Fixing a Hole: a retrospective cohort study evaluating HAV, HBV, tetanus screening, and vaccination during hospitalization in persons who use substances.

Background: Rates of serious injection-related infections in persons who use drugs have increased. Resulting admissions are an opportunity for screening and vaccination of preventable infections such as hepatitis A virus (HAV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and tetanus. Design and methods: We conducted a retrospective review of adults with documented substance use admitted for bacterial infection between July 2015 and March 2020. We evaluated HAV, HBV, and tetanus vaccination status at admission, along with screening for HAV and HBV infection and immunity. We identified the proportion of patients at risk for infection who received HAV, HBV, and tetanus vaccines during admission and patient-level factors associated with vaccination. Results: We identified 280 patients who met our inclusion criteria. Of the 198 (70.7%) patients at risk for HAV, infectious disease providers recommended vaccination for 21 (10.6%) and 15 (7.6%) received HAV vaccine. Of the 174 (62.1%) patients at risk for HBV, infectious disease providers recommended vaccination for 32 (18.3%) and 25 (14.4%) received HBV vaccine. A large proportion of patients (31.4%, 88) had no documentation of prior tetanus vaccination, and infectious disease providers recommended tetanus vaccination for three (1.1%) and five patients (1.8%) received a tetanus booster. Infectious disease consult vaccine recommendations were statistically significantly associated with HAV or HBV vaccination prior to discharge. Conclusion: Over 70% of our population is at risk for one or more of these preventable infections. Efforts are needed to maximize inpatient screening and vaccination for HAV, HBV, and tetanus in patients with barriers to care.

Screening for co-infections in patients with substance use disorders and severe bacterial infections.

Background: Patients with substance use disorders admitted for severe bacterial infection are in a prime position to be screened for important co-infections. However, data suggest that standard screening for co-infections in this population during hospital admission can vary in frequency and type of testing. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients to evaluate screening for co-infections during admission, followed by a case-control analysis to determine factors associated with lack of any screening. Results: We identified 280 patients with 320 eligible admissions. Most were male and Caucasian with unstable housing. Only 67 (23.9%) patients had a primary-care provider. About 89% (n = 250) of our cohort were screened for one or more co-infection during their first admission with one patient never screened despite subsequent admissions. Of those screened, the greatest proportion was HIV (219, 81.4% of those without history of HIV), HCV (94, 79.7% of those without a prior positive HCV antibody), syphilis (206, 73.6%), gonorrhea, and chlamydia (47, 16.8%) with new positive tests identified in 60 (21.4%) people. Screening for all five co-infections was only completed in 15 (14.0%) of the 107 patients who had screening indications. Overall, a high proportion of those screened had a new positive test, including three cases of neurosyphilis, highlighting the importance of screening and treatment initiation. One patient was prescribed HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis at discharge and only 37 (34.6%) of those eligible were referred for HCV treatment or follow-up. In multivariable case-control analysis, non-Medicaid insurance (OR 2.8, 95% CI: 1.2-6.6, p = 0.02), use of only 1 substance (OR 2.9, 95% CI: 1.3-6.5, p < 0.01), and no documented screening recommendations by the infectious disease team (OR 3.7, 95% CI: 1.5-8.8, p < 0.01), were statistically significantly associated with lack of screening for any co-infection during hospital admission. Conclusion: Our data suggest additional interventions are needed to improve inpatient screening for co-infections in this population.

Vaccination before or after SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to robust humoral response and antibodies that effectively neutralize variants.

Current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines effectively reduce overall morbidity and mortality and are vitally important to controlling the pandemic. Individuals who previously recovered from COVID-19 have enhanced immune responses after vaccination (hybrid immunity) compared with their naïve-vaccinated peers; however, the effects of post-vaccination breakthrough infections on humoral immune response remain to be determined. Here, we measure neutralizing antibody responses from 104 vaccinated individuals, including those with breakthrough infections, hybrid immunity, and no infection history. We find that human immune sera after breakthrough infection and vaccination after natural infection broadly neutralize SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2) variants to a similar degree. Although age negatively correlates with antibody response after vaccination alone, no correlation with age was found in breakthrough or hybrid immune groups. Together, our data suggest that the additional antigen exposure from natural infection substantially boosts the quantity, quality, and breadth of humoral immune response regardless of whether it occurs before or after vaccination.