Frequency of instrument, environment, and laboratory technologist contamination during routine diagnostic testing of infectious specimens

ABSTRACT Laboratory testing to support the care of patients with highly infectious diseases may pose a risk for laboratory workers. However, data on the risk of virus transmission during routine laboratory testing conducted using standard personal protective equipment (PPE) are sparse. Our objective was to measure laboratory contamination during routine analysis of patient specimens. Remnant specimens were spiked with the nonpathogenic bacteriophage MS2 at 1.0 × 10 7 PFU/ml, and contamination was assessed using reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) for MS2. Specimen containers were exteriorly coated with a fluorescent powder to enable the visualization of gross contamination using UV light. Testing was performed by two experienced laboratory technologists using standard laboratory PPE and sample-to-answer instrumentation. Fluorescence was noted on the gloves, bare hands, and laboratory coat cuffs of the laboratory technologist in 36/36 (100%), 13/36 (36%), and 4/36 (11%) tests performed, respectively. Fluorescence was observed in the biosafety cabinet (BSC) in 8/36 (22%) tests, on test cartridges/devices in 14/32 (44%) tests, and on testing accessory items in 29/32 (91%) tests. Fluorescence was not observed on or in laboratory instrumentation or adjacent surfaces. In contrast to fluorescence detection, MS2 detection was infrequent (3/286 instances [1%]) and occurred during test setup for the FilmArray instrument and on FilmArray accessory equipment. The information from this study may provide opportunities for the improvement of clinical laboratory safety practices so as to reduce the risk of pathogen transmission to laboratory workers. </jats:p

Randomized controlled trial to determine the impact of probiotic administration on colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms in critically ill patients

This was a randomized controlled pilot study of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG versus standard of care to prevent gastrointestinal multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) colonization in ICU patients. Seventy subjects were included in analyses. There were no significant differences in acquisition or loss of any MDROs (p>0.05). There were no probiotic-associated adverse events

Assessment of healthcare worker protocol deviations and self-contamination during personal protective equipment donning and doffing

OBJECTIVETo evaluate healthcare worker (HCW) risk of self-contamination when donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE) using fluorescence and MS2 bacteriophage.DESIGNProspective pilot study.SETTINGTertiary-care hospital.PARTICIPANTSA total of 36 HCWs were included in this study: 18 donned/doffed contact precaution (CP) PPE and 18 donned/doffed Ebola virus disease (EVD) PPE.INTERVENTIONSHCWs donned PPE according to standard protocols. Fluorescent liquid and MS2 bacteriophage were applied to HCWs. HCWs then doffed their PPE. After doffing, HCWs were scanned for fluorescence and swabbed for MS2. MS2 detection was performed using reverse transcriptase PCR. The donning and doffing processes were videotaped, and protocol deviations were recorded.RESULTSOverall, 27% of EVD PPE HCWs and 50% of CP PPE HCWs made ≥1 protocol deviation while donning, and 100% of EVD PPE HCWs and 67% of CP PPE HCWs made ≥1 protocol deviation while doffing (P=.02). The median number of doffing protocol deviations among EVD PPE HCWs was 4, versus 1 among CP PPE HCWs. Also, 15 EVD PPE protocol deviations were committed by doffing assistants and/or trained observers. Fluorescence was detected on 8 EVD PPE HCWs (44%) and 5 CP PPE HCWs (28%), most commonly on hands. MS2 was recovered from 2 EVD PPE HCWs (11%) and 3 CP PPE HCWs (17%).CONCLUSIONSProtocol deviations were common during both EVD and CP PPE doffing, and some deviations during EVD PPE doffing were committed by the HCW doffing assistant and/or the trained observer. Self-contamination was common. PPE donning/doffing are complex and deserve additional study.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1077–1083</jats:sec

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine breakthrough infections among healthcare personnel, December 2020-April 2021

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness in the early months of vaccine availability was high among healthcare personnel (HCP) at 88.3% for 2-doses. Among those testing positive for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), those with breakthrough infection after vaccination were more likely to have had a non-work-related SARS-CoV-2 exposure compared to unvaccinated HCP

Assessment of the characteristics of COVID-19 infection among healthcare personnel working in long-term care facilities

Between May and June 2021, healthcare personnel at two long-term care facilities underwent SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid immunoglobulin G testing and completed a survey on COVID-19 exposures and symptoms. Antibody positivity rate was 8.9%. Similar rates of COVID-19 exposure occurred in non-occupational and occupational settings, with high self-reported adherence to workplace infection prevention practices

Clinical and occupational risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in healthcare personnel

OBJECTIVE: To identify characteristics associated with positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests in healthcare personnel. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A multihospital healthcare system. PARTICIPANTS: Employees who reported SARS-CoV-2 exposures and/or symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between March 30, 2020, and September 20, 2020, and were subsequently referred for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing. METHODS: Data from exposure and/or symptom reports were linked to the corresponding SARS-CoV-2 PCR test result. Employee demographic characteristics, occupational characteristics, SARS-CoV-2 exposure history, and symptoms were evaluated as potential risk factors for having a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. RESULTS: Among 6,289 employees who received SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing, 873 (14%) had a positive test. Independent risk factors for a positive PCR included: working in a patient care area (relative risk [RR], 1.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37–2.40), having a known SARS-CoV-2 exposure (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.04–1.37), reporting a community versus an occupational exposure (RR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.49–2.34), and having an infected household contact (RR, 2.47; 95% CI, 2.11–2.89). Nearly all HCP (99%) reported symptoms. Symptoms associated with a positive PCR in a multivariable analysis included loss of sense of smell (RR, 2.60; 95% CI, 2.09–3.24) or taste (RR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.40–2.20), cough (RR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.40–2.20), fever, and muscle aches. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of >6,000 healthcare system and academic medical center employees early in the pandemic, community exposures, and particularly household exposures, were associated with greater risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection than occupational exposures. This work highlights the importance of COVID-19 prevention in the community and in healthcare settings to prevent COVID-19

Knowledge, beliefs, and practices related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and vaccination in healthcare personnel working at nonacute care facilities

OBJECTIVE: To characterize experiences, beliefs, and perceptions of risk related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), infection prevention practices, and COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare personnel (HCP) at nonacute care facilities. DESIGN: Anonymous survey. SETTING: Three non-acute-care facilities in St. Louis, Missouri. PARTICIPANTS: In total, 156 HCP responded to the survey, for a 25.6% participation rate). Among them, 32% had direct patient-care roles. METHODS: Anonymous surveys were distributed between April-May 2021. Data were collected on demographics, work experience, COVID-19 exposure, knowledge, and beliefs about infection prevention, personal protective equipment (PPE) use, COVID-19 vaccination, and the impact of COVID-19. RESULTS: Nearly all respondents reported adequate knowledge of how to protect oneself from COVID-19 at work (97%) and had access to adequate PPE supplies (95%). Many HCP reported that wearing a mask or face shield made communication difficult (59%), that they had taken on additional responsibilities due to staff shortages (56%), and that their job became more stressful because of COVID-19 (53%). Moreover, 28% had considered quitting their job. Most respondents (78%) had received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Common reasons for vaccination were a desire to protect family and friends (84%) and a desire to stop the spread of COVID-19 (82%). Potential side effects and/or inadequate vaccine testing were cited as the most common concerns by unvaccinated HCP. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of HCP reported increased stress and responsibilities at work due to COVID-19. The majority were vaccinated. Improving workplace policies related to mental health resources and sick leave, maintaining access to PPE, and ensuring clear communication of PPE requirements may improve workplace stress and burnout

Acupuncture and reflexology for patients undergoing chemotherapy : a cohort study

Purpose: Around three quarters of individuals undergoing chemotherapy self-report multiple symptoms. There is clinical trial evidence of effectiveness for acupuncture for commonly experienced symptoms, and emerging evidence for reflexology, but little is known about the effects of these therapies on multiple symptoms when implemented in a real world setting during active chemotherapy treatment. Methods: This was a cohort study of participants receiving reflexology and/or acupuncture while attending chemotherapy. Participants received a 20 minute reflexology treatment or a 20 minute acupuncture treatment or a combination of both. Patient reported outcome measures were administered before and after the treatment using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). Results: During the study period, 330 unique patients received a total of 809 acupuncture and/or reflexology treatments. Participants had, on average, 5.3 symptoms each which they reported as moderate to severe (≥4/10) using the ESAS at baseline. Following treatment, participants reported 3.2 symptoms as moderate to severe. The symptom change for all participant encounters receiving any therapy was statistically significant for all symptoms, and clinically significant (a reduction of more than 1) for all symptoms except financial distress, appetite, and memory. Clinically significant levels of global distress (<3) were reduced in 72% of all participants receiving either therapy. No adverse events were recorded. Conclusions: The results indicate that acupuncture and reflexology administered alongside chemotherapy may reduce patient reported symptom burden and patient global symptom related distress. Future research would include an active control group, and consider confounding factors such as chemotherapy stage and medication

Assessment of antibiotic-resistant organism transmission among rooms of hospitalized patients, healthcare personnel, and the hospital environment utilizing surrogate markers and selective bacterial cultures

OBJECTIVE: To assess potential transmission of antibiotic-resistant organisms (AROs) using surrogate markers and bacterial cultures. DESIGN: Pilot study. SETTING: A 1,260-bed tertiary-care academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 25 patients (17 of whom were on contact precautions for AROs) and 77 healthcare personnel (HCP). METHODS: Fluorescent powder (FP) and MS2 bacteriophage were applied in patient rooms. HCP visits to each room were observed for 2-4 hours; hand hygiene (HH) compliance was recorded. Surfaces inside and outside the room and HCP skin and clothing were assessed for fluorescence, and swabs were collected for MS2 detection by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and selective bacterial cultures. RESULTS: Transfer of FP was observed for 20 rooms (80%) and 26 HCP (34%). Transfer of MS2 was detected for 10 rooms (40%) and 15 HCP (19%). Bacterial cultures were positive for 1 room and 8 HCP (10%). Interactions with patients on contact precautions resulted in fewer FP detections than interactions with patients not on precautions (P \u3c .001); MS2 detections did not differ by patient isolation status. Fluorescent powder detections did not differ by HCP type, but MS2 was recovered more frequently from physicians than from nurses (P = .03). Overall, HH compliance was better among HCP caring for patients on contact precautions than among HCP caring for patients not on precautions (P = .003), among nurses than among other nonphysician HCP at room entry (P = .002), and among nurses than among physicians at room exit (P = .03). Moreover, HCP who performed HH prior to assessment had fewer fluorescence detections (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Contact precautions were associated with greater HCP HH compliance and reduced detection of FP and MS2

Extent of Left Ventricular Scar Predicts Outcomes in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Patients With Significantly Reduced Systolic Function A Delayed Hyperenhancement Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Study

ObjectivesThe objective of the study was to determine whether the extent of left ventricular scar, measured with delayed hyperenhancement cardiac magnetic resonance (DHE-CMR), predicts survival in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).BackgroundPatients with ICM and reduced LVEF have poor survival. Such patients have a high myocardial scar burden. CMR is highly accurate in delineation of myocardial scar.MethodsWe studied 349 patients (76% men) with severe ICM (≥70% disease in ≥1 epicardial coronary, and mean LVEF of 24%) that underwent DHE-CMR (Siemens 1.5-T scanner, Erlangen, Germany), between 2003 and 2006. Scar (quantified as percentage of myocardium) was defined on DHE-MR images as an intensity >2 standard deviations above the viable myocardium. Transmurality score was semiquantitatively recorded in a 17-segment model as: 0 = no scar, 1 = 1% to 25% scar, 2 = 26% to 50%, 3 = 51% to 75%, and 4 = >75%. The LVEF, demographic data, risk factors, need for cardiac transplantation (CTx), and all-cause mortality were recorded.ResultsThe mean age and follow-up were 65 ± 11 years and 2.6 ± 1.2 years (median 2.4 years [1.1, 3.5]), respectively. There were 56 events (51 deaths and 5 CTx). Mean scar percentage and transmurality score were higher in patients with events versus those without (39 ± 22 vs. 30 ± 20, p = 0.003, and 9.7 ± 5 vs. 7.8 ± 5, p = 0.004). On Cox proportional hazard survival analysis, quantified scar was greater than the median (30% of total myocardium), and female gender predicted events (relative risk 1.75 [95% Confidence Interval: 1.02 to 3.03] and relative risk 1.83 [95% Confidence Interval: 1.06 to 3.16], respectively, both p = 0.03).ConclusionsIn patients with ICM and severely reduced LVEF, a greater extent of myocardial scar, delineated by DHE-CMR is associated with increased mortality or the need for cardiac transplantation, potentially aiding further risk-stratification