Introduction to A Compendium of Strategies to Prevent Healthcare-Associated Infections In Acute-Care Hospitals: 2022 Updates.

Since the initial publication of A Compendium of Strategies to Prevent Healthcare-Associated Infections in Acute Care Hospitals in 2008, the prevention of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) has continued to be a national priority. Progress in healthcare epidemiology, infection prevention, antimicrobial stewardship, and implementation science research has led to improvements in our understanding of effective strategies for HAI prevention. Despite these advances, HAIs continue to affect ∼1 of every 31 hospitalized patients, leading to substantial morbidity, mortality, and excess healthcare expenditures, and persistent gaps remain between what is recommended and what is practiced.The widespread impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on HAI outcomes in acute-care hospitals has further highlighted the essential role of infection prevention programs and the critical importance of prioritizing efforts that can be sustained even in the face of resource requirements from COVID-19 and future infectious diseases crises.The Compendium: 2022 Updates document provides acute-care hospitals with up-to-date, practical expert guidance to assist in prioritizing and implementing HAI prevention efforts. It is the product of a highly collaborative effort led by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA), the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), the American Hospital Association (AHA), and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of organizations and societies with content expertise, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Pediatric Infectious Disease Society (PIDS), the Society for Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), the Society for Hospital Medicine (SHM), the Surgical Infection Society (SIS), and others

Opportunities to Improve Antibiotic Appropriateness in U.S. ICUs: A Multicenter Evaluation

To use a standardized tool for a multicenter assessment of antibiotic appropriateness in ICUs and identify local antibiotic stewardship improvement opportunities. Pilot point prevalence conducted on October 5, 2016; point prevalence survey conducted on March 1, 2017. ICUs in 12 U.S. acute care hospitals with median bed size 563. Receiving antibiotics on participating units on March 1, 2017. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tool for the Assessment of Appropriateness of Inpatient Antibiotics was made actionable by an expert antibiotic stewardship panel and implemented across hospitals. Data were collected by antibiotic stewardship program personnel at each hospital, deidentified and submitted in aggregate for benchmarking. hospital personnel identified most salient reasons for inappropriate use by category and agent. Forty-seven ICUs participated. Most hospitals (83%) identified as teaching with median licensed ICU beds of 70. On March 1, 2017, 362 (54%) of 667 ICU patients were on antibiotics (range, 8-81 patients); of these, 112 (31%) were identified as inappropriate and administered greater than 72 hours among all 12 hospitals (range, 9-82%). Prophylactic antibiotic regimens and PICU patients demonstrated a statistically significant risk ratio of 1.76 and 1.90 for inappropriate treatment, respectively. Reasons for inappropriate use included unnecessarily broad spectrum (29%), no infection or nonbacterial syndrome (22%), and duration longer than necessary (21%). Of patients on inappropriate antibiotic therapy in surgical ICUs, a statistically significant risk ratio of 2.59 was calculated for noninfectious or nonbacterial reasons for inappropriate therapy. In this multicenter point prevalence study, 31% of ICU antibiotic regimens were inappropriate; prophylactic regimens were often inappropriate across different ICU types, particularly in surgical ICUs. Engaging intensivists in antibiotic stewardship program efforts is crucial to sustain the efficacy of antibiotics and quality of infectious diseases care in critical care settings. This study underscores the value of standardized assessment tools and benchmarking to be shared with local leaders for targeted antibiotic stewardship program interventions

West Nile Virus RNA in Tissues from Donor Associated with Transmission to Organ Transplant Recipients

We identified West Nile virus (WNV) RNA in skin, fat, muscle, tendon, and bone marrow from a deceased donor associated with WNV transmission through solid organ transplantation. WNV could not be cultured from the RNA-positive tissues. Further studies are needed to determine if WNV can be transmitted from postmortem tissues

Donor-Derived West Nile Virus Infection in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

We describe four solid-organ transplant recipients with donor-derived West Nile virus (WNV) infection (encephalitis 3, asymptomatic 1) from a common donor residing in a region of increased WNV activity. All four transplant recipients had molecular evidence of WNV infection in their serum and/or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. Serum from the organ donor was positive for WNV IgM but negative for WNV RNA, whereas his lymph node and spleen tissues tested positive for WNV by RT-PCR. Combination therapy included intravenous immunoglobulin (4 cases), interferon (3 cases), fresh frozen plasma with WNV IgG (2 cases), and ribavirin (1 case). Two of the four transplant recipients survived.Review of the 20 published cases of organ-derived WNV infection found that this infection is associated with a high incidence of neuroinvasive disease (70%) and severe morbidity and mortality (30%). Median time to onset of symptomatic WNV infection was 13 days after transplantation (range 5-37 days). Initial unexplained fever unresponsive to antibiotic therapy followed by rapid onset of neurologic deficits was the most common clinical presentation. Confirmation of infection was made by testing serum and CSF for both WNV RNA by RT-PCR and WNV IgM by serological assays. Treatment usually included supportive care, reduction of immunosuppression, and frequent intravenous immunoglobulin. The often negative results for WNV by current RT-PCR and serological assays and the absence of clinical signs of acute infection in donors contribute to the sporadic occurrence of donor-derived WNV infection. Potential organ donors should be assessed for unexplained fever and neurological symptoms, particularly if they reside in areas of increased WNV activity