CDC's Hospital-Onset Clostridioides difficile Prevention Framework in a Regional Hospital Network.

Importance: Despite modest reductions in the incidence of hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile infection (HO-CDI), CDI remains a leading cause of health care-associated infection. As no single intervention has proven highly effective on its own, a multifaceted approach to controlling HO-CDI is needed. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Strategies to Prevent Clostridioides difficile Infection in Acute Care Facilities Framework (hereafter, the Framework) in reducing HO-CDI incidence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was performed within the Duke Infection Control Outreach Network from July 1, 2019, through March 31, 2022. In all, 20 hospitals in the network participated in an implementation study of the Framework recommendations, and 26 hospitals did not participate and served as controls. The Framework has 39 discrete intervention categories organized into 5 focal areas for CDI prevention: (1) isolation and contact precautions, (2) CDI confirmation, (3) environmental cleaning, (4) infrastructure development, and (5) antimicrobial stewardship engagement. Exposures: Monthly teleconferences supporting Framework implementation for the participating hospitals. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were HO-CDI incidence trends at participating hospitals compared with controls and postintervention HO-CDI incidence at intervention sites compared with rates during the 24 months before the intervention. Results: The study sample included a total of 2184 HO-CDI cases and 7 269 429 patient-days. In the intervention cohort of 20 participating hospitals, there were 1403 HO-CDI cases and 3 513 755 patient-days, with a median (IQR) HO-CDI incidence of 2.8 (2.0-4.3) cases per 10 000 patient-days. The first analysis included an additional 3 755 674 patient-days and 781 HO-CDI cases among the 26 controls, with a median (IQR) HO-CDI incidence of 1.1 (0.7-2.7) case per 10 000 patient-days. The second analysis included an additional 2 538 874 patient-days and 1751 HO-CDI cases, with a median (IQR) HO-CDI incidence of 5.9 (2.7-8.9) cases per 10 000 patient-days, from participating hospitals 24 months before the intervention. In the first analysis, intervention sites had a steeper decline in HO-CDI incidence over time relative to controls (yearly incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.79 [95% CI, 0.67-0.94]; P = .01), but the decline was not temporally associated with study participation. In the second analysis, HO-CDI incidence was declining in participating hospitals before the intervention, and the rate of decline did not change during the intervention. The degree to which hospitals implemented the Framework was associated with steeper declines in HO-CDI incidence (yearly IRR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.90-0.99]; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study of a regional hospital network, implementation of the Framework was not temporally associated with declining HO-CDI incidence. Further study of the effectiveness of multimodal prevention measures for controlling HO-CDI is warranted.

Physician perceptions of barriers to infection prevention and control in labor and delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To learn about the perceptions of healthcare personnel (HCP) on the barriers they encounter when performing infection prevention and control (IPC) practices in labor and delivery to help inform future IPC resources tailored to this setting. DESIGN: Qualitative focus groups. SETTING: Labor and delivery units in acute-care settings. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of labor and delivery HCP attending the Infectious Diseases Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology 2022 Annual Meeting. METHODS: Two focus groups, each lasting 45 minutes, were conducted by a team from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A standardized script facilitated discussion around performing IPC practices during labor and delivery. Coding was performed by 3 reviewers using an immersion-crystallization technique. RESULTS: In total, 18 conference attendees participated in the focus groups: 67% obstetrician-gynecologists, 17% infectious disease physicians, 11% medical students, and 6% an obstetric anesthesiologist. Participants described the difficulty of consistently performing IPC practices in this setting because they often respond to emergencies, are an entry point to the hospital, and frequently encounter bodily fluids. They also described that IPC training and education is not specific to labor and delivery, and personal protective equipment is difficult to locate when needed. Participants observed a lack of standardization of IPC protocols in their setting and felt that healthcare for women and pregnant people is not prioritized on a larger scale and within their hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified barriers to consistently implementing IPC practices in the labor and delivery setting. These barriers should be addressed through targeted interventions and the development of obstetric-specific IPC resources.

A Review of Pediatric Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections Reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network: United States, 2016-2022.

Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) are common healthcare-associated infections in pediatrics. Children's hospital CLABSI standardized infection ratios decreased when comparing 2016-2019 (-26%, 95% CI [-31%, -20%]), and increased from 2019 to 2022 (18%, 95% CI [9%, 26%]). Resilient pediatric CLABSI prevention initiatives are needed.

Burnout and staff turnover among certified nursing assistants working in acute care hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare worker burnout is a growing problem in the United States which affects healthcare workers themselves, as well as the healthcare system as a whole. The goal of this qualitative assessment was to understand factors that may lead to healthcare worker burnout and turnover through focus groups with Certified Nursing Assistants who worked in acute care hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Eight focus group discussions lasting approximately 30 minutes each were held remotely from October 2022-January 2023 with current and former Certified Nursing Assistants who worked during the COVID-19 pandemic in acute care hospitals. Participants were recruited through various sources such as social media and outreach through professional organizations. The focus groups utilized open-ended prompts including topics such as challenges experienced during the pandemic, what could have improved their experiences working during the pandemic, and motivations for continuing or leaving their career in healthcare. The focus groups were coded using an immersion-crystallization technique and summarized using NVivo and Microsoft Excel. Participant demographic information was summarized overall and by current work status. RESULTS: The focus groups included 58 Certified Nursing Assistants; 33 (57%) were current Certified Nursing Assistants and 25 (43%) were Certified Nursing Assistants who no longer work in healthcare. Throughout the focus groups, five convergent themes emerged, including staffing challenges, respect and recognition for Certified Nursing Assistants, the physical and mental toll of the job, facility leadership support, and pay and incentives. CONCLUSIONS: Focus group discussions with Certified Nursing Assistants identified factors at individual and organizational levels that might contribute to burnout and staff turnover in healthcare settings. Suggestions from participants on improving their experiences included ensuring staff know they are valued, being included in conversations with leadership, and improving access to mental health resources.

Assessing the Impact of 2-Step Clostridioides difficile Testing at the Healthcare Facility Level.

BACKGROUND: Two-step testing for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) aims to improve diagnostic specificity but may also influence reported epidemiology and patterns of treatment. Some providers fear that 2-step testing may result in adverse outcomes if C. difficile is underdiagnosed. METHODS: Our primary objective was to assess the impact of 2-step testing on reported incidence of hospital-onset CDI (HO-CDI). As secondary objectives, we assessed the impact of 2-step testing on C. difficile-specific antibiotic use and colectomy rates as proxies for harm from underdiagnosis or delayed treatment. This longitudinal cohort study included 2 657 324 patient-days across 8 regional hospitals from July 2017 through March 2022. Impact of 2-step testing was assessed by time series analysis with generalized estimating equation regression models. RESULTS: Two-step testing was associated with a level decrease in HO-CDI incidence (incidence rate ratio, 0.53 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .48-.60]; P < .001), a similar level decrease in utilization rates for oral vancomycin and fidaxomicin (utilization rate ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, .58-.70]; P < .001), and no significant level (rate ratio, 1.16 [95% CI, .93-1.43]; P = .18) or trend (rate ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, .52-1.39]; P = .51) change in emergent colectomy rates. CONCLUSIONS: Two-step testing is associated with decreased reported incidence of HO-CDI, likely by improving diagnostic specificity. The parallel decrease in C. difficile-specific antibiotic use offers indirect reassurance against underdiagnosis of C. difficile infections still requiring treatment by clinician assessment. Similarly, the absence of any significant change in colectomy rates offers indirect reassurance against any rise in fulminant C. difficile requiring surgical management.

Making a C-DIFFerence: Implementation of a prevention collaborative to reduce hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile infection rates.

Objective: To assist hospitals in reducing Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) implemented a collaborative using the CDC CDI prevention strategies and the Targeted Assessment for Prevention (TAP) Strategy as foundational frameworks. Setting: Acute-care hospitals. Methods: We invited 400 hospitals with the highest cumulative attributable differences (CADs) to the 12-month collaborative, with monthly webinars, coaching calls, and deployment of the CDC CDI TAP facility assessments. Infection prevention barriers, gaps identified, and interventions implemented were qualitatively coded by categorizing them to respective CDI prevention strategies. Standardized infection ratios (SIRs) were reviewed to measure outcomes. Results: Overall, 76 hospitals participated, most often reporting CDI testing as their greatest barrier to achieving reduction (61%). In total, 5,673 TAP assessments were collected across 46 (61%) hospitals. Most hospitals (98%) identified at least 1 gap related to testing and at least 1 gap related to infrastructure to support prevention. Among 14 follow-up hospitals, 64% implemented interventions related to infrastructure to support prevention (eg, establishing champions, reviewing individual CDIs) and 86% implemented testing interventions (eg, 2-step testing, testing algorithms). The SIR decrease between the pre-collaborative and post-collaborative periods was significant among participants (16.7%; P < .001) but less than that among nonparticipants (25.1%; P < .001). Conclusions: This article describes gaps identified and interventions implemented during a comprehensive CDI prevention collaborative in targeted hospitals, highlighting potential future areas of focus for CDI prevention efforts as well as reported challenges and barriers to prevention of one of the most common healthcare-associated infections affecting hospitals and patients nationwide.

Evaluation of a Virtual Training to Enhance Public Health Capacity for COVID-19 Infection Prevention and Control in Nursing Homes.

CONTEXT: Between April 2020 and May 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) awarded more than $40 billion to health departments nationwide for COVID-19 prevention and response activities. One of the identified priorities for this investment was improving infection prevention and control (IPC) in nursing homes. PROGRAM: CDC developed a virtual course to train new and less experienced public health staff in core healthcare IPC principles and in the application of CDC COVID-19 healthcare IPC guidance for nursing homes. IMPLEMENTATION: From October 2020 to August 2021, the CDC led training sessions for 12 cohorts of public health staff using pretraining reading materials, case-based scenarios, didactic presentations, peer-learning opportunities, and subject matter expert-led discussions. Multiple electronic assessments were distributed to learners over time to measure changes in self-reported knowledge and confidence and to collect feedback on the course. Participating public health programs were also assessed to measure overall course impact. EVALUATION: Among 182 enrolled learners, 94% completed the training. Most learners were infection preventionists (42%) or epidemiologists (38%), had less than 1 year of experience in their health department role (75%), and had less than 1 year of subject matter experience (54%). After training, learners reported increased knowledge and confidence in applying the CDC COVID-19 healthcare IPC guidance for nursing homes (≥81%) with the greatest increase in performing COVID-19 IPC consultations and assessments (87%). The majority of participating programs agreed that the course provided an overall benefit (88%) and reduced training burden (72%). DISCUSSION: The CDC's virtual course was effective in increasing public health capacity for COVID-19 healthcare IPC in nursing homes and provides a possible model to increase IPC capacity for other infectious diseases and other healthcare settings. Future virtual healthcare IPC courses could be enhanced by tailoring materials to health department needs, reinforcing training through applied learning experiences, and supporting mechanisms to retain trained staff.

Remote Infection Control Assessments of US Nursing Homes During the COVID-19 Pandemic, April to June 2020.

BACKGROUND: Nursing homes (NHs) provide care in a congregate setting for residents at high risk of severe outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. In spring 2020, NHs were implementing new guidance to minimize SARS-CoV-2 spread among residents and staff. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether telephone and video-based infection control assessment and response (TeleICAR) strategies could efficiently assess NH preparedness and help resolve gaps. DESIGN: We incorporated Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 guidance for NH into an assessment tool covering 6 domains: visitor restrictions; health care personnel COVID-19 training; resident education, monitoring, screening, and cohorting; personal protective equipment supply; core infection prevention and control (IPC); and communication to public health. We performed TeleICAR consultations on behalf of health departments. Adherence to each element was documented and recommendations provided to the facility. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Health department-referred NHs that agreed to TeleICAR consultation. METHODS: We assessed overall numbers and proportions of NH that had not implemented each infection control element (gap) and proportion of NH that reported making ≥1 change in practice following the assessment. RESULTS: During April 13 to June 12, 2020, we completed TeleICAR consultations in 629 NHs across 19 states. Overall, 524 (83%) had ≥1 implementation gap identified; the median number of gaps was 2 (interquartile range: 1-4). The domains with the greatest number of facilities with gaps were core IPC practices (428/625; 68%) and COVID-19 education, monitoring, screening, and cohorting of residents (291/620; 47%). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: TeleICAR was an alternative to onsite infection control assessments that enabled public health to efficiently reach NHs across the United States early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Assessments identified widespread gaps in core IPC practices that put residents and staff at risk of infection. TeleICAR is an important strategy that leverages infection control expertise and can be useful in future efforts to improve NH IPC.

A qualitative assessment of factors affecting nursing home caregiving staff experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: A large portion of COVID-19 cases and deaths in the United States have occurred in nursing homes; however, current literature including the frontline perspective of staff working in nursing homes is limited. The objective of this qualitative assessment was to better understand what individual and facility level factors may have contributed to the impact of COVID-19 on Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) and Environmental Services (EVS) staff working in nursing homes. METHODS: Based on a simple random sample from the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN), 7,520 facilities were emailed invitations requesting one CNA and/or one EVS staff member for participation in a voluntary focus group over Zoom. Facility characteristics were obtained via NHSN and publicly available sources; participant demographics were collected via SurveyMonkey during registration and polling during focus groups. Qualitative information was coded using NVIVO and Excel. RESULTS: Throughout April 2021, 23 focus groups including 110 participants from 84 facilities were conducted homogenous by participant role. Staffing problems were a recurring theme reported. Participants often cited the toll the pandemic took on their emotional well-being, describing increased stress, responsibilities, and time needed to complete their jobs. The lack of consistent and systematic guidance resulting in frequently changing infection prevention protocols was also reported across focus groups. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing concerns of low wages and lack of financial incentives may have the potential to attract and retain employees to help alleviate nursing home staff shortages. Additionally, access to mental health resources could help nursing home staff cope with the emotional burden of the COVID-19 pandemic. These frontline staff members provided invaluable insight and should be included in improvement efforts to support nursing homes recovering from the impact of COVID-19 as well as future pandemic planning.

Gaps in infection prevention practices for catheter-associated urinary tract infections and central line-associated bloodstream infections as identified by the Targeted Assessment for Prevention Strategy.

BACKGROUND: Catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) and central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) represent a substantial portion of health care-associated infections (HAIs) reported in the United States. The Targeted Assessment for Prevention Strategy is a quality improvement framework to reduce health care-associated infections. Data from the Targeted Assessment for Prevention Facility Assessments were used to determine common infection prevention gaps for CAUTI and CLABSI. METHODS: Data from 2,044 CAUTI and 1,680 CLABSI assessments were included in the analysis. Items were defined as potential gaps if ≥33% respondents answered Unknown, ≥33% No, or ≥50% No or Unknown or Never, Rarely, Sometimes, or Unknown to questions pertaining to those areas. Review of response frequencies and stratification by respondent role were performed to highlight opportunities for improvement. RESULTS: Across CAUTI and CLABSI assessments, lack of physician champions (<35% Yes) and nurse champions (<55% Yes), along with lack of awareness of competency assessments, audits, and feedback were reported. Lack of practices to facilitate timely removal of urinary catheters were identified for CAUTI and issues with select device insertion practices, such as maintaining aseptic technique, were perceived as areas for improvement for CLABSI. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest common gaps in critical components of infection prevention and control programs. The identification of these gaps has the potential to inform targeted CAUTI and CLABSI prevention efforts.

A modified Delphi approach to develop a trial protocol for antibiotic de-escalation in patients with suspected sepsis.

Background: Early administration of antibiotics in sepsis is associated with improved patient outcomes, but safe and generalizable approaches to de-escalate or discontinue antibiotics after suspected sepsis events are unknown. Methods: We used a modified Delphi approach to identify safety criteria for an opt-out protocol to guide de-escalation or discontinuation of antibiotic therapy after 72 hours in non-ICU patients with suspected sepsis. An expert panel with expertise in antimicrobial stewardship and hospital epidemiology rated 48 unique criteria across 3 electronic survey rating tools. Criteria were rated primarily based on their impact on patient safety and feasibility for extraction from electronic health record review. The 48 unique criteria were rated by anonymous electronic survey tools, and the results were fed back to the expert panel participants. Consensus was achieved to either retain or remove each criterion. Results: After 3 rounds, 22 unique criteria remained as part of the opt-out safety checklist. These criteria included high-risk comorbidities, signs of severe illness, lack of cultures during sepsis work-up or antibiotic use prior to blood cultures, or ongoing signs and symptoms of infection. Conclusions: The modified Delphi approach is a useful method to achieve expert-level consensus in the absence of evidence suifficient to provide validated guidance. The Delphi approach allowed for flexibility in development of an opt-out trial protocol for sepsis antibiotic de-escalation. The utility of this protocol should be evaluated in a randomized controlled trial.

Implementation of the Targeted Assessment for Prevention Strategy in a healthcare system to reduce Clostridioides difficile infection rates.

BACKGROUND: Prevention of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a national priority and may be facilitated by deployment of the Targeted Assessment for Prevention (TAP) Strategy, a quality improvement framework providing a focused approach to infection prevention. This article describes the process and outcomes of TAP Strategy implementation for CDI prevention in a healthcare system. METHODS: Hospital A was identified based on CDI surveillance data indicating an excess burden of infections above the national goal; hospitals B and C participated as part of systemwide deployment. TAP facility assessments were administered to staff to identify infection control gaps and inform CDI prevention interventions. Retrospective analysis was performed using negative-binomial, interrupted time series (ITS) regression to assess overall effect of targeted CDI prevention efforts. Analysis included hospital-onset, laboratory-identified C. difficile event data for 18 months before and after implementation of the TAP facility assessments. RESULTS: The systemwide monthly CDI rate significantly decreased at the intervention (ß2, -44%; P = .017), and the postintervention CDI rate trend showed a sustained decrease (ß1 + ß3; -12% per month; P = .008). At an individual hospital level, the CDI rate trend significantly decreased in the postintervention period at hospital A only (ß1 + ß3, -26% per month; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: This project demonstrates TAP Strategy implementation in a healthcare system, yielding significant decrease in the laboratory-identified C. difficile rate trend in the postintervention period at the system level and in hospital A. This project highlights the potential benefit of directing prevention efforts to facilities with the highest burden of excess infections to more efficiently reduce CDI rates.

Pathogens causing central-line-associated bloodstream infections in acute-care hospitals-United States, 2011-2017.

OBJECTIVE: To describe pathogen distribution and rates for central-line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) from different acute-care locations during 2011-2017 to inform prevention efforts. METHODS: CLABSI data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) were analyzed. Percentages and pooled mean incidence density rates were calculated for a variety of pathogens and stratified by acute-care location groups (adult intensive care units [ICUs], pediatric ICUs [PICUs], adult wards, pediatric wards, and oncology wards). RESULTS: From 2011 to 2017, 136,264 CLABSIs were reported to the NHSN by adult and pediatric acute-care locations; adult ICUs and wards reported the most CLABSIs: 59,461 (44%) and 40,763 (30%), respectively. In 2017, the most common pathogens were Candida spp/yeast in adult ICUs (27%) and Enterobacteriaceae in adult wards, pediatric wards, oncology wards, and PICUs (23%-31%). Most pathogen-specific CLABSI rates decreased over time, excepting Candida spp/yeast in adult ICUs and Enterobacteriaceae in oncology wards, which increased, and Staphylococcus aureus rates in pediatric locations, which did not change. CONCLUSIONS: The pathogens associated with CLABSIs differ across acute-care location groups. Learning how pathogen-targeted prevention efforts could augment current prevention strategies, such as strategies aimed at preventing Candida spp/yeast and Enterobacteriaceae CLABSIs, might further reduce national rates.

A national survey of testing and management of asymptomatic carriage of C. difficile.

A nationwide survey indicated that screening for asymptomatic carriers of C. difficile is an uncommon practice in US healthcare settings. Better understanding of the role of asymptomatic carriage in C. difficile transmission, and of the measures available to reduce that risk, are needed to inform best practices regarding the management of carriers.

Evaluation of a program to improve hand hygiene in Kenyan hospitals through production and promotion of alcohol-based Handrub - 2012-2014.

Although critical to prevent healthcare-associated infections, hand hygiene (HH) compliance is poor in resource-limited settings. In 2012, three Kenyan hospitals began onsite production of alcohol-based handrub (ABHR) and HH promotion. Our aim is to determine the impact of local production of ABHR on HH compliance and perceptions of ABHR. We observed 25,738 HH compliance opportunities and conducted 15 baseline and post-intervention focus group discussions. Hand Hygiene compliance increased from 28% (baseline) to 38% (post-intervention, p = 0.0003). Healthcare workers liked the increased accessibility of ABHR, but disliked its smell, feel, and sporadic availability. Onsite production and promotion of ABHR resulted in modest HH improvement. Enhancing the quality of ABHR and addressing logistical barriers could improve program impact.

One needle, one syringe, only one time? A survey of physician and nurse knowledge, attitudes, and practices around injection safety.

BACKGROUND: To inform development, targeting, and penetration of materials from a national injection safety campaign, an evaluation was conducted to assess provider knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to unsafe injection practices. METHODS: A panel of physicians (n = 370) and nurses (n = 320) were recruited from 8 states to complete an online survey. Questions, using 5-point Likert and Spector scales, addressed acceptability and frequency of unsafe practices (eg, reuse of a syringe on >1 patient). Results were stratified to identify differences among physician specialties and nurse practice locations. RESULTS: Unsafe injection practices were reported by both physicians and nurses across all surveyed physician specialties and nurse practice locations. Twelve percent (12.4%) of physicians and 3% of nurses indicated reuse of syringes for >1 patient occurs in their workplace; nearly 5% of physicians indicated this practice usually or always occurs. A higher proportion of oncologists reported unsafe practices occurring in their workplace. CONCLUSIONS: There is a dangerous minority of providers violating basic standards of care; practice patterns may vary by provider group and specialty. More research is needed to understand how best to identify providers placing patients at risk of infection and modify their behaviors.

Expert Consensus on Metrics to Assess the Impact of Patient-Level Antimicrobial Stewardship Interventions in Acute-Care Settings.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) positively impact patient care, but metrics to assess ASP impact are poorly defined. We used a modified Delphi approach to select relevant metrics for assessing patient-level interventions in acute-care settings for the purposes of internal program decision making. An expert panel rated 90 candidate metrics on a 9-point Likert scale for association with 4 criteria: improved antimicrobial prescribing, improved patient care, utility in targeting stewardship efforts, and feasibility in hospitals with electronic health records. Experts further refined, added, or removed metrics during structured teleconferences and re-rated the retained metrics. Six metrics were rated >6 in all criteria: 2 measures of Clostridium difficile incidence, incidence of drug-resistant pathogens, days of therapy over admissions, days of therapy over patient days, and redundant therapy events. Fourteen metrics rated >6 in all criteria except feasibility were identified as targets for future development.

A Concise Set of Structure and Process Indicators to Assess and Compare Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs Among EU and US Hospitals: Results From a Multinational Expert Panel.

OBJECTIVES To develop common indicators, relevant to both EU member states and the United States, that characterize and allow for meaningful comparison of antimicrobial stewardship programs among different countries and healthcare systems. DESIGN Modified Delphi process. PARTICIPANTS A multinational panel of 20 experts in antimicrobial stewardship. METHODS Potential indicators were rated on the perceived feasibility to implement and measure each indicator and clinical importance for optimizing appropriate antimicrobial prescribing. RESULTS The outcome was a set of 33 indicators developed to characterize the infrastructure and activities of hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs. Among them 17 indicators were considered essential to characterize an antimicrobial stewardship program and therefore were included in a core set of indicators. The remaining 16 indicators were considered optional indicators and included in a supplemental set. CONCLUSIONS The integration of these indicators in public health surveillance and special studies will lead to a better understanding of best practices in antimicrobial stewardship. Additionally, future studies can explore the association of hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs to antimicrobial use and resistance. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016:1-11.

The Likelihood of Hospital Readmission Among Patients With Hospital-Onset Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) increase the likelihood of readmission. DESIGN: Retrospective matched cohort study for the years 2008-2009. SETTING: Acute care hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare recipients. CLABSI and readmission status were determined by linking National Healthcare Safety Network surveillance data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Medical Provider and Analysis Review in 8 states. Frequency matching was used on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification procedure code category and intensive care unit status. METHODS: We compared the rate of readmission among patients with and without CLABSI during an index hospitalization. Cox proportional hazard analysis was used to assess rate of readmission (the first hospitalization within 30 days after index discharge). Multivariate models included the following covariates: race, sex, length of index hospitalization stay, central line procedure code, Gagne comorbidity score, and individual chronic conditions. RESULTS: Of the 8,097 patients, 2,260 were readmitted within 30 days (27.9%). The rate of first readmission was 7.1 events/person-year for CLABSI patients and 4.3 events/person-year for non-CLABSI patients (P<.001). The final model revealed a small but significant increase in the rate of 30-day readmissions for patients with a CLABSI compared with similar non-CLABSI patients. In the first readmission for CLABSI patients, we also observed an increase in diagnostic categories consistent with CLABSI, including septicemia and complications of a device. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis found a statistically significant association between CLABSI status and readmission, suggesting that CLABSI may have adverse health impact that extends beyond hospital discharge.