bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025 huggingface dataset:
Clostridioides difficile: A diagnostic intervention
Authors: Alsoubani Majd , Khuvis Joshua , Rodday Angie , Doron Shira
Published: May 2022

Background:Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a leading cause of healthcare-associated infection and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Multiple strategies have been implemented to optimize the diagnostic accuracy of CDI testing algorithms. However, overdiagnosis of C. difficile colonization remains a challenge especially in the era of highly sensitive Nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT). We implemented 2 interventions to reduce the rates of inappropriate C. difficile orders and tests. Methods: We performed a quasi-experimental retrospective study to examine the rates of all inpatient C. difficile test orders and results relative to 2 interventions between January 2018 and February 2021. We defined 3 periods: preintervention, after the first intervention, and after the second intervention. The first intervention, implemented May 2019, was a clinical decision support system (CDSS) tool to guide clinicians to order testing only if CDI criteria were met. The second intervention, implemented July 2020, was the requirement of mandatory antimicrobial team approval of PCR reflex testing for indeterminate toxin or antigen test results. This intervention included a discussion between clinicians and members of stewardship team prior to approval. To evaluate the impact of interventions on ordering appropriateness, chart review was conducted on a random subsample of 100 orders from each period. Hospital-onset CDI (HO-CDI) was calculated using CDC criteria. Results: In total, 3,004 C. difficile test orders were placed during the study period. The rates of reportable HO-CDI were significantly reduced by 57.1% (P = .003). We detected a significant reduction in the number of tests ordered over time from 11.6 to 7.51 per 1,000 patient days. (p Conclusions: CDSS tools target patients at high pretest probability of CDI. The restriction of PCR-reflex testing to the antimicrobial stewardship team is a novel effective measure to minimize the misdiagnosis of CDI. The incorporation of multiple strategies is necessary to improve the diagnostic accuracy of C. difficile testing.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Peripheral intravascular catheter-associated bloodstream infection in the medical–surgical ICU
Authors: Hogle Nancy , Burke Patrick , Fraser Thomas
Published: May 2022

Background: Prompt removal of unnecessary central venous catheters (CVC) may reduce central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI). Primary non–central-line–associated hospital-acquired bloodstream infection (BSI), including peripheral intravascular (PIV) catheter-associated bloodstream infection (PIVABSI) remains a problem. Hospitals use CLABSI surveillance data to measure patient safety, yet this measure alone fails to describe the burden of total intravascular device-related infection. We described non-CLABSI primary BSI due to PIV in our medical–surgical ICU population. Methods: Hospital-wide surveillance for primary hospital-acquired BSI, including CLABSI, was conducted in accordance with NHSN protocol. We measured PIV catheter days and central-line days using a database including nursing device documentation and patient census data to count the number of patients with 1 or more devices in place in each location, counted at the same time each day. By substituting the role of the CVC with short or midline PIV in NHSN CLABSI surveillance protocols, we performed surveillance for PIVABSI. We defined PIVABSI as a patient without CVC and either a short or midline catheter in place for >2 calendar days on the date of BSI. Patients with BSI and both CVC and PIV were counted as CLABSI. We compared CVC and PIV utilization and the incidence density of CLABSI and PIVABSI in 8 medical and surgical ICUs at our large teaching hospital. We used OpenEpi version 3.01 software to test the hypothesis that the incidence density of CLABSI would be significantly different from that of PIVABSI. Results: From January to September 2021, there were 16 CLABSIs and 12 primary non–central-line–associated hospital-acquired BSIs, all 12 were PIVABSIs. Of these 12, 8 had >1 PIV in place and none were midlines. There were 13,418 central-line days, 10,897 short and midline peripheral IV days, and 22,415 patient days, resulting in device utilization ratios of 0.60 and 0.49, respectively. The incidence density of CLABSI was 1.2 per 1,000 central-line days, although the incidence density of PIVABSI was 1.1 per 1,000 peripheral IV days (P = .84). There was no difference in pathogens between the 2 groups. Conclusions: PIVABSI represented more than one-third of the total primary hospital-acquired BSIs in our medical and surgical ICUs. Total BSI surveillance is feasible. Efforts to reduce CLABSI should be part of a broader strategy to decrease total hospital-acquired BSI from all vascular access devices.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
The effectiveness of a dedicated central venous access care team to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infections
Authors: Charles Fil de Lara Fortune , Mano Maria Jesusa , Henson Karl Evans , Bello Jia An , Abad Cybele Lara
Published: May 2022

Background: Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) rates remain high despite the use of an insertion bundle. We hypothesized that line care and maintenance by a dedicated team would help decrease CRBSI rates. This study was conducted in The Medical City (TMC), is a 526-bed, private, tertiary-care center in Pasig City, Philippines. Methods: All adult hospitalized patients from October 1, 2020, to October 31, 2021, with a newly inserted temporary central venous catheter (CVC) were eligible for inclusion. CRBSI rates before the intervention (October 2019 to March 2020) and after the intervention (April to October 2021) were compared. The intervention arm consisted of a dedicated central venous access team (CVAT) who provided education and performed daily line care and dressing changes per protocol. A series of χ2 and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were performed to compare characteristics between exposure groups. Incidence rates of CRBSI before and after the intervention were compared using an incidence rate ratio approach. Results: In total, 209 CVCs were enrolled in the study, with 103 CVCs (49.28%) in the preintervention arm and 106 CVCs (50.72%) in the postintervention arm. Baseline patient characteristics were similar. CRBSIs were more frequent in the preintervention arm than the postintervention arm (39 of 103 vs 28 of 106; P = .08). The CRBSI incidence density rate was higher in the preintervention arm than the postintervention arm, but the difference was not statistically significant (37.46 per 1,000 patient days vs 25.97 per 1,000 patient days; P = .14). Median time to CRBSI was similar in both groups (9 vs 8 days). Conclusions: Baseline CRBSI rates were high and risk of infection increased by day 8 after line insertion. We detected a decreasing trend in rates of CRBSI with a dedicated CVAT, but multiple interventions are likely needed to influence overall rates.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in patients with and without hepatic failure
Authors: Bosco Jordan , Burke Patrick , Canosa Francisco Marco , Wilson Stephen , Gordon Steven , Fraser Thomas
Published: May 2022

Background: The NHSN parameter estimate for predicted number of central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) is the same for gastroenterology wards as other specialty wards, such as behavioral health and gerontology. We conducted this study to contribute to the body of knowledge surrounding the risk for hospital-acquired bloodstream infection (HABSI) in patients with and without hepatic failure. The Cleveland Clinic is a 1,200-bed, multispecialty hospital with a solid-organ transplant service. Patients with hepatic failure who do not require critical care are housed on 36-bed unit A. On unit A, 43% of patients are under hepatology or gastroenterology service, although 51% of patients are under general internal medicine. Overall, unit A has a high incidence of HABSI. Methods: Surveillance for HABSI and CLABSI is performed at the Cleveland Clinic per NHSN protocol. All patients with a midnight stay on unit A from January 2019 through September 2021 were dichotomized as having hepatic failure (yes or no) if they ever received the International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision code for “hepatic failure, not elsewhere classified.” We joined the diagnostic code to patient days and central-line-days databases and summarized the data using Microsoft Excel software. We stratified the number of patients, patient days, device days, infection classification, and hospital length of stay by whether the patient had hepatic failure, and we compared the incidence of HABSI and CLABSI between the 2 groups using OpenEpi version 3.01 software. Results: We identified 72 HABSIs among 4,285 patients who stayed on unit A for 30,910 patient days during the study period. The incidences of HABSI in patients with and without hepatic failure were 39.0 and 13.9 per 10,000 patient days, respectively (P < .001). The incidence of CLABSI was 5.4 and 1.9 per 1,000 line days, respectively (P = .01). Patients with hepatic failure stayed longer (11.5 vs 5.9 days), yet the central-line utilization ratios were not substantially different (0.25 vs 0.24). Enterococcus was the most common pathogen involved in CLABSI in both groups (Table 2). Conclusions: Patients with hepatic failure experienced CLABSI more frequently than patients without hepatic failure, stayed longer in the hospital, and were less likely have HABSI attributed to another primary focus of infection according to NHSN definitions. Although hepatic failure may be among the most severe conditions among patients in a gastroenterology ward, we have demonstrated that these units house a population uniquely susceptible to HABSI and CLABSI.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Perceptions and emotions of infection control team member during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany
Authors: Schulz-Stubner Sebastian
Published: May 2022

Background: We conducted an anonymous survey in compliance with German data protections regulations among participants of the annual infectious disease and control meeting in Freiburg, Germany, in October 2021. Methods: In total, 391 surveys were returned: 188 from nurse infection control practitioners (ICPs) and 66 from specially infection control trained physicians (STPs). We report the results of these 2 subgroups regarding their perceptions and emotions during the pandemic. Descriptive statistics and χ2 test with P < .05 were used when applicable. Results: Shortages of medical masks or FFP2 masks during the first pandemic wave in 2020 were reported by 48.5% STPs and 57.4% ICPs. STPs and ICPs relied equally on information provided by the Robert Koch Institute, the WHO, the ECDC and the CDC. Occupational health information was sought significantly more often by ICPs; only 17% of ICPs never used this source versus 51.5% of STPs (P < .001). Most ICPs (58%) and STPs (51%) described their relationship to local authorities as good as well as communication with institutional leaders (69.7%). Fewer ICPs (36.1%) felt frequently appreciated during the pandemic compared to 45.5% of STPs and more ICPs (25%) reported frustration than STPs (18.2%). However, the differences were not statistically significant. Rarely, ICPs (2.1%) or STPs (1.5%) felt unsafe at work and only 1.6% of ICPs and no STPs reported loss of motivation. In addition, 13.8% of ICPs and 12.1% of STPs often felt overwhelmed, but only 3.2% of ICPs and no STPs felt hopeless. Their self-reported competency was rated as high by 75% of ICPs and 69.7% of STPs. The 5 most frequent free-text comments regarding “lessons learned” pertained to better crisis communication, better supply chain management, precise regulations, “less talking more doing,” and mandatory vaccination. The most frequent free-text general comments pertained to maintain basic hygiene measures in private and public life because of the pandemic. Conclusions: Our survey results indicate a high level of resilience among members of infections control teams in German medical institutions despite obvious shortcomings in supplies during the first wave of the pandemic. There were no significant differences between physician and nurse members of infection control teams regarding their perceptions and emotions, indicating a homogenous situation within the teams. The high level of self-perceived competency has likely helped deal with the pandemic and prevented the feeling of loss of control implied in the question items “feeling overwhelmed” and “hopeless.”

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Epidemiologic risk factors and occupation analysis of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths–southern California, 2020
Authors: Cummings Patricia , Perez Theresa Ubano , Sidana Megan , Peters Charmaine
Published: May 2022

Background: COVID-19 occupational exposures have been examined using death certificates and employment data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the O*Net database in the United States. However, no studies have examined cases, hospitalizations, and deaths by occupation using hospital records.1 We analyzed COVID-19 cases using hospitalization data from a large, rural community hospital to fill this gap in the evidence base. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study design was used to examine patients with COVID-19 from March 1 through July 31, 2020. We examined demographic characteristics, such as age, sex, race or ethnicity, and length of stay (LOS), among those who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Epidemiological risk factors were also analyzed, including smoking status, body mass index (BMI), alcohol use, and occupation. Occupational data were processed using the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Industry and Occupation Computerized Coding System. Homemakers, disabled persons or retirees, students or minors, and listed occupations with insufficient information were excluded from the analysis. Occupations were categorized into 23 major occupation groups based on the 2018 Standard Occupational Classification System. To examine whether certain occupations are at a higher risk due to COVID-19, we stratified the analysis by overall cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. Microsoft Power BI Desktop and IBM SPSS version 28.0.0.0 software were used to analyze the data. This study was reviewed and approved by the local institutional review board. Results: In total, 2,132 COVID-19 diagnoses with 1,049 total hospitalizations were identified during the study period. Most cases were in the group aged 50–64 years, white race, and/or Hispanic ethnicity (Table 1). Most cases never or rarely drank alcohol, were nonsmokers, and had a BMI ≥30 (Table 2). The average LOS among those hospitalized for COVID-19 was 6.46 days. The occupational analysis revealed a higher frequency of cases among those in management (n = 95, 14%) and healthcare (n = 83, 12%), with those in management (n = 40, 14%) and sales (n = 29, 10%) having the highest frequency of being hospitalized. However, the highest frequency of deaths occurred among those in building and grounds cleaning and maintenance occupations (13%) (Table 3). Conclusions: This study describes the burden of COVID-19 in a rural area with a large aging population and highlights potential health disparities among severe cases and deaths in different occupational groups.

1. Baker MG, Peckham TK, Seixas NS. Estimating the burden of United States workers exposed to infection or disease: a key factor in containing risk of COVID-19 infection. PLoS One 2020;15:e0232452.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Absence of racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 survival among residents of US Veterans’ Affairs community living centers
Authors: Alabdely Mayyadah , Kothadia Sonya , Bej Taissa , Wilson Brigid , Song Sunah , Akpoji Ukwen , Perez Federico , Jump Robin
Published: May 2022

Background: COVID-19 has had a disproportionate effect on nursing homes residents as well as people from racial and ethnic minorities. Whether differences in mortality due to COVID-19 exists for nursing-home residents from racial and ethnic minorities is less clear, with some previous studies reporting systems-level disparities. The Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) has nursing homes, termed community living centers (CLCs), across the United States. We hypothesized that differences in COVID-19–related mortality among racial and ethnic minorities would be less pronounced among residents of CLCs. Methods: Using data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse, we conducted a retrospective cohort study from April 14, 2020 (implementation of population-based testing) to December 10, 2020 (availability of a COVID-19 vaccine). Inclusion criteria were residents with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test while residing in or <48 hours before admission to a CLC. Positive tests <180 days after a prior positive test were excluded. We assessed the cohort for demographics, including self-reported race or ethnicity, clinical characteristics, and survival probability including all-cause 30-day mortality. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all-cause 30-day mortality that included race, ethnicity, age, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Results: Among 14,759 CLC residents, 651 (4.4%) had a positive SARS-COV-2 test. Their mean age was 75.7 ± 11.3 years, and self-reported race or ethnicity was 68% White (445 of 651), 23% Black (152 of 651), and 4% Hispanic/Latinx (27 of 651). The mean CCI was lower among White residents than Black residents (4.15 ± 2.6 vs 4.61 ± 3.1, respectively). All-cause 30-day mortality for CLC residents following positive SARS-COV-2 test was 25% for White patients, 14% for Black patients, and 15% for Hispanic/Latinx patients (Fig. 1). Age (in years), but neither race or ethnicity nor CCI, was independently associated with all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05–1.09) in CLC residents with COVID-19. Conclusions: Among VA CLC residents with a positive COVID-19 test, minority CLC residents did not have worse outcomes than white residents, suggesting that users of the VA healthcare system may enjoy abrogation of some aspects of health disparities.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Enhancing respiratory protection in skilled nursing facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic: A public health fit-test training program
Authors: Scully Jenna , Menanno Mariah , Gould Jane , Peritz Tiina
Published: May 2022

Background: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Respiratory Protection standard (29 CFR 1910.134) states that it is an employer’s responsibility to establish and maintain a respiratory protection program when a respirator is necessary to protect the health of employees, including annual assessment of adequate respirator fit. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, N95 respirators were rarely used in Philadelphia skilled-nursing facilities (SNFs), and many facilities did not have programs in place or materials to fit test their staff. Methods: The Philadelphia Department of Public Health’s (PDPH) Healthcare Associated Infections/Antimicrobial Resistance (HAI/AR) Program designed and pilot-tested 1.5-hour “train-the-trainer” sessions on OSHA-compliant fit-testing requirements and qualitative procedures. This training was offered to all 47 SNFs beginning May 2021. Training covered the role N95 respirators play in healthcare, proper donning and doffing, OSHA training requirements, medical clearances, record keeping, fit-testing procedure, and demonstrated competency to perform fit testing. Resources that were provided after training included templates of a respiratory protection policy for SNFs, a fit-test record, the OSHA medical clearance form, and a competency checklist. This bundle was designed to help SNFs establish self-sustaining respiratory protection programs. Post-training evaluations were administered on a 6-point Likert scale as well as qualitative, open-ended questions to evaluate the overall quality and effectiveness of the training session. Results: In total, 50 employees (clinical and nonclinical) from 13 Philadelphia SNFs received N95 fit-test training from June through December 2021. The average rating for the training overall was very high (5.9 of 6 points). On average, participants strongly agreed that content presented was directly applicable to their work (5.9 of 6 points), and most strongly agreed that information they learned would alter practices and procedures (5.79 of 6 points). When asked qualitatively what the participant would do differently in practice as a result of the training, the most frequent responses were fit test staff (58%) and educate staff on proper N95 use (60%). Conclusions: The PDPH HAI/AR program created a successful pilot fit-test training program for SNFs, demonstrated by program enrollment and high ratings by participants. This relatively low-cost intervention has provided tools to enhance respiratory protection during the COVID-19 pandemic and has increases the capacity of SNFs to provide essential services for their staff and residents. The PDPH will continue to offer these training sessions to SNFs, with plans to expand to other care settings, such as inpatient behavioral health facilities, outpatient clinics, and emergency medical services.

Funding: Funded by the CDC ELC Project Firstline

Disclosures: None
The role and relevance of asymptomatic healthcare worker testing in COVID-19 hospital outbreaks
Authors: Garrod Matthew , Short Katy , Zlosnik James , Prystajecky Natalie
Published: May 2022

Background: Many healthcare facilities have faced the decision of conducting point prevalence testing (PPT) of healthcare workers (HCW) during COVID-19 outbreaks. As a containment strategy, PPT can identify asymptomatic or presymptomatic cases for isolation. It is less clear how useful testing asymptomatic HCW is in understanding the spread and possible routes of transmission in an outbreak. This study investigated HCW cases identified through PPT during acute-care outbreaks in Fraser Health (FH), British Columbia, incorporating both epidemiological and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) data to determine their epidemiological source. Methods: This study was a retrospective review of cases associated with COVID-19 acute-care outbreaks in FH occurring between December 2020 and June 2021, when most of these infections were of the alpha and gamma lineages. All patients and HCWs with a positive COVID-19 test and epidemiologically linked to the outbreaks were included in the study. WGS results supported determination of epidemiological source for cases. The proportion of patient and HCW cases related to the outbreak was compared. All analyses were conducted using SAS version 4.3 software with the PROC GLM package. Results: Between December 2020 and June 2021, 49 acute-care COVID-19 outbreaks were declared. Point-prevalence testing of HCWs, in addition to routine patient PPT, was conducted in 28 outbreaks (57%), with 2,167 eligible HCWs (63%) tested. Testing identified 14 previously unknown HCW cases, representing 12.96% of all HCW cases epidemiologically linked to the outbreaks. None of these HCWs were determined to be the index case for their associated outbreak. There was no statistically significant difference between HCWs and patients regarding WGS failure rate, and all failed samples were removed from further analysis. Patients were 3.8 times as likely as HCWs to present as symptomatic when testing positive. HCWs were 2.2 times as likely as patients to have WGS results unrelated to the outbreak. Discussion: Although point-prevalence testing of HCW identified previously unknown cases, these cases were more likely than patients to be unrelated to the outbreak and therefore less useful in understanding the epidemiology of the outbreak. It is difficult to determine whether HCW PPT was effective at preventing transmission, especially with robust infection prevention measures already in place. Patients were more likely than HCWs to present as asymptomatic, however this may be due to the attribution of symptoms to other conditions. Conclusions: Point prevalence testing of HCWs during COVID-19 outbreaks may assist with preventing transmission but is less likely to contribute meaningful information to the investigation.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Duration of exposure is the most important risk factor for nosocomial COVID-19 in open multibed wards
Authors: Chan Hwang Ching , Ang Alicia , Fauzi Nazira , Sridhar Revathi , Poh Annie , Low Isaac , Fisher Dale , Tambyah Paul , Somani Jyoti
Published: May 2022

Background: The National University Hospital (NUH) is a 1,200 bed tertiary-care hospital with no documented nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 among patients for the first year and a half of the pandemic, despite 65% of the patients being housed in 4- to 8-bedded open cubicles with shared bathrooms. However, this arrangement changed in late September 2021 with large community clusters including in healthcare institutions nationally associated with the spread of the δ (delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a retrospective review of hospital epidemiology data to determine risk factors for SARS-COV-2 transmission during this period. Methods: Index patients were defined as the first patient in an open cubicle with a confirmed positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. Contacts were defined as being in the same cubicle as a patient before isolation from 2 days before symptom onset, up to 7 days from positive test if asymptomatic. Clinical and patient movement data were obtained manually from routine clinical records. Proximity of the contact from the index was classified as within, or more than, 2 m away, according to the prevailing definition from the Singapore Ministry of Health. A univariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors for nosocomial acquisition of SARS-CoV-2. The analysis was deemed exempt from ethics review (reference no. NHG-DSRB-2021/01026). Results: From October 1 to November 30, 2021, 30 index cases occurred in open cubicles identified (median, 9 days after admission; IQR, 19 days). Contact tracing yielded 211 contacts, of whom 10 (4.7%) were infected. Linear regression analysis found the duration of contact for each hour spent in the same room as the index case was the only statistically significant risk variable for contracting COVID-19, with an odds ratio 1.02 (Table 1). Conclusions: Patients in open cubicles are at risk for nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 and other infections. The duration of contact appeared to be more important than vaccination status of index or ward ventilation status. Larger multicentered studies are needed to validate this finding, which has significant implications for infection prevention strategies and pandemic planning.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Fitted containment efficiency of face masks for reducing emission of aerosols in the indoor environment
Authors: Bennett William , Prince Steven , Zeman Kirby , Samet James
Published: May 2022

Background: Face masks are a major tool for reducing the spread of COVID-19 has been the use of face masks because (1) they protect the wearer from aerosol laden virus in the environment and (2) they reduce aerosol emissions to the environment from infected individuals. Methods that quantify the fitted mask filtration efficiency for protection of the wearer are well established (eg, Sickbert-Bennett et al, JAMA Intern Med 2020;180:1607). In contrast, current methods for assessing face-mask containment efficiency are generally semiquantitative and rely on measurement of a very low concentration of aerosols emitted from a healthy or infected human, or the use of mannequins in which a high concentration of surrogate aerosols can be introduced inside the mask. Methods: Expanding on our standard methods used for fitted face-mask filtration efficiency, we designed a small-volume, low-ventilation chamber to accommodate a seated study participant. The study participant wore a ported face mask to allow introduction of a stream of 0.05 μm NaCl particles at a constant concentration (TSI 8026 particle generator) into the mask space. The ambient chamber concentration was continuously measured by a TSI 3775 condensation particle counter sampling 2 feet (~2 m) in front of the participant’s head over a series of three 3-minute periods: (1) resting, (2) reading out loud, and (3) repeated forceful coughing (2 × 10 coughs) (~450 L/min peak flows). Figure 1 shows a raw data sample for the coughing procedure. Containment efficiency (%) for each mask and procedure were determined as 100 × (1 – the average of all 1 − second ambient concentration values between 30 and 180 seconds divided by the same for the “no mask” condition). Results: Table 1 shows the average % containment efficiency for 2 study days with each mask or procedure in an adult male. The 2-ear-loop masks (KN95 and procedure) tested during coughing had the greatest reduction in % containment efficiency compared to that during resting breathing, likely owing to a decreased mask fit with transient pressure increase inside the mask associated with the coughs. The N95 was least affected by the introduction of reading and/or coughing, maintaining near 95% containment efficiency throughout. Conclusions: Our preliminary data on fitted containment efficiency of masks under different conditions suggest that the fitted containment efficiency closely mimics their performance for personal protection. This information that may aid in providing optimum source control in indoor environments.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections among hospitalized patients in southeastern Michigan
Authors: Fine Sydney , Necaise Kellee , Hayward Alexandra , Malani Anurag
Published: May 2022

Background: As of January 2022, more than 57 million cases of COVID-19 have been reported in the United States. Three primary COVID-19 vaccines are widely available: Pfizer (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), and Johnson & Johnson’s-Janssen (JNJ-78436735). The vaccines are effective but do not prevent all infections. We investigated trends in type of vaccine receipt, demographic characteristics, and disease outcomes in COVID-19 breakthrough infections among hospitalized patients. Methods: A breakthrough case is defined as the detection of SARS-CoV-2 ≥14 days after completion of all doses of an FDA-authorized COVID-19 vaccine. An electronic medical record report in EPIC EHR software identified 85 fully vaccinated patients with a documented positive SARS-CoV-2 result between February and September 2021 at 2 hospitals in southeastern Michigan. Demographic information and hospitalization characteristics, including length of stay and oxygen requirements, were collected from the report. Patients were classified into disease severity categories: nonsevere, severe, or critical. A case was considered severe if the patient’s oxygen saturation level (SpO2) was ≤94% on room air or if the patient required supplemental oxygen. Illness was considered critical if the patient developed respiratory failure, including mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. All other cases were classified as nonsevere. Cycle threshold (Ct) values, the number of PCR cycles required to reach a threshold of SARS-CoV-2 genomic material, were collected from the hospital microbiology lab. Results: We identified 85 breakthrough infections (Fig. 1). The average patient age was 69.9±15.7 years, and 44 (51.8%) were female. Severe disease was most common (n = 73, 85.9%) followed by nonsevere disease (n = 7, 8.24%), and 9 patients (10.6%) in this cohort died. Most patients received either the Moderna (n = 35, 41.2%) or Pfizer (n = 38, 44.7%) vaccines. Pfizer vaccine receipt was most common among patients with severe illness (n = 33 of 73, 45.2%), and Moderna vaccine receipt was most common among patients with critical illness (n = 4 of 5, 80.0%). Average time from last vaccination to positive test was longest among Moderna vaccine recipients (181.9±43.1 days) and shortest among J&J vaccine recipients (91.0±61.1 days). The average Ct value was 23.8±7.5 and ranged from 13.0 to 41.3. There were no appreciable differences in the average Ct value by vaccine manufacturer. Conclusions: Breakthrough infections among hospitalized patients were uncommon, but incidence increased with time after vaccine receipt in all vaccines. Further study is needed to examine differences and severity in breakthrough infections by vaccine type and in individuals who completed booster vaccines.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
assessment of Vaccine Interest in Unvaccinated COVID-19–positive inpatients
Authors: Stancill Lisa , DiBiase Lauren , Vavalle Emily Sickbert-Bennett
Published: May 2022

Background: Although vaccine hesitancy has been an issue for many years, it has become a major point of contention in the effort to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. In August 2021, a large academic medical facility began capturing the vaccination status of admitted COVID-19–positive patients, as well as their interest in the COVID-19 vaccine. We performed a descriptive analysis on the characteristics of unvaccinated patients who contracted COVID-19 and their interest in receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: Patient history and physical (H&P) notes and demographic data were collected using the internal data warehouse sourced from the electronic medical record for all SARS-COV-2–positive inpatient admissions to UNC Medical Center and UNC Chatham from August 1, 2021, to January 11, 2022. Manual chart reviews of progress notes were completed for patients whose history was not recorded in the initial H&P. Demographic data were summarized by vaccine status overall and by interest in COVID-19 vaccine among unvaccinated patients. We performed χ2 to determine demographic differences between the interested and uninterested unvaccinated groups. Results: In total, 536 patients were admitted with COVID-19 from August 1, 2021, to January 11, 2022. Of these, 15% were fully vaccinated (2 doses mRNA plus 1 dose J&J); 5.4% were partially vaccinated; 75.7% were unvaccinated; and 2.9% had an unknown vaccination status. Demographic characteristics are presented in Table 1. The most common demographics were consistent among the fully vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, with the exception of sex and age group (Table 1). For those whose interest data were available (n = 164), 34% were uninterested in receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Importantly, race and age were statistically significantly different (P < .05) between the unvaccinated interested and unvaccinated uninterested groups. Conclusions: Even after experiencing COVID-19 firsthand and being hospitalized, some people who remain uninterested in receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. This population had a statistically higher proportion of white and older individuals than the unvaccinated interested group. Recommendations from healthcare providers might not be effective in persuading this population to be vaccinated. Instead, grassroots alternatives might be more successful. Additional analysis should be considered on whether patients who expressed interest in COVID-19 vaccine received immunization.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Stay home, save lives: Characterizing sickness presenteeism and motives among healthcare personnel in the COVID-19 pandemic
Authors: Marusiak Amanda Brown , Weber David , Culbreth Cynthia , Pettigrew Erica , Stancill Lisa , Sickbert-Bennett Emily
Published: May 2022

Background: Working while ill, or presenteeism, has been documented at substantial levels among healthcare personnel (HCP) along with its consequences for both patient and HCP safety. Limited literature has been published on HCP presenteeism during the COVID-19 pandemic, and specific motivations for this behavior are not well described. Understanding both individual and systemic factors that contribute to presenteeism is key to reducing respiratory illness transmission in the healthcare setting. We characterized the frequency of and motivations for presenteeism in the workforce of a large academic medical center during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: We deployed a voluntary, anonymous electronic survey to HCP at University of North Carolina (UNC) Medical Center in December 2021, which was approved by the UNC Institutional Review Board. We received 591 responses recruited through employee newsletters. Respondents recounted their frequency of presenteeism since March 2020, defined as coming to work feeling feverish plus cough and/or sore throat. In total, 24.6% reported presenteeism at least once, with 8.1% reporting twice and 5.3% 3 or more times. Asking more generally about any symptoms while working, the following were most common: headache (26%), sinus congestion (20%), sore throat (13%), cough (13%), and muscle aches (9.3%). Results: Motivations for presenteeism fell broadly into 4 categories: (1) perception of low risk for COVID-19 infection, (2) concerns about workplace culture and operations, (3) issues with sick leave, and (4) concerns about employment record and status. Among HCP reporting at least 1 instance, the most common motivations for presenteeism included feeling low risk for COVID-19 infection due to mild symptoms (59.9%), being vaccinated (50.6%), avoiding increasing colleagues’ workload (48.3%), avoiding employment record impact (39.6%), and saving sick days for other purposes (37.9%). Asked to identify a primary motivation, 40.3% reported feeling low risk for COVID-19 infection due to mild symptoms or vaccination, 21.2% reported a workplace culture issue (ie, increasing colleague workload, perception of weakness, responsibility for patients), 20.6% reported sick leave availability and use (including difficulty finding coverage) and 17.8% reported employment record ramifications including termination. Conclusions: This survey coincided with 2the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 ο (omicron) variant locally, and as such, risk perceptions and motivations for presenteeism may have changed. Responses were self-reported and generalizability is limited. Still, these results highlight the importance of risk messaging and demonstrate the many factors to be considered as potential presenteeism motivators. Mitigating these drivers is particularly critical during high-risk times such as pandemics or seasonal peaks of respiratory illness.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Assessment of the effects of rapid diagnostic biofire blood culture identification panel in hospitalized patients
Authors: Cohen Amy , Erwes Thomas , Wiskirchen Dora , Abrantes-Figueiredo Jessica
Published: May 2022

Background: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) have life-threatening consequences; they contribute to increased global morbidity and mortality, particularly in critically ill patients. Consequently, early implementation of effective antimicrobial therapy is crucial. Microbiology stewardship efforts, such as rapid diagnostic testing, streamline healthcare resources while also optimizing clinical outcomes. These outcomes include decreased mortality, fewer days of hospitalization, and more efficient time to appropriate anti-infective regimens. Biofire Blood Culture Identification (BCID) is a 2-stage multiplexed PCR system yielding multiple pathogen etiologies, as well as antimicrobial resistance genes. Results are published ~60 minutes after a blood-culture Gram stain turns positive. The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical impact of rapid diagnostic PCR testing, which was introduced at Saint Francis Hospital in March 2020. Methods: We conducted a single-center, retrospective observational chart review before and after implementation of Biofire BCID, surveying all positive cultures from December 2019 through June 2020. Medical records were more thoroughly reviewed for patients who met study inclusion criteria. The primary outcome of interest, time to appropriate antimicrobial therapy, included both days to targeted therapy in the setting of a probable pathogen, and days to antibiotic discontinuation in the case of a likely contaminant (nonpathogenic normal skin flora introduced into culture at the time of collection or processing). Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality (death during hospitalization), and inpatient length of stay (LOS). Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for primary outcomes and Fisher exact tests were used for secondary outcomes. Results: Among 643 patients with positive blood cultures, 410 (63.8%) met the criteria. In the study, 220 patients before the intervention and 190 patients after the intervention were reviewed. The difference in mean days to targeted therapy with a probable pathogen and days to antibiotic discontinuation with a likely contaminant were both observed at a significance level (3.62 vs 1.79, P Inpatient mortality rates were higher prior to launching Biofire BCID, but they were not statistically significant (15.5% vs 14.2 %; P = .782). The average LOS before and after implementation was 12.6 days (range, 2–92 days), and 10 days (range, 2–68 days), respectively. This parameter was also not statistically significant (P = .597). Conclusions: We detected a trend toward a significant reduction in time to appropriate antimicrobial therapy following the launch of Biofire BCID. Incorporation of molecular rapid diagnostics for BSI evaluation should be the standard of care in hospital settings.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
Electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems: Perceptions and behaviors
Authors: Elliott Rachel , Shaw Jana , Suits Paul , Fetibegovic Emina , Stewart Telisa , Wong Roger , Briggs Julie
Published: May 2022

Background: Electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems (EHHMSs) are being increasingly utilized to improve hand hygiene outcomes. Following the implementation of an EHHMS at a large, academic medical center, an interdisciplinary team developed a web-based survey to gather information on employee’s perceptions and behaviors surrounding the EHHMS. Methods: In total, 1,273 complete responses were collected. Responses were analyzed using Stata version 16 statistical software with 2-tailed tests and .05 significance level. Multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to examine factors associated with negative perceptions of the EHHMS and of wearing the EHHMS radiofrequency identification (RFID) badge. Supporting qualitative analysis was performed using Atlas.ti version 9 software. Results: The general sentiment toward the monitoring system was neutral (38%) to negative (37%). The same was true for respondents’ sentiments toward wearing the RFID badge. Of respondents who interact with the system, 48% feel that the system does not capture hand hygiene data accurately. The EHHMS had limited influence on employee’s hand hygiene habits: 27% significant influence and 54% little-to-no influence. Respondents of younger age, those employed as a registered nurse, scientist, physician, or master’s level clinician, and those working at the satellite hospital were significantly more likely to have negative perceptions of the EHHMS. Negative perceptions were also significantly more likely among respondents familiar with the institution’s hand hygiene policy and those who had a negative opinion of seeing the hand hygiene data of others. Negative perceptions of the EHHMS RFID badge were significantly more likely among respondents of younger age, those employed as a registered nurse, scientist, physician, or master’s level clinician, those working at the satellite hospital, and those with a negative perception of seeing the hand hygiene data of others. Employment in a role providing direct patient care and those employed at the institution for >1 year were also significantly more likely to have a negative perception. Conclusions: Negative and neutral opinions dominate perceptions of the EHHMS considered in this analysis. Respondents expressed concerns with accuracy of the EHHMS data collection. The system’s limited influence is likely a result of limited familiarity, limited performance feedback, and employee frustration and concerns. These findings provide opportunities for improvement in future implementation of EHHMS. Based on these results, implementation of EHHMS would be best be supported by coordinated backing from administration and leadership, advanced planning and education, and frequent, effective communication. Additional research and evaluation are required to optimize implementation of electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems, with the goal of improving hand hygiene outcomes.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None
A pilot study of using thermal imaging to assess hand hygiene technique
Authors: Boyce John , Martinello Richard
Published: May 2022

Background: Although substantial efforts have been made to improve hand hygiene (HH) compliance among healthcare personnel (HCP), much less attention has been devoted to improving HH technique. To date, no standard method for assessing HH technique has been widely adopted by hospitals. Because applying an alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS) transiently reduces adjacent skin temperature, we explored the feasibility of using thermal imaging to determine whether ABHS has been applied to fingertips and thumbs, areas often missed by HCP. Methods: A convenience sample of 12 Quality and Safety staff volunteered for the study. A FLIR One Pro thermal camera attached to an iPhone was used to obtain thermal images of the palmar aspect of each volunteer’s dominant hand before applying ~1.8 mL ABHS gel, immediately after hands felt dry, and at 1 minute and 2 minutes later. Spot temperature readings of the mid-palm area and middle finger were recorded at each time point. The sex and estimated hand surface area (HSA in cm2) of each volunteer were recorded. Results: In 11 of 12 volunteers, thermal imaging showed a significant decrease in mid-palm and middle finger skin temperatures after performing HH (paired t test P < .01 for both), especially for the fingers and thumb, indicating that ABHS was applied to these areas (Fig. 1). When HH was performed with ABHS and the thumb was purposefully excluded, the lack of colorimetric change in the thumb was visible (Fig. 2). The palmar area showed the least drop in temperature and reverted to normal temperature more quickly. Immediate post-HH mid-palm temperature change ranged from +0.5 to −2.7°C, with a significantly greater mean temperature drop with small or medium hands than with large hands (Mann-Whitney U test P = .048). With some volunteers, the color changes lasted 1 minute or longer. However, for persons with “cold” fingers at baseline, it was more difficult to draw conclusions from the gross assessment for colorimetric change. Conclusions: Thermal imaging of HH performance shows promise as an HH assessment technique and may be useful to determine whether HCP have applied ABHS to their fingertips and thumbs. Additional studies involving a much larger number of HCP under varying conditions are needed to determine whether thermal imaging can be a practical modality for teaching HH technique, for routinely monitoring HH technique, or as a research tool for studying the dynamics of HH using ABHS.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None