SHEA position statement on pandemic preparedness for policymakers: building a strong and resilient healthcare workforce.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, many areas in the United States experienced healthcare personnel (HCP) shortages tied to a variety of factors. Infection prevention programs, in particular, faced increasing workload demands with little opportunity to delegate tasks to others without specific infectious diseases or infection control expertise. Shortages of clinicians providing inpatient care to critically ill patients during the early phase of the pandemic were multifactorial, largely attributed to increasing demands on hospitals to provide care to patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and furloughs.1 HCP shortages and challenges during later surges, including the Omicron variant-associated surges, were largely attributed to HCP infections and associated work restrictions during isolation periods and the need to care for family members, particularly children, with COVID-19. Additionally, the detrimental physical and mental health impact of COVID-19 on HCP has led to attrition, which further exacerbates shortages.2 Demands increased in post-acute and long-term care (PALTC) settings, which already faced critical staffing challenges difficulty with recruitment, and high rates of turnover. Although individual healthcare organizations and state and federal governments have taken actions to mitigate recurring shortages, additional work and innovation are needed to develop longer-term solutions to improve healthcare workforce resiliency. The critical role of those with specialized training in infection prevention, including healthcare epidemiologists, was well-demonstrated in pandemic preparedness and response. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the need to support growth in these fields.3 This commentary outlines the need to develop the US healthcare workforce in preparation for future pandemics.

SHEA position statement on pandemic preparedness for policymakers: introduction and overview.

Throughout history, pandemics and their aftereffects have spurred society to make substantial improvements in healthcare. After the Black Death in 14th century Europe, changes were made to elevate standards of care and nutrition that resulted in improved life expectancy.1 The 1918 influenza pandemic spurred a movement that emphasized public health surveillance and detection of future outbreaks and eventually led to the creation of the World Health Organization Global Influenza Surveillance Network.2 In the present, the COVID-19 pandemic exposed many of the pre-existing problems within the US healthcare system, which included (1) a lack of capacity to manage a large influx of contagious patients while simultaneously maintaining routine and emergency care to non-COVID patients; (2) a "just in time" supply network that led to shortages and competition among hospitals, nursing homes, and other care sites for essential supplies; and (3) longstanding inequities in the distribution of healthcare and the healthcare workforce. The decades-long shift from domestic manufacturing to a reliance on global supply chains has compounded ongoing gaps in preparedness for supplies such as personal protective equipment and ventilators. Inequities in racial and socioeconomic outcomes highlighted during the pandemic have accelerated the call to focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within our communities. The pandemic accelerated cooperation between government entities and the healthcare system, resulting in swift implementation of mitigation measures, new therapies and vaccinations at unprecedented speeds, despite our fragmented healthcare delivery system and political divisions. Still, widespread misinformation or disinformation and political divisions contributed to eroded trust in the public health system and prevented an even uptake of mitigation measures, vaccines and therapeutics, impeding our ability to contain the spread of the virus in this country.3 Ultimately, the lessons of COVID-19 illustrate the need to better prepare for the next pandemic. Rising microbial resistance, emerging and re-emerging pathogens, increased globalization, an aging population, and climate change are all factors that increase the likelihood of another pandemic.4.

Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America position statement on pandemic preparedness for policymakers: mitigating supply shortages.

The COVID-19 has had major direct (e.g., deaths) and indirect (e.g., social inequities) effects in the United States. While the public health response to the epidemic featured some important successes (e.g., universal masking ,and rapid development and approval of vaccines and therapeutics), there were systemic failures (e.g., inadequate public health infrastructure) that overshadowed these successes. Key deficiency in the U.S. response were shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) and supply chain deficiencies. Recommendations are provided for mitigating supply shortages and supply chain failures in healthcare settings in future pandemics. Some key recommendations for preventing shortages of essential components of infection control and prevention include increasing the stockpile of PPE in the U.S. National Strategic Stockpile, increased transparency of the Stockpile, invoking the Defense Production Act at an early stage, and rapid review and authorization by FDA/EPA/OSHA of non-U.S. approved products. Recommendations are also provided for mitigating shortages of diagnostic testing, medications and medical equipment.

SHEA position statement on pandemic preparedness for policymakers: pandemic data collection, maintenance, and release.

The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology in America (SHEA) strongly supports modernization of data collection processes and the creation of publicly available data repositories that include a wide variety of data elements and mechanisms for securely storing both cleaned and uncleaned data sets that can be curated as clinical and research needs arise. These elements can be used for clinical research and quality monitoring and to evaluate the impacts of different policies on different outcomes. Achieving these goals will require dedicated, sustained and long-term funding to support data science teams and the creation of central data repositories that include data sets that can be "linked" via a variety of different mechanisms and also data sets that include institutional and state and local policies and procedures. A team-based approach to data science is strongly encouraged and supported to achieve the goal of a sustainable, adaptable national shared data resource.

Reliability of nonlocalizing signs and symptoms as indicators of the presence of infection in nursing-home residents.

Antibiotics are among the most common medications prescribed in nursing homes. The annual prevalence of antibiotic use in residents of nursing homes ranges from 47% to 79%, and more than half of antibiotic courses initiated in nursing-home settings are unnecessary or prescribed inappropriately (wrong drug, dose, or duration). Inappropriate antibiotic use is associated with a variety of negative consequences including Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), adverse drug effects, drug-drug interactions, and antimicrobial resistance. In response to this problem, public health authorities have called for efforts to improve the quality of antibiotic prescribing in nursing homes.

Multisociety statement on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination as a condition of employment for healthcare personnel.

This consensus statement by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine (AMDA), the Association for Professionals in Epidemiology and Infection Control (APIC), the HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA), the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (PIDS), and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists (SIDP) recommends that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination should be a condition of employment for all healthcare personnel in facilities in the United States. Exemptions from this policy apply to those with medical contraindications to all COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States and other exemptions as specified by federal or state law. The consensus statement also supports COVID-19 vaccination of nonemployees functioning at a healthcare facility (eg, students, contract workers, volunteers, etc).

Endotracheal Application of Ultraviolet A Light in Critically Ill Patients with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2: A First-in-Human Study.

INTRODUCTION: Our previous preclinical experiments show that under specific and monitored conditions, ultraviolet A (UVA) exposure reduces certain bacteria, fungi, and viruses including coronavirus-229E without harming mammalian columnar epithelial cells. The goal of this study was to evaluate the safety and effects of narrow-band UVA therapy administered by a novel device via endotracheal tube in critically ill subjects with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. METHODS: Newly intubated, mechanically ventilated adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection and an endotracheal tube size of at least 7.50 mm were eligible for inclusion in the study. Subjects were treated with UVA for 20 min daily for 5 days and followed for 30 days. RESULTS: Five subjects were enrolled (mean age 56.60 years, three male). At baseline, all subjects scored 9/10 on the World Health Organization (WHO) clinical severity scale (10 = death), with predicted mortality ranging from 21% to 95%. Average endotracheal viral load significantly reduced from baseline to day 5 (- 2.41 log; range - 1.16 to - 4.54; Friedman p = 0.002) and day 6 (- 3.20; range - 1.20 to - 6.77; Friedman p < 0.001). There were no treatment-emergent adverse events, with no changes in oxygenation or hemodynamics during the 20-min treatments. One subject died 17 days after enrollment due to intracranial hemorrhagic complications of anticoagulation while receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The remaining subjects clinically improved and scored 2, 4, 5, and 7 on the WHO scale at day 30. In these subjects, clinical improvement correlated with reduction of viral load (Spearman's rho = 1, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this first-in-human study, endotracheal narrow-band UVA therapy, under specific and monitored settings, appears to be safe and associated with a reduction in respiratory SARS-CoV-2 viral burden over the treatment period. UVA therapy may provide a novel approach in the fight against COVID-19. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT04572399.

Introducing a nursing maintenance bundle for patients with pulmonary arterial catheters.

We undertook a quality improvement project to address challenges with pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) line maintenance in a setting of low-baseline central-line infection rates. We observed a subsequent reduction in Staphylococcal PAC line infections and a trend toward a reduction in overall PAC infection rates over 1 year.

Optimizing utilization of beta-lactam surgical prophylaxis through implementation of a structured allergy assessment tool in a presurgical clinic.

In patients with ß-lactam allergies, administration of non-ß-lactam surgical prophylaxis is associated with increased risk of infection. Although many patients self-report ß-lactam allergies, most are unconfirmed or mislabeled. A quality improvement process, utilizing a structured ß-lactam allergy tool, was implemented to improve the utilization of preferred ß-lactam surgical prophylaxis.

New Developments in the Prevention of Gastrointestinal Scope-Related Infections.

Gastrointestinal endoscopes are used for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes and are the most common medical device implicated in health care-associated outbreaks. Infections can be divided into endogenous or exogenous. Exogenous infections were associated with lapses in reprocessing. Recent outbreaks have occurred despite compliance with reprocessing guidelines and highlight the challenges with clearance of all organisms from the duodenoscopes and the potential role of biofilms in hindering adequate reprocessing. This review provides an overview of recent developments and the current understanding of the key contributing factors related to gastrointestinal endoscope-related infections and current approaches to identify and prevent these complications.

A Roadmap to Implementing Antimicrobial Stewardship Principles in Long-term Care Facilities (LTCFs): Collaboration Between an Acute-Care Hospital and LTCFs.

Effective 28 November 2017, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) mandated long-term care facilities (LTCFs) to have antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in place. Although guidance exists for establishing ASPs in LTCFs, limited data exist on the "how." As comprehensive ASPs already exist in many acute-care hospitals (ACHs) and with the known "sharing of patients" between both settings, extending ACH ASP expertise to LTCFs will not only aid LTCFs in complying with the CMS mandate but will likely also facilitate in decreasing multidrug-resistant organisms and Clostridium difficile infection rates in patients at both organizations. Here, we provide a roadmap on how to implement ASPs in LTCFs, using examples from our own ACH's collaboration with local LTCFs to develop and sustain LTCF ASPs. We discuss critical elements to achieving successful LTCF ASPs, including the potential barriers and how to overcome them.

Standardized Infection Ratio for Surgical Site Infection after Colon Surgery: Discord in Models Measuring Healthcare Quality.

The government publishes 3 different public report surgical site infection (SSI) metrics, all called standardized infection ratios (SIRs), that impact perceived hospital quality. We conducted a non-random cross-sectional observational pilot study of 20 California hospitals that voluntarily submitted colon surgery and SSI data. Discordant SIR values, leading to contradictory conclusions, occurred in 35% of these hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1-5.

Outbreaks associated with duodenoscopes: new challenges and controversies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent outbreaks of carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae related to duodenoscopes in the United States and Europe have gained international attention and resulted in new regulations, especially in the United States, affecting healthcare facilities. In this review, we summarize findings from recent duodenoscope-related outbreaks, highlight what is known about the risk of transmission from these devices and discuss controversies about current recommendations to prevent transmission. RECENT FINDINGS: Between 2013 and 2015, several US and European healthcare facilities reported outbreaks of carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae associated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures. Unlike prior outbreaks (attributed to lapses in cleaning and reprocessing), the recent outbreaks occurred in spite of adherence to current reprocessing guidelines. Factors associated with infection transmission include a low margin of safety for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures and complex design features of duodenoscopes. Outbreaks were halted with enhanced cleaning and surveillance measures or by adopting gas sterilization methods. New guidance from manufacturers and federal agencies has been issued as a result of these recent outbreaks; however, concerns remain that the new measures may not eliminate risks to patients. SUMMARY: Recent duodenoscope-related outbreaks have highlighted the need for a reassessment of current guidelines for endoscope reprocessing and for new design of duodenoscope components. Although we summarize the US experience, this review has global implications for the safe cleaning and disinfection of these instruments.

Cost Utility of Competing Strategies to Prevent Endoscopic Transmission of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae.

OBJECTIVES: Prior reports have linked patient transmission of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE, or "superbug") to endoscopes used during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We performed a decision analysis to measure the cost-effectiveness of four competing strategies for CRE risk management. METHODS: We used decision analysis to calculate the cost-effectiveness of four approaches to reduce the risk of CRE transmission among patients presenting to the hospital for symptomatic common bile duct stones. The strategies included the following: (1) perform ERCP followed by US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended endoscope reprocessing procedures; (2) perform ERCP followed by "endoscope culture and hold"; (3) perform ERCP followed by ethylene oxide (EtO) sterilization of the endoscope; and (4) stop performing ERCP in lieu of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with common bile duct exploration (CBDE). Our outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: In the base-case scenario, ERCP with FDA-recommended endoscope reprocessing was the most cost-effective strategy. Both the ERCP with culture and hold ($4,228,170/QALY) and ERCP with EtO sterilization ($50,572,348/QALY) strategies had unacceptable incremental costs per QALY gained. LC with CBDE was dominated, being both more costly and marginally less effective vs. the alternatives. In sensitivity analysis, ERCP with culture and hold became the most cost-effective approach when the pretest probability of CRE exceeded 24%. CONCLUSIONS: In institutions with a low CRE prevalence, ERCP with FDA-recommended reprocessing is the most cost-effective approach for mitigating CRE transmission risk. Only in settings with an extremely high CRE prevalence did ERCP with culture and hold become cost-effective.

Reconsidering contact precautions for endemic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus.

BACKGROUND: Whether contact precautions (CP) are required to control the endemic transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) in acute care hospitals is controversial in light of improvements in hand hygiene, MRSA decolonization, environmental cleaning and disinfection, fomite elimination, and chlorhexidine bathing. OBJECTIVE: To provide a framework for decision making around use of CP for endemic MRSA and VRE based on a summary of evidence related to use of CP, including impact on patients and patient care processes, and current practices in use of CP for MRSA and VRE in US hospitals. DESIGN: A literature review, a survey of Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Research Network members on use of CP, and a detailed examination of the experience of a convenience sample of hospitals not using CP for MRSA or VRE. PARTICIPANTS: Hospital epidemiologists and infection prevention experts. RESULTS: No high quality data support or reject use of CP for endemic MRSA or VRE. Our survey found more than 90% of responding hospitals currently use CP for MRSA and VRE, but approximately 60% are interested in using CP in a different manner. More than 30 US hospitals do not use CP for control of endemic MRSA or VRE. CONCLUSIONS: Higher quality research on the benefits and harms of CP in the control of endemic MRSA and VRE is needed. Until more definitive data are available, the use of CP for endemic MRSA or VRE in acute care hospitals should be guided by local needs and resources.