international survey was conducted, focusing on data from Italy. RESULTS: Italian ICUs provided 118 (18%) responses out of 667 responses collected worldwide. A total of 12 Italian ICUs were at the peak of COVID-19 admissions at the time of the survey and 42/118 had 90% or more of patients admitted to ICU affected by COVID-19. During the COVID-19 peak, 74% of Italian ICUs adopted a no-in-person-visiting policy. This remained the most common strategy (67%) at the time of the survey. Information to families was provided by regular phone calls (81% in Italy versus 47% for the rest of the world). Virtual visiting was available for 69% and most commonly performed using devices provided by the ICU (71% in Italy versus 36% outside Italy). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that restrictions to the ICU applied during the COVID-19 pandemic were still in use at the time of the survey. The main means of communication with caregivers were telephone and virtual meetings.

Different epidemiology of bloodstream infections in COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 critically ill patients: a descriptive analysis of the Eurobact II study.

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.

Update on Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review recently published evidence relevant to Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB). RECENT FINDINGS: Staphylococcus aureus is the most common pathogen causing co-infections and superinfections in patients with COVID-19. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia ratios have sharply risen during the pandemic. SAB mortality is 18% at 1 month and 27% at 3 months but has gradually decreased over the last 30 years. Recurrences and reinfections are common (9%). Standardised items to define complicated SAB, and a new cut-off defining persisting bacteremia after 2 days with positive blood cultures have been proposed. Multiple antibiotic combinations have been trialled including vancomycin or daptomycin with ß-lactams, fosfomycin, or clindamycin, without significant results. In the recently published guidelines, vancomycin remains the first line of treatment for MRSA bacteremia. For the management of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus , cefazolin less frequently causes acute kidney injury than flucloxacillin, and when susceptibility is demonstrated, de-escalation to penicillin G is suggested. SUMMARY: Our review confirms that Staphylococcus aureus represents a special aetiology among all causes of bloodstream infections. Pending results of platform and larger trials, its distinct epidemiology and determinants mandate careful integration of clinical variables and best available evidence to optimize patient outcomes.

Variation in communication and family visiting policies in intensive care within and between countries during the Covid-19 pandemic: The COVISIT international survey.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, intensive care units (ICU) introduced restrictions to in-person family visiting to safeguard patients, healthcare personnel, and visitors. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey (March-July 2021) investigating ICU visiting practices before the pandemic, at peak COVID-19 ICU admissions, and at the time of survey response. We sought data on visiting policies and communication modes including use of virtual visiting (videoconferencing). RESULTS: We obtained 667 valid responses representing ICUs in all continents. Before the pandemic, 20% (106/525) had unrestricted visiting hours; 6% (30/525) did not allow in-person visiting. At peak, 84% (558/667) did not allow in-person visiting for patients with COVID-19; 66% for patients without COVID-19. This proportion had decreased to 55% (369/667) at time of survey reporting. A government mandate to restrict hospital visiting was reported by 53% (354/646). Most ICUs (55%, 353/615) used regular telephone updates; 50% (306/667) used telephone for formal meetings and discussions regarding prognosis or end-of-life. Virtual visiting was available in 63% (418/667) at time of survey. CONCLUSIONS: Highly restrictive visiting policies were introduced at the initial pandemic peaks, were subsequently liberalized, but without returning to pre-pandemic practices. Telephone became the primary communication mode in most ICUs, supplemented with virtual visits.

Current opinion in management of septic shock due to Gram-negative bacteria.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused multiple challenges to ICUs, including an increased rate of secondary infections, mostly caused by Gram-negative micro-organisms. Worrying trends of resistance acquisition complicate this picture. We provide a review of the latest evidence to guide management of patients with septic shock because of Gram-negative bacteria. RECENT FINDINGS: New laboratory techniques to detect pathogens and specific resistance patterns from the initial culture are available. Those may assist decreasing the time to adequate antimicrobial therapy and avoid unnecessary broad-spectrum antibiotic overuse. New antimicrobials, including ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitor combinations, such as ceftolozane-tazobactam, imipenem-relebactam or meropenem-vaborbactam and cephalosporins, such as cefiderocol targeted to specific pathogens and resistance patterns are available for use in the clinical setting. Optimization of antibiotic dosing and delivery should follow pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles and wherever available therapeutic drug monitoring. Management of sepsis has brought capillary refill time back to the spotlight along with more reasoned fluid resuscitation and a moderate approach to timing of dialysis initiation. SUMMARY: Novel rapid diagnostic tests and antimicrobials specifically targeted to Gram-negative pathogens are available and should be used within the principles of antimicrobial stewardship including de-escalation and short duration of antimicrobial therapy.

Personal protective equipment use by healthcare workers in intensive care unit during the early phase of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy: a secondary analysis of the PPE-SAFE survey.

BACKGROUND: Italy was the first Western country to be heavily affected by COVID-19. Healthcare workers (HCWs) were exposed to a high risk of occupational infection, partially due to insufficient personal protective equipment (PPE) supplies. This study aimed to describe the practices, availability, training, confidence in PPE use and the adverse effects due to extended PPE use, as reported by HCWs in Italy. We also aimed to provide a comparison between Italian data and those from other countries. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of a previously published international study, the PPE-SAFE Survey, conducted in April 2020. Data were analysed from the original study database. RESULTS: We analysed the responses from 380 healthcare workers based in Italy, out of the 2711 respondents to the international survey. Among the Italian respondents, FFP2 and FFP3 respirators or equivalent were the most used masks for routine tasks (respectively 188/380, 50%; and 163/380, 43%). The median time of wearing PPE without taking a break was 5 h [interquartile range (IQR) 4-6], with statistically significant difference from other countries [median 4 h (IQR 2-5) p < 0.0001]. In Italy, 249 out of 380 (65%) HCWs had never performed a formal fit test for a N95 mask or equivalent and 91/380 (24%) never had a partner for donning and doffing procedures. Most of the respondents (299/380, 79%) had received formal training in PPE use at any time. CONCLUSION: Most of the surveyed Italian HCWs reported working at above usual capacity, long shifts with PPE without breaks and routine use in intensive care unit of aerosol protection (e.g. FFP2/FFP3), hazmat suits and face shields/visors. The correct adherence to safety procedures (e.g. donning/doffing in pairs, performing fit test) has substantial scope for improvement in the future.

Personal protective equipment use by health-care workers in intensive care units during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: comparative analysis with the PPE-SAFE survey.

Aim: We investigated personal protective equipment (PPE) use and supply shortage, training, and adverse events among health-care workers (HCWs) in the intensive care unit (ICU) during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in Japan and compared the results with an international survey that used the same methodology. Methods: This Web-based survey was carried out from 14 April to 6 May, 2020, in Japan and included HCWs directly involved in ICU management of COVID-19 patients. A survey invitation was emailed using the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine's mailing list. Results: We analyzed 460 valid responses from among 976 responses. The N95/FFP2 mask (77%) was the most frequently used, although half of our respondents reported reuse of single-use N95/FFP2 masks. The median duration (1 h) of uninterrupted PPE use per shift was less than that in the international study. The most common PPE-related adverse event was experiencing intense heat (75%). Logistic regression analysis revealed that being a nurse was independently associated with experiencing intense heat. Conclusion: Shortage of PPE and frequent mask reuse were prevalent during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan. Intense heat is the most significant symptom, especially for nurses, even with short-duration PPE use. Strategies to protect HCWs from dehydration and intense heatstroke are needed.

Personal protective equipment and intensive care unit healthcare worker safety in the COVID-19 era (PPE-SAFE): An international survey.

PURPOSE: To survey healthcare workers (HCW) on availability and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) caring for COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIALS AND METHOD: A web-based survey distributed worldwide in April 2020. RESULTS: We received 2711 responses from 1797 (67%) physicians, 744 (27%) nurses, and 170 (6%) Allied HCW. For routine care, most (1557, 58%) reportedly used FFP2/N95 masks, waterproof long sleeve gowns (1623; 67%), and face shields/visors (1574; 62%). Powered Air-Purifying Respirators were used routinely and for intubation only by 184 (7%) and 254 (13%) respondents, respectively. Surgical masks were used for routine care by 289 (15%) and 47 (2%) for intubations. At least one piece of standard PPE was unavailable for 1402 (52%), and 817 (30%) reported reusing single-use PPE. PPE was worn for a median of 4 h (IQR 2, 5). Adverse effects of PPE were associated with longer shift durations and included heat (1266, 51%), thirst (1174, 47%), pressure areas (1088, 44%), headaches (696, 28%), Inability to use the bathroom (661, 27%) and extreme exhaustion (492, 20%). CONCLUSIONS: HCWs reported widespread shortages, frequent reuse of, and adverse effects related to PPE. Urgent action by healthcare administrators, policymakers, governments and industry is warranted.