Impact of metagenomic next-generation sequencing on clinical decision-making at an academic medical center, a retrospective study, Iowa, 2020-2022.

We assessed the impact of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) on patient care using previously established criteria. Among 37 patients receiving mNGS testing, 16% showed results that had a positive clinical impact. While mNGS results may offer valuable supplementary information, results should be interpreted within the broader clinical context and evaluation.

Diagnostic stewardship to improve patient outcomes and healthcare-associated infection (HAI) metrics.

Diagnostic stewardship seeks to improve ordering, collection, performance, and reporting of tests. Test results play an important role in reportable HAIs. The inclusion of HAIs in public reporting and pay for performance programs has highlighted the value of diagnostic stewardship as part of infection prevention initiatives. Inappropriate testing should be discouraged, and approaches that seek to alter testing solely to impact a reportable metric should be avoided. HAI definitions should be further adapted to new testing technologies, with focus on actionable and clinically relevant test results that will improve patient care.

Diagnostic stewardship and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: Lessons learned for prevention of emerging infectious diseases in acute-care settings.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has demonstrated the importance of stewardship of viral diagnostic tests to aid infection prevention efforts in healthcare facilities. We highlight diagnostic stewardship lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss how diagnostic stewardship principles can inform management and mitigation of future emerging pathogens in acute-care settings. Diagnostic stewardship during the COVID-19 pandemic evolved as information regarding transmission (eg, routes, timing, and efficiency of transmission) became available. Diagnostic testing approaches varied depending on the availability of tests and when supplies and resources became available. Diagnostic stewardship lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic include the importance of prioritizing robust infection prevention mitigation controls above universal admission testing and considering preprocedure testing, contact tracing, and surveillance in the healthcare facility in certain scenarios. In the future, optimal diagnostic stewardship approaches should be tailored to specific pathogen virulence, transmissibility, and transmission routes, as well as disease severity, availability of effective treatments and vaccines, and timing of infectiousness relative to symptoms. This document is part of a series of papers developed by the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America on diagnostic stewardship in infection prevention and antibiotic stewardship.1.

A review of extended coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) isolation duration among inpatients in a tertiary-care hospital-Iowa, 2020-2022.

Of the 2,668 patients admitted with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), 4% underwent prolonged isolation for >20 days. Reasons for extended isolation were inconsistent with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines in 25% of these patients and were questionable in 54% due to an ongoing critically ill condition at day 20 without CDC-defined immunocompromised status.

Comparison of virus aerosol concentrations across a face shield worn on a healthcare personnel during a simulated patient cough.

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) aerosolize severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) via respiratory efforts, expose, and possibly infect healthcare personnel (HCP). To prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 HCP have been required to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) during patient care. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, face shields were used as an approach to control HCP exposure to SARS-CoV-2, including eye protection. METHODS: An MS2 bacteriophage was used as a surrogate for SARS-CoV-2 and was aerosolized using a coughing machine. A simulated HCP wearing a disposable plastic face shield was placed 0.41 m (16 inches) away from the coughing machine. The aerosolized virus was sampled using SKC biosamplers on the inside (near the mouth of the simulated HCP) and the outside of the face shield. The aerosolized virus collected by the SKC Biosampler was analyzed using a viability assay. Optical particle counters (OPCs) were placed next to the biosamplers to measure the particle concentration. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant reduction (P < .0006) in viable virus concentration on the inside of the face shield compared to the outside of the face shield. The particle concentration was significantly lower on the inside of the face shield compared to the outside of the face shield for 12 of the 16 particle sizes measured (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in virus and particle concentrations were observed on the inside of the face shield; however, viable virus was measured on the inside of the face shield, in the breathing zone of the HCP. Therefore, other exposure control methods need to be used to prevent transmission from virus aerosol.

Asymptomatic Testing of Hospital Admissions for SARS-CoV-2: Is it OK to Stop?

Universal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing of all persons admitted to acute care hospitals has become common practice. We describe why 1 hospital discontinued this practice after weighing potential benefits against known harms. Considerations around the benefits shifted as we saw a decline in SARS-CoV-2 community transmission and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity of illness, increased availability of vaccines and treatments, and better understood the many other transmission pathways in the healthcare environment. Considerations around harms included the additional strain on laboratory and infection prevention resources, and several unintended adverse consequences of admission screening for patients, including unnecessary isolation, antiviral treatments, and delays in care delivery. Poor test performance for detection of infectiousness also played a significant role in determining to stop universal screening. No increase in hospital-onset COVID-19 has been documented since discontinuation of admission testing. We continue to apply other established layers of prevention while monitoring for any change in incidence of within-facility transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

Alcohol-based decontamination of gloved hands: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The gold standard for hand hygiene (HH) while wearing gloves requires removing gloves, performing HH, and donning new gloves between WHO moments. The novel strategy of applying alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) directly to gloved hands might be effective and efficient. DESIGN: A mixed-method, multicenter, 3-arm, randomized trial. SETTING: Adult and pediatric medical-surgical, intermediate, and intensive care units at 4 hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare personnel (HCP). INTERVENTIONS: HCP were randomized to 3 groups: ABHR applied directly to gloved hands, the current standard, or usual care. METHODS: Gloved hands were sampled via direct imprint. Gold-standard and usual-care arms were compared with the ABHR intervention. RESULTS: Bacteria were identified on gloved hands after 432 (67.4%) of 641 observations in the gold-standard arm versus 548 (82.8%) of 662 observations in the intervention arm (P < .01). HH required a mean of 14 seconds in the intervention and a mean of 28.7 seconds in the gold-standard arm (P < .01). Bacteria were identified on gloved hands after 133 (98.5%) of 135 observations in the usual-care arm versus 173 (76.6%) of 226 observations in the intervention arm (P < .01). Of 331 gloves tested 6 (1.8%) were found to have microperforations; all were identified in the intervention arm [6 (2.9%) of 205]. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with usual care, contamination of gloved hands was significantly reduced by applying ABHR directly to gloved hands but statistically higher than the gold standard. Given time savings and microbiological benefit over usual care and lack of feasibility of adhering to the gold standard, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization should consider advising HCP to decontaminate gloved hands with ABHR when HH moments arise during single-patient encounters.Trial Registration: NCT03445676.

Descriptive epidemiology of central line-associated bloodstream infections at an academic medical center in Iowa, 2019-2022.

BACKGROUND: Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) increased nationally during the COVID-19 pandemic. We described CLABSIs at our institution during 2019 to 2022. METHODS: This retrospective observational study examined CLABSIs among adult inpatients at an 866-bed teaching hospital in the Midwest. CLABSI incidence was trended over time and compared to monthly COVID-19 admissions. Manual chart review was performed to obtain patient demographics, catheter-associated variables, pathogens, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 178 CLABSIs. The CLABSI incidence (cases per 1,000 line days) tripled in October 2020 as COVID-19 admissions increased. CLABSIs in 2020 were more frequently caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci and more frequently occurred in the intensive care units 7+ days after central line insertion. The CLABSI incidence normalized in early 2021 and did not increase during subsequent COVID-19 surges. Throughout 2019 to 2022, about half of the nontunneled central venous catheters involved in CLABSI were placed emergently. One-quarter of CLABSIs involved multiple central lines. Chlorhexidine skin treatment adherence was limited by patient refusal. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in CLABSIs in late 2020 during a surge in COVID-19 admissions was likely related to central line maintenance but has resolved. Characterizing CLABSI cases can provide insight into adherence to guideline-recommended prevention practices and identify areas for improvement at individual institutions.

Direct Gloving vs Hand Hygiene Before Donning Gloves in Adherence to Hospital Infection Control Practices: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Current guidelines require hand hygiene before donning nonsterile gloves, but evidence to support this requirement is lacking. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a direct-gloving policy on adherence to infection prevention practices in a hospital setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: This mixed-method, multicenter, cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted at 4 academic centers in Baltimore, Maryland, or Iowa City, Iowa, from January 1, 2016, to November 30, 2017. Data analysis was completed April 25, 2019. Participants were 3790 health care personnel (HCP) across 13 hospital units. Intervention: Hospital units were randomly assigned to direct gloving, with hand hygiene not required before donning gloves (intervention), or to usual care (hand hygiene before donning nonsterile gloves). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was adherence to the expected practice at room entry and exit. A random sample of HCPs' gloved hands were imprinted on agar plates at entry to contact precautions rooms. The intention-to-treat approach was followed, and all analyses were conducted at the level of the participating unit. Primary and secondary outcomes between treatment groups were assessed using generalized estimating equations with an unstructured working correlation matrix to adjust for clustering; multivariate analysis using generalized estimating equations was conducted to adjust for covariates, including baseline adherence. Results: In total, 13 hospital units participated in the trial, and 3790 HCP were observed. Adherence to expected practice was greater in the 6 units with the direct-gloving intervention than in the 7 usual care units (1297 of 1491 [87%] vs 954 of 2299 [41%]; P < .001) even when controlling for baseline hand hygiene rates, unit type, and universal gloving policies (risk ratio [RR], 1.76; 95% CI, 1.58-1.97). Glove use on entry to contact precautions rooms was also higher in the direct-gloving units (1297 of 1491 [87%] vs 1530 of 2299 [67%]; P = .008. The intervention had no effect on hand hygiene adherence measured at entry to non-contact precautions rooms (951 of 1315 [72%] for usual care vs 1111 of 1688 [66%] for direct gloving; RR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.91-1.10]) or at room exit (1587 of 1897 [84%] for usual care vs 1525 of 1785 [85%] for direct gloving; RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.91-1.07]). The intervention was associated with increased total bacteria colony counts (adjusted incidence RR, 7.13; 95% CI, 3.95-12.85) and greater detection of pathogenic bacteria (adjusted incidence RR, 10.18; 95% CI, 2.13-44.94) on gloves in the emergency department and reduced colony counts in pediatrics units (adjusted incidence RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.19-0.63), with no change in either total colony count (RR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.60 to 1.25] for adult intensive care unit; RR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.31-1.10] for hemodialysis unit) or presence of pathogenic bacteria (RR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.40-2.14] for adult intensive care unit; RR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.15-2.04] for hemodialysis unit) in the other units. Conclusions and Relevance: Current guidelines require hand hygiene before donning nonsterile gloves, but evidence to support this requirement is lacking. The findings from this cluster randomized clinical trial indicate that a direct-gloving strategy without prior hand hygiene should be considered by health care facilities. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03119389.

Are contact precautions "essential" for the prevention of healthcare-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus?

The recently updated SHEA/IDSA/APIC practice recommendations for MRSA prevention in acute care facilities list contact precautions (CP) for patients known to be infected or colonized with MRSA as an "essential practice", meaning that it should be adopted in all acute care facilities. We argue that existing evidence on benefits and harms associated with CP do not justify this recommendation. There are no controlled trials that support broad use of CP for MRSA prevention. Data from hospitals that have discontinued CP for MRSA have found no impact on MRSA acquisition or infection. The burden and harms of CP remain concerning, including the environmental impact of increased gown and glove use. We suggest that CP be included among other "additional approaches" to MRSA prevention that can be implemented under specific circumstances (e.g. outbreaks, evidence of ongoing transmission despite application of essential practices).

Improving antimicrobial use through better diagnosis: The relationship between diagnostic stewardship and antimicrobial stewardship.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) exist to optimize antibiotic use, reduce selection for antimicrobial-resistant microorganisms, and improve patient outcomes. Rapid and accurate diagnosis is essential to optimal antibiotic use. Because diagnostic testing plays a significant role in diagnosing patients, it has one of the strongest influences on clinician antibiotic prescribing behaviors. Diagnostic stewardship, consequently, has emerged to improve clinician diagnostic testing and test result interpretation. Antimicrobial stewardship and diagnostic stewardship share common goals and are synergistic when used together. Although ASP requires a relationship with clinicians and focuses on person-to-person communication, diagnostic stewardship centers on a relationship with the laboratory and hardwiring testing changes into laboratory processes and the electronic health record. Here, we discuss how diagnostic stewardship can optimize the "Four Moments of Antibiotic Decision Making" created by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and work synergistically with ASPs.

Pandemic Demand for SARS-CoV-2 Testing Led to Critical Supply and Workforce Shortages in U.S. Clinical and Public Health Laboratories.

COVID-19 has brought unprecedented challenges to clinical and public health laboratories. While U.S. laboratories have continued striving to provide quality test results during the pandemic, the uncertainty and lack of supplies became a significant hurdle, hindering day-to-day laboratory operations and the ability to increase testing capacity for both SARS-CoV-2 and non-COVID-19 testing. In addition, long-standing laboratory workforce shortages became apparent, hindering the ability of clinical and public health laboratories to rapidly increase testing. The American Society for Microbiology, the College of American Pathologists, the National Coalition of STD Directors, and the Emerging Infections Network independently conducted surveys in 2020 and early 2021 to assess the capacity of the nation's clinical laboratories to respond to the increase in demand for testing during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of these surveys highlighted the shortages of crucial supplies for SARS-CoV-2 testing and supplies for other routine laboratory diagnostics, as well as a shortage of trained personnel to perform testing. The conclusions are based on communications, observations, and the survey results of the clinical laboratory, public health, and professional organizations represented here. While the results of each survey considered separately may not be representative of the entire community, when considered together they provide remarkably similar results, further validating the findings and highlighting the importance of laboratory supply chains and the personnel capable of performing these tests for any response to a large-scale public health emergency.

What Is New in Fungal Infections?

Invasive fungal infections are an increasingly important cause of morbidity and mortality. We provide a summary of important changes in the epidemiology of invasive fungal infections, citing examples of new emerging pathogens, expanding populations who are at-risk, and increasing antifungal resistance. We review how human activity and climate change may play a role in some of these changes. Finally, we discuss how these changes create the need for advances in fungal diagnostics. The limitations of existing fungal diagnostic testing emphasize the critically important role of histopathology in the early recognition of fungal disease.

Diagnostic Stewardship to Prevent Diagnostic Error.

This Viewpoint discusses the growth of diagnostic stewardship beyond infectious disease to reduce diagnostic errors in other fields.

Principles of diagnostic stewardship: A practical guide from the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Diagnostic Stewardship Task Force.

We provide an overview of diagnostic stewardship with key concepts that include the diagnostic pathway and the multiple points where interventions can be implemented, strategies for interventions, the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration, and key microbiologic diagnostic tests that should be considered for diagnostic stewardship. The document focuses on microbiologic laboratory testing for adult and pediatric patients and is intended for a target audience of healthcare workers involved in diagnostic stewardship interventions and all workers affected by any step of the diagnostic pathway (ie, ordering, collecting, processing, reporting, and interpreting results of a diagnostic test). This document was developed by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Diagnostic Stewardship Taskforce.

Effectiveness and acceptability of intranasal povidone-iodine decolonization among fracture fixation surgery patients to reduce Staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization.

We evaluated povidone-iodine (PVI) decolonization among 51 fracture-fixation surgery patients. PVI was applied twice on the day of surgery. Patients were tested for S. aureus nasal colonization and surveyed. Mean S. aureus concentrations decreased from 3.13 to 1.15 CFU/mL (P = .03). Also, 86% of patients stated that they felt neutral or positive about their PVI experience.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among nonphysician healthcare personnel by work location at a tertiary-care center, Iowa, 2020-2021.

We describe COVID-19 cases among nonphysician healthcare personnel (HCP) by work location. The proportion of HCP with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was highest in the emergency department and lowest among those working remotely. COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 units had similar proportions of HCP with COVID-19 (13%). Cases decreased across all work locations following COVID-19 vaccination.

Blood culture practices in patients with a central line at an academic medical center-Iowa, 2020.

We analyzed blood-culture practices to characterize the utilization of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recommendations related to catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) blood cultures. Most patients with a central line had only peripheral blood cultures. Increasing the utilization of CRBSI guidelines may improve clinical care, but may also affect other quality metrics.