The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel.

BACKGROUND: Although N95 filtering facepiece respirators and medical masks are commonly used for protection against respiratory infections in healthcare settings, more clinical evidence is needed to understand the optimal settings and exposure circumstances for healthcare personnel to use these devices. A lack of clinically germane research has led to equivocal, and occasionally conflicting, healthcare respiratory protection recommendations from public health organizations, professional societies, and experts. METHODS: The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT) is a prospective comparison of respiratory protective equipment to be conducted at multiple U.S. study sites. Healthcare personnel who work in outpatient settings will be cluster-randomized to wear N95 respirators or medical masks for protection against infections during respiratory virus season. Outcome measures will include laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections, acute respiratory illness, and influenza-like illness. Participant exposures to patients, coworkers, and others with symptoms and signs of respiratory infection, both within and beyond the workplace, will be recorded in daily diaries. Adherence to study protocols will be monitored by the study team. DISCUSSION: ResPECT is designed to better understand the extent to which N95s and MMs reduce clinical illness among healthcare personnel. A fully successful study would produce clinically relevant results that help clinician-leaders make reasoned decisions about protection of healthcare personnel against occupationally acquired respiratory infections and prevention of spread within healthcare systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01249625 (11/29/2010)

The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel.

BACKGROUND: Although N95 filtering facepiece respirators and medical masks are commonly used for protection against respiratory infections in healthcare settings, more clinical evidence is needed to understand the optimal settings and exposure circumstances for healthcare personnel to use these devices. A lack of clinically germane research has led to equivocal, and occasionally conflicting, healthcare respiratory protection recommendations from public health organizations, professional societies, and experts. METHODS: The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT) is a prospective comparison of respiratory protective equipment to be conducted at multiple U.S. study sites. Healthcare personnel who work in outpatient settings will be cluster-randomized to wear N95 respirators or medical masks for protection against infections during respiratory virus season. Outcome measures will include laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections, acute respiratory illness, and influenza-like illness. Participant exposures to patients, coworkers, and others with symptoms and signs of respiratory infection, both within and beyond the workplace, will be recorded in daily diaries. Adherence to study protocols will be monitored by the study team. DISCUSSION: ResPECT is designed to better understand the extent to which N95s and MMs reduce clinical illness among healthcare personnel. A fully successful study would produce clinically relevant results that help clinician-leaders make reasoned decisions about protection of healthcare personnel against occupationally acquired respiratory infections and prevention of spread within healthcare systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01249625 (11/29/2010)

Preschool-Aged Household Contacts as a Risk Factor for Viral Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Personnel

BACKGROUND: Viral respiratory infections (VRIs) are common and are occupational risks for healthcare personnel (HCP). VRIs can also be acquired at home and other settings among HCPs. We sought to determine if preschool-aged household contacts are a risk factor for VRIs among HCPs working in outpatient settings. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a cluster randomized trial at 7 medical centers in the United States over 4 influenza seasons from 2011-2012 to 2014-2015. Adult HCPs who routinely came within 6 feet of patients with respiratory infections were included. Participants were tested for respiratory viruses whenever symptomatic and at 2 random times each season when asymptomatic. The exposure of interest was the number of household contacts 0-5 years old (preschool-aged) at the beginning of each HCP-season. The primary outcome was the rate of polymerase chain reaction-detected VRIs, regardless of symptoms. The VRI incidence rate ratio (IRR) was calculated using a mixed-effects Poisson regression model that accounted for clustering at the clinic level. RESULTS: Among the 4476 HCP-seasons, most HCPs were female (85.4%) and between 30 and 49 years of age (54.6%). The overall VRI rate was 2.04 per 100 person-weeks. In the adjusted analysis, HCPs having 1 (IRR, 1.22 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.05-1.43]) and ≥2 (IRR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.09-1.67]) preschool-aged household contacts had higher VRI rates than those with zero preschool-aged household contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Preschool-aged household contacts are a risk factor for developing VRIs among HCPs working in outpatient settings

The Human Nasal Microbiota and Staphylococcus aureus Carriage

BACKGROUND: Colonization of humans with Staphylococcus aureus is a critical prerequisite of subsequent clinical infection of the skin, blood, lung, heart and other deep tissues. S. aureus persistently or intermittently colonizes the nares of approximately 50% of healthy adults, whereas approximately 50% of the general population is rarely or never colonized by this pathogen. Because microbial consortia within the nasal cavity may be an important determinant of S. aureus colonization we determined the composition and dynamics of the nasal microbiota and correlated specific microorganisms with S. aureus colonization. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Nasal specimens were collected longitudinally from five healthy adults and a cross-section of hospitalized patients (26 S. aureus carriers and 16 non-carriers). Culture-independent analysis of 16S rRNA sequences revealed that the nasal microbiota of healthy subjects consists primarily of members of the phylum Actinobacteria (e.g., Propionibacterium spp. and Corynebacterium spp.), with proportionally less representation of other phyla, including Firmicutes (e.g., Staphylococcus spp.) and Proteobacteria (e.g. Enterobacter spp). In contrast, inpatient nasal microbiotas were enriched in S. aureus or Staphylococcus epidermidis and diminished in several actinobacterial groups, most notably Propionibacterium acnes. Moreover, within the inpatient population S. aureus colonization was negatively correlated with the abundances of several microbial groups, including S. epidermidis (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The nares environment is colonized by a temporally stable microbiota that is distinct from other regions of the integument. Negative association between S. aureus, S. epidermidis, and other groups suggests microbial competition during colonization of the nares, a finding that could be exploited to limit S. aureus colonization

Virulence determinants identified in <i>S</i>. <i>aureus</i> isolate genomes.

<p>Virulence determinants identified in <i>S</i>. <i>aureus</i> isolate genomes.</p

Distribution of SNPs.

<p>A) Distribution of all SNPs identified in <i>S. aureus</i> isolates. B) Distribution of Non-Synonymous SNPs identified in <i>S. aureus</i> isolates by functional categories defined by Aureowiki.</p

Overview of SNP analysis.

<p>Overview of SNP analysis.</p