Transmission of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus in the long term care facilities in Hong Kong

Background The relative contribution of long term care facilities (LTCFs) and hospitals in the transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is unknown. Methods Concurrent MRSA screening and spa type analysis was performed in LTCFs and their network hospitals to estimate the rate of MRSA acquisition among residents during their stay in LTCFs and hospitals, by colonization pressure and MRSA transmission calculations. Results In 40 LTCFs, 436 (21.6%) of 2020 residents were identified as ‘MRSA-positive’. The incidence of MRSA transmission per 1000-colonization-days among the residents during their stay in LTCFs and hospitals were 309 and 113 respectively, while the colonization pressure in LTCFs and hospitals were 210 and 185 per 1000-patient-days respectively. MRSA spa type t1081 was the most commonly isolated linage in both LTCF residents (76/121, 62.8%) and hospitalized patients (51/87, 58.6%), while type t4677 was significantly associated with LTCF residents (24/121, 19.8%) compared with hospitalized patients (3/87, 3.4%) (p < 0.001). This suggested continuous transmission of MRSA t4677 among LTCF residents. Also, an inverse linear relationship between MRSA prevalence in LTCFs and the average living area per LTCF resident was observed (Pearson correlation −0.443, p = 0.004), with the odds of patients acquiring MRSA reduced by a factor of 0.90 for each 10 square feet increase in living area. Conclusions Our data suggest that MRSA transmission was more serious in LTCFs than in hospitals. Infection control should be focused on LTCFs in order to reduce the burden of MRSA carriers in healthcare settings.published_or_final_versio

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): an evidence map of medical literature

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak in December 2019, a substantial body of COVID-19 medical literature has been generated. As of June 2020, gaps and longitudinal trends in the COVID-19 medical literature remain unidentified, despite potential benefits for research prioritisation and policy setting in both the COVID-19 pandemic and future large-scale public health crises. METHODS: In this paper, we searched PubMed and Embase for medical literature on COVID-19 between 1 January and 24 March 2020. We characterised the growth of the early COVID-19 medical literature using evidence maps and bibliometric analyses to elicit cross-sectional and longitudinal trends and systematically identify gaps. RESULTS: The early COVID-19 medical literature originated primarily from Asia and focused mainly on clinical features and diagnosis of the disease. Many areas of potential research remain underexplored, such as mental health, the use of novel technologies and artificial intelligence, pathophysiology of COVID-19 within different body systems, and indirect effects of COVID-19 on the care of non-COVID-19 patients. Few articles involved research collaboration at the international level (24.7%). The median submission-to-publication duration was 8 days (interquartile range: 4–16). CONCLUSIONS: Although in its early phase, COVID-19 research has generated a large volume of publications. However, there are still knowledge gaps yet to be filled and areas for improvement for the global research community. Our analysis of early COVID-19 research may be valuable in informing research prioritisation and policy planning both in the current COVID-19 pandemic and similar global health crises