44 research outputs found
Which comorbid conditions should we be analyzing as risk factors for healthcare-associated infections?
OBJECTIVETo determine which comorbid conditions are considered causally related to central-line associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and surgical-site infection (SSI) based on expert consensus.DESIGNUsing the Delphi method, we administered an iterative, 2-round survey to 9 infectious disease and infection control experts from the United States.METHODSBased on our selection of components from the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices, 35 different comorbid conditions were rated from 1 (not at all related) to 5 (strongly related) by each expert separately for CLABSI and SSI, based on perceived relatedness to the outcome. To assign expert consensus on causal relatedness for each comorbid condition, all 3 of the following criteria had to be met at the end of the second round: (1) a majority (>50%) of experts rating the condition at 3 (somewhat related) or higher, (2) interquartile range (IQR)≤1, and (3) standard deviation (SD)≤1.RESULTSFrom round 1 to round 2, the IQR and SD, respectively, decreased for ratings of 21 of 35 (60%) and 33 of 35 (94%) comorbid conditions for CLABSI, and for 17 of 35 (49%) and 32 of 35 (91%) comorbid conditions for SSI, suggesting improvement in consensus among this group of experts. At the end of round 2, 13 of 35 (37%) and 17 of 35 (49%) comorbid conditions were perceived as causally related to CLABSI and SSI, respectively.CONCLUSIONSOur results have produced a list of comorbid conditions that should be analyzed as risk factors for and further explored for risk adjustment of CLABSI and SSI.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:449–454</jats:sec
Is there a correlation between infection control performance and other hospital quality measures?
Quality measures are increasingly reported by hospitals to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), yet there may be tradeoffs in performance between infection control (IC) and other quality measures. Hospitals that performed best on IC measures did not perform well on most CMS non–IC quality measures
The effect of adding comorbidities to current centers for disease control and prevention central-line–associated bloodstream infection risk-adjustment methodology
BACKGROUNDRisk adjustment is needed to fairly compare central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates between hospitals. Until 2017, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) methodology adjusted CLABSI rates only by type of intensive care unit (ICU). The 2017 CDC models also adjust for hospital size and medical school affiliation. We hypothesized that risk adjustment would be improved by including patient demographics and comorbidities from electronically available hospital discharge codes.METHODSUsing a cohort design across 22 hospitals, we analyzed data from ICU patients admitted between January 2012 and December 2013. Demographics and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) discharge codes were obtained for each patient, and CLABSIs were identified by trained infection preventionists. Models adjusting only for ICU type and for ICU type plus patient case mix were built and compared using discrimination and standardized infection ratio (SIR). Hospitals were ranked by SIR for each model to examine and compare the changes in rank.RESULTSOverall, 85,849 ICU patients were analyzed and 162 (0.2%) developed CLABSI. The significant variables added to the ICU model were coagulopathy, paralysis, renal failure, malnutrition, and age. The C statistics were 0.55 (95% CI, 0.51–0.59) for the ICU-type model and 0.64 (95% CI, 0.60–0.69) for the ICU-type plus patient case-mix model. When the hospitals were ranked by adjusted SIRs, 10 hospitals (45%) changed rank when comorbidity was added to the ICU-type model.CONCLUSIONSOur risk-adjustment model for CLABSI using electronically available comorbidities demonstrated better discrimination than did the CDC model. The CDC should strongly consider comorbidity-based risk adjustment to more accurately compare CLABSI rates across hospitals.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1019–1024</jats:sec
The impact of universal glove and gown use on Clostridioides difficile acquisition: A cluster-randomized trial
BACKGROUND: Clostridioides difficile is the most common cause of healthcare-associated infections in the United States. It is unknown whether universal gown and glove use in intensive care units (ICUs) decreases acquisition of C. difficile.
METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized trial in 20 medical and surgical ICUs in 20 US hospitals from 4 January 2012 to 4 October 2012. After a baseline period, ICUs were randomized to standard practice for glove and gown use versus the intervention of all healthcare workers being required to wear gloves and gowns for all patient contact and when entering any patient room (contact precautions). The primary outcome was acquisition of toxigenic C. difficile determined by surveillance cultures collected on admission and discharge from the ICU.
RESULTS: A total of 21 845 patients had both admission and discharge perianal swabs cultured for toxigenic C. difficile. On admission, 9.43% (2060/21 845) of patients were colonized with toxigenic C. difficile. No significant difference was observed in the rate of toxigenic C. difficile acquisition with universal gown and glove use. Differences in acquisition rates in the study period compared with the baseline period in control ICUs were 1.49 per 100 patient-days versus 1.68 per 100 patient-days in universal gown and glove ICUs (rate difference, -0.28; generalized linear mixed model, P = .091).
CONCLUSIONS: Glove and gown use for all patient contact in medical and surgical ICUs did not result in a reduction in the acquisition of C. difficile compared with usual care.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01318213
Electronically available patient claims data improve models for comparing antibiotic use across hospitals: Results from 576 US facilities
BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) uses standardized antimicrobial administration ratios (SAARs)-that is, observed-to-predicted ratios-to compare antibiotic use across facilities. CDC models adjust for facility characteristics when predicting antibiotic use but do not include patient diagnoses and comorbidities that may also affect utilization. This study aimed to identify comorbidities causally related to appropriate antibiotic use and to compare models that include these comorbidities and other patient-level claims variables to a facility model for risk-adjusting inpatient antibiotic utilization.
METHODS: The study included adults discharged from Premier Database hospitals in 2016-2017. For each admission, we extracted facility, claims, and antibiotic data. We evaluated 7 models to predict an admission\u27s antibiotic days of therapy (DOTs): a CDC facility model, models that added patient clinical constructs in varying layers of complexity, and an external validation of a published patient-variable model. We calculated hospital-specific SAARs to quantify effects on hospital rankings. Separately, we used Delphi Consensus methodology to identify Elixhauser comorbidities associated with appropriate antibiotic use.
RESULTS: The study included 11 701 326 admissions across 576 hospitals. Compared to a CDC-facility model, a model that added Delphi-selected comorbidities and a bacterial infection indicator was more accurate for all antibiotic outcomes. For total antibiotic use, it was 24% more accurate (respective mean absolute errors: 3.11 vs 2.35 DOTs), resulting in 31-33% more hospitals moving into bottom or top usage quartiles postadjustment.
CONCLUSIONS: Adding electronically available patient claims data to facility models consistently improved antibiotic utilization predictions and yielded substantial movement in hospitals\u27 utilization rankings
Significant regional differences in antibiotic use across 576 US hospitals and 11 701 326 adult admissions, 2016-2017
BACKGROUND: Quantifying the amount and diversity of antibiotic use in United States hospitals assists antibiotic stewardship efforts but is hampered by limited national surveillance. Our study aimed to address this knowledge gap by examining adult antibiotic use across 576 hospitals and nearly 12 million encounters in 2016-2017.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients aged ≥ 18 years discharged from hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2017. Using daily antibiotic charge data, we mapped antibiotics to mutually exclusive classes and to spectrum of activity categories. We evaluated relationships between facility and case-mix characteristics and antibiotic use in negative binomial regression models.
RESULTS: The study included 11 701 326 admissions, totaling 64 064 632 patient-days, across 576 hospitals. Overall, patients received antibiotics in 65% of hospitalizations, at a crude rate of 870 days of therapy (DOT) per 1000 patient-days. By class, use was highest among β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations, third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, and glycopeptides. Teaching hospitals averaged lower rates of total antibiotic use than nonteaching hospitals (834 vs 957 DOT per 1000 patient-days; P \u3c .001). In adjusted models, teaching hospitals remained associated with lower use of third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins and antipseudomonal agents (adjusted incidence rate ratio [95% confidence interval], 0.92 [.86-.97] and 0.91 [.85-.98], respectively). Significant regional differences in total and class-specific antibiotic use also persisted in adjusted models.
CONCLUSIONS: Adult inpatient antibiotic use remains high, driven predominantly by broad-spectrum agents. Better understanding reasons for interhospital usage differences, including by region and teaching status, may inform efforts to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing
Variation in Definitions and Isolation Procedures for Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria: A Survey of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Research Network
Recommended from our members
Contamination of Healthcare Worker Personal Protective Equipment with MRSA Outside the Intensive Care Unit Setting
Background: Estimates of contamination of healthcare personnel (HCP) gloves and gowns with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) following interactions with colonized or infected patients range from 17% to 20%. Most studies were conducted in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting where patients had a recent positive clinical culture. The aim of this study was to determine the rate of MRSA transmission to HCP gloves and gown in non-ICU acute-care hospital units and to identify associated risk factors. Methods: Patients on contact precautions with history of MRSA colonization or infection admitted to non-ICU settings were randomly selected from electronic health records. We observed patient care activities and cultured the gloves and gowns of 10 HCP interactions per patient prior to doffing. Cultures from patients’ anterior nares, chest, antecubital fossa and perianal area were collected to quantify bacterial bioburden. Bacterial counts were log transformed. Results: We observed 55 patients (Fig. 1), and 517 HCP–patient interactions. Of the HCP–patient interactions, 16 (3.1%) led to MRSA contamination of HCP gloves, 18 (3.5%) led to contamination of HCP gown, and 28 (5.4%) led to contamination of either gloves or gown. In addition, 5 (12.8%) patients had a positive clinical or surveillance culture for MRSA in the prior 7 days. Nurses, physicians and technicians were grouped in “direct patient care”, and rest of the HCPs were included in “no direct care group.” Of 404 interactions, 26 (6.4%) of providers in the “direct patient care” group showed transmission of MRSA to gloves or gown in comparison to 2 of 113 (1.8%) interactions involving providers in the “no direct patient care” group (P = .05) (Fig. 2). The median MRSA bioburden was 0 log 10CFU/mL in the nares (range, 0–3.6), perianal region (range, 0–3.5), the arm skin (range, 0-0.3), and the chest skin (range, 0–6.2). Detectable bioburden on patients was negatively correlated with the time since placed on contact precautions (rs= −0.06; P < .001). Of 97 observations with detectable bacterial bioburden at any site, 9 (9.3%) resulted in transmission of MRSA to HCP in comparison to 11 (3.6%) of 310 observations with no detectable bioburden at all sites (P = .03). Conclusions: Transmission of MRSA to gloves or gowns of HCP caring for patients on contact precautions for MRSA in non-ICU settings was lower than in the ICU setting. More evidence is needed to help guide the optimal use of contact precautions for the right patient, in the right setting, for the right type of encounter.
Funding: None
Disclosures: Non
Recommended from our members
Clinician Testing and Treatment Thresholds for Management of Urinary Tract Infection
Greater understanding of clinical decision thresholds may improve inappropriate testing and treatment of urinary tract infection (UTI). We used a survey of clinicians to examine UTI decision thresholds. Although overestimates of UTI occurred, testing and treatment thresholds were generally rational, were lower than previously reported, and differed by type of clinician