Visitor Restrictions During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Increased Falls With Harm at a Canadian Hospital: An Exploratory Study.

BACKGROUND: Falls with harms (FWH) in hospitalized patients increase costs and lengths of stay. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in more FWH. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased patients in isolation with fewer visitors. Their relationship with falls has not been previously studied. METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-site, 12-month before pandemic-12-month after pandemic, observational study. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to model FWH outcome and associations with isolation and visitor restrictions. RESULTS: There were 4369 isolation events and 385 FWH among 22,505 admissions during the study period. Unadjusted analysis demonstrated a FWH risk of 1.33% (95% CI 0.99, 1.67) in those who were placed in isolation compared to 1.80% (95% CI 1.60, 2.00) in those without an isolation event (χ2 = 4.73,P = 0.03). The FWH risk during the different visitor restriction periods was significantly higher compared to the prepandemic period (χ2 = 20.81, P < 0.001), ranging from 1.28% (95% CI 1.06, 2.50) in the prepandemic period to 2.03% (95% 1.66, 2.40) with no visitors permitted (phase A) in the pandemic period. After adjusting for potential confounders and selection bias, only phase A visitor restrictions were associated with an increased FWH risk of 0.75% (95% CI 0.32, 1.18) compared to no visitor restrictions. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest a moderately strong association between hospitalized patient FWH risk and severe visitor restrictions. This association was muted in phases with even minor allowances for visitation. This represents the first report of the adverse effects of visitor restriction policies on patients' FWH risks.

What is already known on this topic ­ Patient accidents in hospitals account for 4% of all hospital-related harmful events. There are many risk factors that contribute to these accidents, but few interventions that reduce their risk. During the COVID-19 pandemic period, the number of patient accidents has increased. While the reasons for this association are unclear, they may be related to COVID-19-related interventions such as patient isolation and visitor restrictions. What this study adds ­ This exploratory study is the first to demonstrate that visitor restrictions may be associated with an increased risk of patient accidents. How this study might affect research, practice or policy ­ The potential harmful effects of visitor restrictions should be taken into consideration whenever these interventions are being implemented as part of a bundled strategy for prevention of infectious diseases transmission and protection. Patient accidents in hospitals resulting in harm requiring either treatment or prolonged hospital stay are of great interest to health care, policy makers and the general public.1 They account for 4% of all hospital-related harmful events and are included as an indicator in the new Hospital Harm Measure instituted across Canada as a patient safety quality measure of acute hospital care.2 Since the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada on March 13, 2020, there were 0.26 patient trauma events per 100 hospitalizations reported in both 2020­2021 and 2021­2022, a 13% increase from 2019 to 2020.3 In a population-based observational study conducted among Ontario patients hospitalized in 2015­2016, patient accidents were estimated to increase the index hospitalization length of stay by 17.3 days (95% CI 17.0, 17.6) and costs by $47824 (95% CI 47,383, 48,266) (CDN).4 There have been over 400 clinical factors identified as being associated with an increased risk of falls in hospitalized patients.5 Risk mitigation strategies have been implemented in many hospitals to prevent anticipatory falls defined as potentially preventable through early identification of patients that exhibit clinical signs associated with increased risk of falls. These anticipatory falls make up approximately 30% of all falls, with the remainder being nonpreventable and due to unanticipated or accidental falls.5 In a recent systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of falls prevention interventions on fall outcomes for adults in hospital settings, patient and staff education was the only intervention that reduced the fall rate risk ratio (RR) 0.70 (95% CI 0.51, 0.96) and the fall odds ratio 0.62 (95% 0.47, 0.83) with a high level of certainty, while early stratification using fall risk screening tools, rehabilitation and exercise therapies, assistive and alarm devices, system changes such as hourly rounding, and environmental modifications demonstrated no benefit.6 One particular program, the Fall TIPS program,7,8 which leverages visitor engagement to ensure that patients are compliant with fall prevention recommendations printed on a laminated poster or visual aid, demonstrated a 34% reduction in falls with harm, suggesting a potential mechanism through which patient visitation might reduce patient harm. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a COVID-19 pandemic.9 In an attempt to prevent the introduction and spread of COVID-19 in Canadian hospitals and prevent transmission from patients and healthcare providers to visitors, regional and local public health authorities advised acute care hospitals to cancel elective clinic visits, treatments, and surgical procedures and implement visitor restrictions and enhanced COVID-19 screening and isolation protocols. These recommendations resulted in increased numbers of patients in contact/droplet isolation precautions and more severe patient visitor restrictions. Many of these recommendations were revised during the subsequent pandemic waves, as some were considered by many to be ineffective and potentially harmful.10­12 For example, some have argued that patient visitors are unlikely to be an important source of hospital-acquired COVID-19 infection.12 The authors concluded that severe patient visitor restrictions may have prevented few COVID-19 infections, while contributing to low staff morale and worse patient outcomes. In a retrospective before-after ecological study conducted at 32 hospitals within the Beryl Institute community in the United States from 2019 to 2020, the unadjusted in-hospital fall with hip fracture rates increased from 0.03 events (per 1000 hospital discharges) in 2019 in hospitals with no visitor restrictions, to 0.07 in hospitals with partial limited visitation in 2020, and to 0.14 in hospitals with absolute visitor restriction policies in 2020,13 possibly suggesting a signal for patient harm associated with different levels of visitor restrictions. As for increased numbers of hospitalized patients in isolation, a systematic review noted that isolation practices are associated with less patient-healthcare worker interaction, delays in care, and increased symptoms of depression and anxiety.14 The impact of either visitor restrictions or patient isolation on FWH risks has not been reported.10,11,14 This is an exploratory study to determine if there is an association between either isolation precautions or visitor restrictions and increased falls with harm risk in adult patients hospitalized in an acute care community hospital.

The Efficacy of the BioFire FilmArray Gastrointestinal Panel to Reduce Hospital Costs Associated With Contact Isolation: A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Molecular syndromic panels can rapidly detect common pathogens responsible for acute gastroenteritis in hospitalized patients. Their impact on both patient and healthcare system outcomes is uncertain compared to conventional stool testing. This randomized trial evaluates the impact of molecular testing on in-hospital resource utilization compared to conventional stool testing. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with acute diarrheal illness were randomized 1:1 to either conventional or molecular stool testing with the BioFire FilmArray gastrointestinal panel (FGP). The primary outcome was the duration of contact isolation, and secondary outcomes included other in-hospital resource utilization such as diagnostic imaging and antimicrobial use. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients were randomized. Randomization resulted in a balanced allocation of patients across all three age strata (<18, 18-69, ≥70 years old). The proportion of positive stools was 20.5% vs 29.5% in the control and FGP groups, respectively (p=0.196). The median duration of contact isolation was 51 hours (interquartile range [iqr] 66) and 69 hours (iqr 81) in the conventional and FGP groups, respectively (p=0.0513). There were no significant differences in other in-hospital resource utilization between groups. CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in in-hospital resource utilization observed between the FGP and conventional stool testing groups.

The role of patients in the governance of a sustainable healthcare system: A scoping review.

Patients, healthcare providers and insurers need a governance framework to establish the 'rules of use' to deliver more responsible use of services. The objective of this review was to provide an overview of frameworks and analyze the definitions of patient accountability to identify themes and potential gaps in the literature. Fifteen bibliographic databases were searched until July 2021. This included: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Web of Science, HealthSTAR, Scopus, ABI/INFORM Global, Cochrane Library, ERIC, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, Sociological Abstracts, Worldwide Political Science Abstracts and International Political Science Abstracts. Searches were also completed in Google Scholar. Inclusion criteria included articles focused on accountability of patients, and exclusions included articles that were not available, not written in English, with missing information, and commentaries or editorials. In total, 85530 unique abstracts were identified, and 27 articles were included based on the inclusion criteria. The results showed that patient accountability is rarely used and poorly defined. Most studies focused on what patients should be held to account for and agreed that patients should be responsible for behaviours that may contribute to adverse health outcomes. Some studies promoted a punitive approach as a mechanism of enforcement. Most studies argued for positive incentives or written agreements and contracts. While many studies recognized the value of patient accountability frameworks, there was a concern that these frameworks could further exacerbate existing socioeconomic disparities and contribute to poor health-related behaviours and outcomes (e.g., stigmatizing marginalized groups). Shared models of accountability between patients and healthcare providers or patients and communities were preferred. Before committing to a patient accountability framework for improving patient health and sustaining a healthcare system, the concept must be acceptable and reasonable to patients, providers, and society as a whole.

Pandemic Responsiveness in an Acute Care Setting: A Community Hospital's Utilization of Operational Resources During COVID-19.

Background: To ensure continuity of services while mitigating patient surge and nosocomial infections during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, acute care hospitals have been required to make significant operational adjustments. Here, we identify and discuss key administrative priorities and strategies utilized by a large community hospital located in Ontario, Canada. Methods: Guided by a qualitative descriptive approach, we performed a thematic analysis of all COVID-19-related documentation discussed by the hospital's emergency operation centre (EOC) during the pandemic's first wave. We then solicited operational strategies from a multidisciplinary group of hospital leaders to construct a narrative for each theme. Results: Seven recurrent themes critical to the hospital's pandemic response emerged: 1) Organizational structure: a modified EOC structure was adopted to increase departmental interoperability and situational awareness; 2) Capacity planning: Design Thinking guided rapid infrastructure decisions to meet surge requirements; 3) Occupational health and workplace safety: a multidisciplinary team provided respirator fit-testing, critical absence adjudication, and wellness needs; 4) Human resources/workforce planning: new workforce planning, recruitment, and redeployment strategies addressed staffing shortages; 5) Personal protective equipment (PPE): PPE conservation required proactive sourcing from traditional and non-traditional suppliers; 6) Community response: local partnerships were activated to divert patients through a non-referral-based assessment and treatment centre, support long-term care and retirement homes, and establish a 70-bed field hospital; and 7) Corporate communication: a robust communication strategy provided timely and transparent access to rapidly evolving information. Conclusion: A community hospital's operational preparedness for COVID-19 was supported by inter-operability, leveraging internal and external expertise and partnerships, creative problem solving, and developing novel tools to support occupational health and community initiatives.

Elicitation of stakeholder viewpoints about medical cannabis research for pain management in critically ill ventilated patients: A Q-methodology study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine acceptability of medical cannabis research in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Q-methodology survey. SETTING: Convenience sample of healthcare providers and the general public were recruited at an acute care community hospital in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: In the first phase, 63 respondents provided 197 unique viewpoints in response to a topic statement about medical cannabis use in critically ill patients. Twenty-five viewpoints were selected for the q-sample. In the second phase, 99 respondents ranked these viewpoints according to an a priori quasi normal distribution ranging from +4 (most agree) to -4 (least agree). Factor analysis was combined with comments provided by survey respondents to label and describe the extracted factors. RESULTS: The factor labels were hoping and caring (factor 1), pragmatic progress (factor 2), and cautious/conservative and protectionist (factor 3). Factor 1 describes a viewpoint of unequivocal support for medical cannabis research in this population with few caveats. Factor 2 describes a viewpoint of cautious support with a need to monitor for unintended adverse effects. Factor 3 describes a viewpoint of ensuring that current analgosedation techniques are optimized before exposing patients to another potentially harmful drug. CONCLUSIONS: Using a q-methodology design, we were able to sample and describe the viewpoints that exist about medical cannabis research in critically ill patients. Three factors emerged that seemed to adequately describe the relative ranking of q-statements by the majority of respondents. Combining the distinguishing statements along with respondent comments allowed us to determine that the majority support medical cannabis research in critically ill patients.

Clinical Evaluation of Deep Learning and Atlas-Based Auto-Contouring of Bladder and Rectum for Prostate Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: Auto-contouring may reduce workload, interobserver variation, and time associated with manual contouring of organs at risk. Manual contouring remains the standard due in part to uncertainty around the time and workload savings after accounting for the review and editing of auto-contours. This preliminary study compares a standard manual contouring workflow with 2 auto-contouring workflows (atlas and deep learning) for contouring the bladder and rectum in patients with prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Three contouring workflows were defined based on the initial contour-generation method including manual (MAN), atlas-based auto-contour (ATLAS), and deep-learning auto-contour (DEEP). For each workflow, initial contour generation was retrospectively performed on 15 patients with prostate cancer. Then, radiation oncologists (ROs) edited each contour while blinded to the manner in which the initial contour was generated. Workflows were compared by time (both in initial contour generation and in RO editing), contour similarity, and dosimetric evaluation. RESULTS: Mean durations for initial contour generation were 10.9 min, 1.4 min, and 1.2 min for MAN, DEEP, and ATLAS, respectively. Initial DEEP contours were more geometrically similar to initial MAN contours. Mean durations of the RO editing steps for MAN, DEEP, and ATLAS contours were 4.1 min, 4.7 min, and 10.2 min, respectively. The geometric extent of RO edits was consistently larger for ATLAS contours compared with MAN and DEEP. No differences in clinically relevant dose-volume metrics were observed between workflows. CONCLUSION: Auto-contouring software affords time savings for initial contour generation; however, it is important to also quantify workload changes at the RO editing step. Using deep-learning auto-contouring for bladder and rectum contour generation reduced contouring time without negatively affecting RO editing times, contour geometry, or clinically relevant dose-volume metrics. This work contributes to growing evidence that deep-learning methods are a clinically viable solution for organ-at-risk contouring in radiation therapy.

Implications of Oncoplastic Breast Surgery on Radiation Boost Delivery in Localized Breast Cancer.

Background Oncoplastic partial mastectomy (OPM) is a technique utilized to improve aesthetic and survivorship outcomes in patients with localized breast cancer. This technique leads to breast tissue rearrangement, which can have an impact on target definition for boost radiotherapy (BRT). The aim of this study was to determine if the choice of surgical technique independently affected the decision to deliver a radiation boost. Materials and methods This was a retrospective study of patients treated between January 2017 and December 2018. We selected consecutive patients based on surgical procedure: 50 undergoing standard breast-conserving surgery and 50 having had an OPM. The primary outcome was average treatment effect (ATE) of surgery type on reception of BRT. Secondary outcomes included ATE of surgery type on the time to reception of radiotherapy and incidence of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). The ratio of boost clinical target volume (CTV) to pathologic tumor size was also compared between the two groups. Treatment effects regression adjustment and inverse-probability weighted analysis was used to estimate ATEs for both primary and secondary outcomes. Results For the entire cohort, the median age was 64 years (range: 37-88 years). The median tumor size was 1.5 cm (range: 0.1-6.5 cm). The majority of patients were with ≤ stage IIA (78%), invasive ductal subtype (80%), negative lymphovascular space invasion (78%), negative margin (90%), and positive ER/PR (estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor) (69%). Overall, surgical technique was not associated with differences in the proportion of patients receiving BRT (ATE: 6.0% [95% CI: -4.5 to 16.0]). There were no differences in delays to radiation treatment between the two groups (ATE: 32.8 days [95% CI: -22.1 to 87.7]). With a median follow-up time of 419 days (range: 30-793 days), there were only five recurrences, with one case of IBTR in each group. There was no difference in the ratio of CTV volume to tumor size between the two groups (p=0.38). Conclusions OPM did not affect the decision to offer localized BRT following standard whole breast radiotherapy or significantly affect treatment times or radiation volumes. The decision to offer OPM should include a multi-disciplinary approach.

Evaluation of a program using a physician assistant and an electronic patient-provider communication tool to facilitate discussions about goals of care in older adults in hospital: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Many patients receive unwanted, low-value, high-intensity care at the end of life because of poor communication with health care providers. Our aim was to evaluate the feasibility of using a physician assistant and an electronic tool to facilitate discussions about goals of care. METHOD: We conducted a pilot study for the intervention (physician assistant-led discussion using an electronic tool) from Apr. 1 to Aug. 31, 2019. Patients aged 79 years or older admitted to the Royal Victoria Hospital (Barrie, Ontario) with either (i) no documented resuscitation preferences or (ii) a request for life-sustaining treatments in the event of a life-threatening illness were eligible for the intervention. The goal of this study was to complete more than 30 interventions. The primary outcomes included the proportion of consenting eligible patients, the time required and the proportion of patients changing their resuscitation preferences. RESULTS: A total of 763 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 337 eligible for the intervention. Of these, 49 cases were contacted for consent, and 37 interventions were completed (75.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 61.1%-86.6%). On average, the intervention required 50 minutes (standard deviation 21) to complete. Overall, 31 interventions resulted in a change in resuscitation preferences (83.7%, 95% CI 68.0%-93.8%), with 22 patients choosing to forgo any access to life-sustaining treatments in the event of a life-threatening illness (59.4%, 95% CI 42.1%-75.2%). INTERPRETATION: In this pilot study, the intervention was completed in a minority of eligible patients and required substantial time; however, it led to many changes in resuscitation preferences. Before designing a study to evaluate its impact, the intervention needs to be revised to make it more efficient to administer.

Premedication with montelukast and rupatadine decreased rituximab infusion time, rate, severity of reactions and use of rescue medications.

Rituximab-associated infusion reactions (IRs) are significant burdens on oncology patients, caregivers and healthcare providers. We evaluated whether montelukast and rupatadine improve rituximab delivery, decrease frequency/severity of IRs and the number of medications used to control IRs. Using a nonrandomized clinical study design, we assessed adult rituximab naïve patients with B-cell lymphoid malignancies from January 2017 to July 2019. Prior to the first rituximab infusion patients received one of the premedication regimens: (i) standard premedications, diphenhydramine hydrochloride and acetaminophen ("SP" group); (ii) SP + montelukast ("M" group); (iii) SP + rupatadine ("R" group); (iv) SP + rupatadine + montelukast Schedule 1 ("M + R Schedule 1" group); (v) SP + rupatadine + montelukast Schedule 2 ("M + R Schedule 2" group). A total of 223 patients with a median age of 69 years were assessed. Demographics and treatment groups were comparable among all five groups. Mean rituximab infusion time was 290 min in the SP group versus 273, 261, 243 and 236 min in the M, R, M + R Schedule 1 and M + R Schedule 2 groups, respectively. The incidence of rituximab IRs was 75% in the SP group versus 44, 41, 22 and 22% in the M, R, M + R Schedule 1 and M + R Schedule 2 groups, respectively. The median reaction grade was 2 in the SP group and 0 in all other groups. The median number of rescue medications was 3 in the SP group and 0 in all other groups. In conclusion, montelukast and rupatadine significantly improved rituximab delivery, decreased the rate and severity of IRs and reduced the need for rescue medications.

Cerebrospinal Fluid Analysis With the BioFire FilmArray Meningitis/Encephalitis Molecular Panel Reduces Length of Hospital Stay in Patients With Suspected Central Nervous System Infections.

The Meningitis/Encephalitis Panel (MEP) is a sensitive and specific Food and Drug Administration-approved molecular diagnostic test for the 14 most common infectious etiologies of meningoencephalitis. Using a before-after controlled study design, MEP reduced length of hospital stay by 1.5 days, and this effect was mediated by the reduced time to final microbiology reporting.

Estimating the Impact of Words Used by Physicians in Advance Care Planning Discussions: The "Do You Want Everything Done?" Effect.

To estimate the probability of a substitute decision maker choosing to withdraw life-sustaining therapy after hearing an affirmative patient response to the phrase "Do you want everything done?" DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment. SETTING: Single community hospital in Ontario. SUBJECTS: Nonrandom sampling of healthcare providers and the public. INTERVENTION: Online survey. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 1,621 subjects who entered the survey, 692 consented and 432 completed the survey. Females comprised 73% of subjects. Over 95% of subjects were under 65 years old, and 50% had some intensive care-related exposure. Healthcare providers comprised 29% of the subjects. The relative importance of attributes for determining the probability of withdraw life-sustaining therapy by substitute decision makers was as follows: stated patient preferences equals to 23.4%; patient age equals to 20.6%; physical function prognosis equals to 15.2%; length of ICU stay equals to 14.4%; survival prognosis equals to 13.8%; and prognosis for communication equals to 12.6%. Using attribute level utilities, the probability of an substitute decision maker choosing to withdraw life-sustaining therapy after hearing a patient answer in the affirmative "Do you want everything done?" compared with "I would not want to live if I could not take care of myself" was 18.8% (95% CI, 17.2-20.4%) versus 59.8% (95% CI, 57.6-62.0%) after controlling for all the other five attribute levels in the scenario: age greater than 80 years; survival prognosis less than 1%; length of ICU stay greater than 6 months; communication equals to unresponsive; and physical equals to bed bound. CONCLUSIONS: Using a discrete choice experiment survey, we estimated the impact of a commonly employed and poorly understood phrase physicians may use when discussing advance care plans with patients and their substitute decision makers on the subsequent withdraw life-sustaining therapies. This phrase is predicted to dramatically reduce the likelihood of withdraw life-sustaining therapy even in medically nonbeneficial scenarios and potentially contribute to low-value end-of-life care and outcomes. The immediate cessation of this term should be reinforced in medical training for all healthcare providers who participate in advance care planning.

Antibiotic exposure and risk of community-associated Clostridium difficile infection: A self-controlled case series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Community-associated Clostridium difficile infection is inconsistently associated with antibiotic exposure. This study uses a self-controlled case series (SCCS) design to estimate antibiotic exposure effect sizes and compare them with those estimated from previous case-control studies. METHODS: We estimated the association between antibiotic exposure and community-associated Clostridium difficile infection among 139,000 patients registered to the Barrie Family Health Team from January 1, 2011, to May 1, 2017, using an SCCS design. Poisson regression analysis was used to estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) between antibiotic exposure versus nonexposure periods within individuals. Antibiotic exposure was categorized as either high risk (fluoroquinolone, clindamycin, or cephalosporin) or low risk (all other antibiotic classes). RESULTS: The final analysis included 189 cases. The pooled IRR for high-risk antibiotics was 2.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29, 3.98) and 2.03 (95% CI 1.19, 3.47) for lower-risk antibiotics. There was no difference between high-risk and lower-risk antibiotics (IRR 1.11, 95% CI 0.53, 2.36). INTERPRETATION: The IRRs were smaller than the odds ratios reported in previous case-control studies, suggesting a less biased estimate because SCCS designs control for time-invariant confounders. Compared with case-control studies, SCCS designs are underused in infection prevention and control studies.

Interhospital patient transfers between Ontario's academic and large community hospitals increase the risk of Clostridium difficile infection.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to determine the impact of interhospital patient transfers on the risk of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). METHODS: The number of interhospital patient transfers and CDI cases for 11 academic and 40 large community hospitals (LCHs) were available from 2010-2015. These data were used to compute a CDI score for each sending facility as a measure of CDI pressure on the receiving facility. This CDI score was included as a variable in a multilevel mixed-effect Poisson regression model of CDI cases. Other covariates included year, CDI testing strategy, antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP), and criteria used for patient isolation. Hospital-specific random effects were estimated for the baseline rate of CDI (intercept) and ASP effect (slope). RESULTS: The CDI score ranged from 0-103, with a mean score ± SD of 20.4 ± 21.8. Every 10-point increase in the CDI score was associated with a 4.5% increase in the incidence of CDI in the receiving academic hospital (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9-8.5) and 3.6% increase in the receiving LCHs (95% CI, 0.3-7). The random components of the model varied significantly, with a strong negative correlation of -0.85 (95% CI, -0.94 to -0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest interhospital patient transfers increase the risk of CDI. ASPs appear to reduce this risk; however, these ASP effects demonstrate significant heterogeneity across hospitals.

The research activities of Ontario's large community acute care hospitals: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Ontario's large community hospitals (LCHs) provide care to 65% of the province's hospitalized patients, yet we know very little about their research activities. By searching for research publications from 2013 to 2015, we will describe the extent, type and collaborative nature of Ontario's LCHs' research activities. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review by searching PubMed, Embase and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases from January 1, 2013 until December 31, 2015 for all publication types whose author(s) was affiliated with any of the 44 LCHs. Articles were screened and abstracted by three reviewers, independently. The data were charted and results described using summary statistics, scatter plots, and bar charts. RESULTS: We included 798 publications from 39 LCHs and 454 authors. The median number of publications was 7 (Interquartile range (IQR) 23). Observational study design was most commonly reported in over 50% of publications. Program evaluation was the focus in 40% of publications. Primary LCH authorship was observed for 535 publications. Over 25% and 65% of the publications were attributable to 24 authors and 9 LCHs, respectively. There was minimal collaboration both within (21.2%) and between (7.8%) LCHs. LCH size and geographic proximity to academic hospitals had minimal impact on research activity. CONCLUSIONS: Ontario's LCHs publish infrequently, collaborate infrequently, and their role in translational research activity is not well defined. A future survey questionnaire to LCH researchers identified through this review is planned to both validate and elicit their interpretations of our study findings and opinions about LCH involvement in research.

Transition from a dedicated to a non-dedicated, ward-based pharmacist antimicrobial stewardship programme model in a non-academic hospital and its impact on length of stay of patients admitted with pneumonia: a prospective observational study.

Pharmacists play an integral role in antimicrobial stewardship (AS). Some AS programmes employ dedicated pharmacists, sometimes with infectious diseases (ID) training, while others employ ward-based pharmacists. The role and impact of both are under investigation. This study compares the length of stay (LOS) of patients admitted to hospital with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) after the implementation of an AS programme initially led by a dedicated ID-trained pharmacist, and then transitioned to a ward-based pharmacist. Starting 1 April 2013, all adult patients admitted with CAP were prospectively reviewed by the AS programme. The control period (phase 0) lasted 3 months. Thereafter, AS was implemented in each of four medicine wards at 2-month intervals in a staggered fashion. During this period (phase 1), an ID-trained pharmacist and physician performed daily prospective audit and feedback. After 24 months, ward-based pharmacists assumed this AS role (phase 2). Over the 36-month study period, 1125 patients with CAP were entered into the AS database, with 518 and 247 patients receiving an AS audit and feedback in phases 1 and 2, respectively. The acceptance rate for AS recommendations was similar for phases 1 and 2, each exceeding 82%. After accounting for secular trends, the overall reduction in LOS was 19.4% (95% CI 1.4% to 40.5%). There was no difference in LOS between phases 1 and 2. This study demonstrated that an AS audit and feedback intervention reduced the median LOS in patients with CAP by approximately 0.5 days regardless of pharmacist model. However, fewer patients were exposed to the AS intervention in phase 2, suggesting dedicated AS pharmacists may be necessary to realise the full benefits of AS.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Antimicrobial Stewardship Program on Reducing the Incidence Rate of Healthcare-Associated Clostridium difficile Infection: A Non-Randomized, Stepped Wedge, Single-Site, Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence rate of healthcare-associated Clostridium difficile infection (HA-CDI) is estimated at 1 in 100 patients. Antibiotic exposure is the most consistently reported risk factor for HA-CDI. Strategies to reduce the risk of HA-CDI have focused on reducing antibiotic utilization. Prospective audit and feedback is a commonly used antimicrobial stewardship intervention (ASi). The impact of this ASi on risk of HA-CDI is equivocal. This study examines the effectiveness of a prospective audit and feedback ASi on reducing the risk of HA-CDI. METHODS: Single-site, 339 bed community-hospital in Barrie, Ontario, Canada. Primary outcome is HA-CDI incidence rate. Daily prospective and audit ASi is the exposure variable. ASi implemented across 6 wards in a non-randomized, stepped wedge design. Criteria for ASi; any intravenous antibiotic use for ≥ 48 hrs, any oral fluoroquinolone or oral second generation cephalosporin use for ≥ 48 hrs, or any antimicrobial use for ≥ 5 days. HA-CDI cases and model covariates were aggregated by ward, year and month starting September 2008 and ending February 2016. Multi-level mixed effect negative binomial regression analysis was used to model the primary outcome, with intercept and slope coefficients for ward-level random effects estimated. Other covariates tested for inclusion in the final model were derived from previously published risk factors. Deviance residuals were used to assess the model's goodness-of-fit. FINDINGS: The dataset included 486 observation periods, of which 350 were control periods and 136 were intervention periods. After accounting for all other model covariates, the estimated overall ASi incidence rate ratio (IRR) was 0.48 (95% 0.30, 0.79). The ASi effect was independent of antimicrobial utilization. The ASi did not seem to reduce the risk of Clostridium difficile infection on the surgery wards (IRR 0.87, 95% CI 0.45, 1.69) compared to the medicine wards (IRR 0.42, 95% CI 0.28, 0.63). The ward-level burden of Clostridium difficile as measured by the ward's previous month's total CDI cases (CDI Lag) and the ward's current month's community-associated CDI cases (CA-CDI) was significantly associated with an increased risk of HA-CDI, with the estimated CDI Lag IRR of 1.21 (95% 1.15, 1.28) and the estimated CA-CDI IRR of 1.10 (95% CI 1.01, 1.20). The ward-level random intercept and slope coefficients were not significant. The final model demonstrated good fit. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a daily prospective audit and feedback ASi resulted in a significant reduction in the risk of HA-CDI on the medicine wards, however, this effect was independent of an overall reduction in antibiotic utilization. In addition, the ward-level burden of Clostridium difficile was shown to significantly increase the risk of HA-CDI, reinforcing the importance of the environment as a source of HA-CDI.

Evaluating the impact of an antimicrobial stewardship program on the length of stay of immune-competent adult patients admitted to a hospital ward with a diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia: A quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to demonstrate an antimicrobial stewardship intervention can reduce length of stay for patients admitted to hospital with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). METHODS: Starting April 1, 2013, consecutive adult patients with CAP admitted to an acute care community hospital in Barrie, Ontario, Canada, were eligible for enrollment until March 31, 2015. The antimicrobial stewardship intervention was a prospective audit and feedback recommendation implemented in a stepped-wedge design across 4 wards. The primary outcome was time to hospital discharge, and secondary outcomes included time to antibiotic discontinuation and a composite outcome of 30-day readmission or all-cause mortality. The intervention effect was estimated by survival (time to discharge and antibiotic discontinuation) and logistic (30-day readmission or all-cause mortality) regression analyses. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 763 patients. The primary outcome was observed in 196 (82%) control patients and 402 (77%) intervention patients. Length of stay was reduced by 11% (95% confidence interval [CI], -9% to 35%). Time to antibiotic discontinuation was shortened by 29% (95% CI, 10%-52%). Odds ratio for 30-day readmission or all-cause mortality was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.49-1.29). CONCLUSIONS: A prospective audit and feedback intervention did not significantly reduce length of hospital stay in CAP patients despite reducing overall antibiotic utilization.

Can an antimicrobial stewardship program reduce length of stay of immune-competent adult patients admitted to hospital with diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia? Study protocol for pragmatic controlled non-randomized clinical study.

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia is responsible for a large proportion of hospital admissions and antibiotic utilization. Physician adherence to evidence-based pneumonia management guidelines is poor. Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are an effective intervention to mitigate against unwarranted variation from these guidelines. Despite this benefit, ASPs have not been shown to reduce the length of stay of hospitalized patients with pneumonia. In immune-competent adult patients admitted to a hospital ward with a diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia, does a multi-faceted ASP utilizing prospective chart audit and feedback reduce the length of stay, compared with usual care, without increasing the risk of death or readmission 30 days after discharge from hospital? METHODS/DESIGN: Starting on 1 April 2013, all consecutive immune-competent adult patients (>18 years old) admitted to a hospital ward with a positive febrile respiratory illness screening questionnaire and a diagnosis of pneumonia by the attending physician will be eligible for inclusion in this non-randomized study. All eligible patients who fulfill the ASP review criteria will undergo a prospective chart audit, followed by an ASP recommendation provided to the attending physician. The attending physician is responsible for implementing or rejecting the ASP recommendation. This is a modified stepped-wedge design with a baseline data collection period of 3 months, followed by non-random sequential introduction of the ASP intervention on each of four hospital wards in a single community-based, academic-affiliated 339-bed acute-care hospital in Barrie, ON, Canada. The primary outcome measure is hospital length of stay; secondary outcome measures include days and duration of antibiotic therapy, and inadvertent adverse outcomes of 30 day post-discharge mortality and hospital readmission rates. Differences in outcome measures will be assessed using extended Cox regression analysis. Time to ASP intervention is included as a time-dependent covariate in the final model, to account for time-dependent bias. DISCUSSION: By designing a pragmatic clinical trial with unique design and analytic features, we not only expect to demonstrate the effectiveness of a real-world ASP, but also provide a model for program evaluation that can be used more broadly to improve patient safety and quality of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02264756 .

Has improved hand hygiene compliance reduced the risk of hospital-acquired infections among hospitalized patients in Ontario? Analysis of publicly reported patient safety data from 2008 to 2011.

DESIGN: Prospective, observational, ecological, time series, cross-sectional study examining the association between hand hygiene compliance (HHC) rates and the incidence of hospital-acquired infections. SETTING: Acute care hospitals (N = 166) located in the province of Ontario, Canada. METHODS: All data were extracted from the Ontario patient safety indicator database ( http://www.hqontario.ca/public-reporting/patient-safety). Complete data were available for 166 acute care hospitals from October 1, 2008, to December 31, 2011. The rates of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) are reported monthly, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia quarterly, and HHC rates yearly. Trends and associations for each indicator were evaluated by ordinary least squares regression (HHC), zero-inflated Poisson regression (MRSA bacteremia), or Poisson regression (CDI). Dependent variables included in the regression analyses were extracted from the same database and included year, healthcare region, and type of hospital (teaching or small or large community). RESULTS: Compared to those in 2008, reported HHC rates improved every year both before and after environment/patient contact (range, 10.6%-25.3%). Compared to those in 2008, there was no corresponding change in the rates of MRSA bacteremia; however, the rates of CDI decreased in 2009 but were not statistically significantly decreased from baseline in either 2010 or 2011. No consistent association was demonstrated between changes in the rates of HHC and these two healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant improvements in reported rates of HHC among healthcare personnel in Ontario's hospitals, we could not demonstrate a positive ecological impact on rates of these two HAIs.

Just clean your hands: measuring the effect of a patient safety initiative on driving transformational change in a health care system.

In 2007, the Ontario government introduced the Just Clean Your Hands program across all provincial hospitals. The goal of this patient safety initiative was to improve hand hygiene practices among health care providers through workplace culture change. A survey questionnaire was distributed to 729 nurses employed at a single large community-based hospital from April to July 2011. Of the 223 nurses who responded to the questionnaire, 153 had completed the program (exposed group). By using the other 70 nurses as a contemporaneous control group (nonexposed), this study demonstrates that the Just Clean Your Hands program contributed to improved hand hygiene practices, but we were unable to demonstrate positive changes in patient safety culture.