To compare the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) between cefazolin 3 g and 2 g surgical prophylaxis in patients weighing ≥120 kg that undergo elective colorectal surgery.

A multicenter, retrospective cohort study was performed utilizing a validated database of elective colorectal surgeries in Michigan acute care hospitals. Adults weighing ≥120 kg who received cefazolin and metronidazole for surgical prophylaxis between 7/2012 and 6/2021 were included. The primary outcome was SSI, which was defined as an infection diagnosed within 30 days following the principal operative procedure. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with SSI; the exposure of interest was cefazolin 3 g surgical prophylaxis.

A total of 581 patients were included; of these, 367 (63.1%) received cefazolin 3 g, while 214 (36.8%) received 2 g. Patients who received cefazolin 3 g had less optimal antibiotic timing (324 [88.3%] vs 200 [93.5%]; P = .043) and a higher receipt of at least 1 of the prophylaxis antibiotics after incision (22 [6%] vs 5 [2.3%]; P = .043). There was no SSI difference between cefazolin 3 g and 2 g cohorts (23 [6.3%] vs 16 [7.5%], P = .574). When accounting for age, smoking status, and surgical duration, cefazolin 3 g was not associated with a reduction in SSI (adjOR, .64; 95%CI, .32–1.29).

Surgical prophylaxis with cefazolin 3 g, in combination with metronidazole, was not associated with decreased SSI compared to 2 g dosing in obese patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

Resilience of the healthcare system has been described as the ability to absorb, adapt, and respond to stress while maintaining the provision of safe patient care. We quantified the impact that stressors associated with the COVID-19 pandemic had on patient safety, as measured by central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Healthcare Safety Network.

Acute care hospitals were mandated to report markers of resource availability (staffing and hospital occupancy with COVID-19 inpatients) to the federal government between July 2020 and June 2021. These data were used with community levels of COVID-19 to develop a statistical model to assess factors influencing rates of CLABSIs among inpatients during the pandemic.

After risk adjustment for hospital characteristics, measured stressors were associated with increased CLABSIs. Staff shortages for more than 10% of days per month were associated with a statistically significant increase of 2 CLABSIs per 10,000 central line days versus hospitals reporting staff shortages of less than 10% of days per month. CLABSIs increased with a higher inpatient COVID-19 occupancy rate; when COVID-19 occupancy was 20% or more, there were 5 more CLABSIs per 10,000 central line days versus the referent (less than 5%).

Reporting of data pertaining to hospital operations during the COVID-19 pandemic afforded an opportunity to evaluate resilience of US hospitals. We demonstrate how the stressors of staffing shortages and high numbers of patients with COVID-19 negatively impacted patient safety, demonstrating poor resilience. Understanding stress in hospitals may allow for the development of policies that support resilience and drive safe care.

To identify global research priorities for improving hand hygiene in healthcare settings and develop a 2023–2030 research agenda to guide funding, coordinate research, promote investment, and inform policy for enhanced healthcare quality and safety.

Expert consensus study using a modified Delphi process.

A 105-member panel of international hand hygiene experts including the World Health Organization (WHO) Technical Advisory Group of Experts on Hand Hygiene in Healthcare representing all WHO regions and World Bank income levels.

The research priorities were identified through a multiphase approach including a meta-review to establish knowledge gaps and inform initial priorities, followed by expert consultations using a modified Delphi process. 192 preliminary priorities were included in a two-round Delphi survey. Experts rated each priority in the first round, and then reviewed and adjusted responses based on the panel’s aggregated, anonymous responses in the second round. Ratings were collected on a five-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as a combined “strongly agree” and “agree” frequency of at least 70%.

Consensus was achieved for 178 of 192 priorities (92.7%), categorized into six domains: system change; training and education; evaluation and feedback; reminders and communications; institutional safety climate; and hand hygiene improvement impact on healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance. Of these, 121 priorities reached >80% consensus. The Delphi process, maintained a 92% response rate over two rounds.

A structured consensus process yielded a research agenda to address gaps in hand hygiene improvement, supporting enhanced healthcare quality and safety globally.

The study objective was to develop and validate a clinical decision support system (CDSS) to guide clinicians through the diagnostic evaluation of hospitalized individuals with suspected pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) in low-prevalence settings.

The “TBorNotTB” CDSS was developed using a modified Delphi method. The CDSS assigns points based on epidemiologic risk factors, TB history, symptoms, chest imaging, and sputum/bronchoscopy results. Below a set point threshold, airborne isolation precautions are automatically discontinued; otherwise, additional evaluation, including infection control review, is recommended. The model was validated through retrospective application of the CDSS to all individuals hospitalized in the Mass General Brigham system from July 2016 to December 2022 with culture-confirmed pulmonary TB (cases) and equal numbers of age and date of testing-matched controls with three negative respiratory mycobacterial cultures.

104 individuals with TB (cases) and 104 controls were identified. Prior residence in a highly endemic country, positive interferon release assay, weight loss, absence of symptom resolution with treatment for alternative diagnoses, and findings concerning for TB on chest imaging were significant predictors of TB (all P < 0.05). CDSS contents and scoring were refined based on the case–control analysis. The final CDSS demonstrated 100% sensitivity and 27% specificity for TB with an AUC of 0.87.

The TBorNotTB CDSS demonstrated modest specificity and high sensitivity to detect TB even when AFB smears were negative. This CDSS, embedded into the electronic medical record system, could help reduce risks of nosocomial TB transmission, patient-time in airborne isolation, and person-time spent reviewing individuals with suspected TB.

Whole genome sequencing (WGS) can help identify transmission of pathogens causing healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). However, the current gold standard of short-read, Illumina-based WGS is labor and time intensive. Given recent improvements in long-read Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) sequencing, we sought to establish a low resource approach providing accurate WGS-pathogen comparison within a time frame allowing for infection prevention and control (IPC) interventions.

WGS was prospectively performed on pathogens at increased risk of potential healthcare transmission using the ONT MinION sequencer with R10.4.1 flow cells and Dorado basecaller. Potential transmission was assessed via Ridom SeqSphere+ for core genome multilocus sequence typing and MINTyper for reference-based core genome single nucleotide polymorphisms using previously published cutoff values. The accuracy of our ONT pipeline was determined relative to Illumina.

Over a six-month period, 242 bacterial isolates from 216 patients were sequenced by a single operator. Compared to the Illumina gold standard, our ONT pipeline achieved a mean identity score of Q60 for assembled genomes, even with a coverage rate as low as 40×. The mean time from initiating DNA extraction to complete analysis was 2 days (IQR 2–3.25 days). We identified five potential transmission clusters comprising 21 isolates (8.7% of sequenced strains). Integrating ONT with epidemiological data, >70% (15/21) of putative transmission cluster isolates originated from patients with potential healthcare transmission links.

Via a stand-alone ONT pipeline, we detected potentially transmitted HAI pathogens rapidly and accurately, aligning closely with epidemiological data. Our low-resource method has the potential to assist in IPC efforts.

To evaluate the impact of a mobile-app-based central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) prevention program in oncology clinic patients with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs).

Pre-post prospective cohort study with baseline (July 2015–December 2016), phase-in (January 2017–April 2017), and intervention (May 2017–November 2018). Generalized linear mixed models compared intervention with baseline frequency of localized inflammation/infection and dressing peeling. Cox proportional hazards models compared days-to-removal of lines with localized inflammation/infection. Chi-square test compared bacteremia rates before and after intervention.

Oncology clinic at a large medical center.

Oncology clinic adult patients with PICCs.

CLABSI prevention program consisting of an actionable scoring system for identifying insertion site infection/inflammation coupled with a mobile-app enabling photo-assessments and automated physician alerting for remote response.

We completed 5,343 assessments of 569 PICCs in 401 patients (baseline: 2,924 assessments, 300 PICCs, 216 patients; intervention: 2,419 assessments, 269 PICCs, 185 patients). The intervention was associated with a 92% lower likelihood of having a dressing with peeling (OR 0.08, 95%CI 0.04-0.17, P < 0.001), 53% lower local inflammation/infection (OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.27-0.84, P < 0.011), and 24% (non-significant) lower CLABSI rates (P = .63). Physician mobile-app alerting and response enabled 80% lower risk of lines remaining in place after inflammation/infection was identified (HR 0.20, 95%CI:0.14-0.30, P < 0.001) and 85% faster removal of infected lines from mean (SD) 11.1 (9.7) to 1.7 (2.4) days.

A mobile-app-based CLABSI prevention program decreased frequency of inflamed/infected central line insertion sites and increased speed of removal when inflammation/infection was found.

Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) result in morbidity and mortality among hospitalized patients. Hospital interventions to reduce the incidence of CLABSI are often broadly applied to all patients with central venous access. Identifying central lines at high risk for CLABSI at time of insertion will allow for a more focused delivery of preventative interventions.

This was an observational cohort study conducted at three hospitals including all patients who received central venous access. CLABSIs were identified using an institutional CLABSI database maintained by the hospital epidemiology team. Logistic regression (LASSO) and machine learning (random forest, XGboost) techniques were applied for the prediction of CLABSI occurrence, adjusting for selected patent and insertion-level characteristics.

A total of 40,008 central venous catheters were included, of which 409 (1.02%) were associated with CLABSI. The random forest and the XGBoost models had the highest discrimination (Area Under the Received Operating Curve [AUC] 0.79) followed by LASSO (0.73). High illness severity, receipt of total parenteral nutrition, receipt of hemodialysis, pre-insertion hospital length-of-stay, and low albumin levels were all predictive of CLABSI occurrence. Precision for all models was poor owing to a high false-positive rate.

CLABSI can be predicted based upon patient and insertion level factors in the electronic health record. In this study, random forest and gradient-boosted models had the highest AUC. Prediction cut-offs for the identification of CLABSI can be adjusted based upon the acceptable rate of false-positives for a given CLABSI preventative intervention.

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) and midline catheters (MC) are widely used for intravenous infusions in oncology and critically ill patients. However, controversy remains regarding which method is superior. This meta-analysis systematically compares the safety differences between these 2 methods of intravenous catheterization.

Eligible studies comparing PICC and MC were identified through searches in 6 databases. Thrombosis is the primary endpoint, while secondary endpoints include other complications, cost, and satisfaction rate.

Fourteen studies with 20,675 patients were analyzed. Based on patient data, the MC group exhibited higher rates of catheter-related superficial vein thrombosis (SVT) (risk ratio [RR]: 0.42 [0.28, 0.64]), infiltrations (RR: 0.27 [0.12, 0.62]), and leaks (RR: 0.16 [0.05, 0.53]). In contrast, the PICC group had more catheter-related bloodstream infections (RR: 1.95 [1.15, 3.32]). Considering catheter days, the MC group showed increased total complications (RR: 0.51 [0.26, 0.99]), catheter-related thrombosis (deep vein thrombosis [DVT]+SVT) (RR: 0.41 [0.18, 0.95]), and leaks (RR: 0.17 [0.05, 0.64]). In the PICC group, the top 3 complications were catheter occlusions (20 per 1,000 catheter days [CDs]), pain (15 per 1,000 CDs), and phlebitis (11 per 1,000 CDs); for the MC group, they were leaks (33 per 1,000 CDs), premature removals (22 per 1,000 CDs), and catheter-related DVT (22 per 1,000 CDs). Additionally, the PICC group had higher dissatisfaction rates (RR: 4.77 [2.33, 9.77]) and increased costs.

Compared to MC, PICC appears to be a safer intravenous catheterization option for adult patients, exhibiting fewer complications. However, the higher associated costs and lower satisfaction rates of PICC warrant serious attention.

Restricting infectious healthcare workers (HCWs) from the workplace is an important infection prevention strategy. The duration of viral shedding or symptoms are often used as proxies for the infectious period in adults but may not accurately estimate it.

To determine the risk period for transmission among previously healthy adults infected with SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant (omicron) or influenza A (influenza) by examining the duration of shedding and symptoms, and day of symptom onset in secondary cases of transmission pairs.

Rapid review

This rapid review adhered to PRISMA-ScR; five databases were searched. The cumulative daily proportion of participants with an outcome of interest was calculated for each study and summarized.

Forty-three studies were included. Shedding resolved among ≥ 70% of participants by the end of day nine post symptom onset for omicron, and day seven for influenza; and for ≥ 90% of participants, by the end of day 10 for omicron and day nine for influenza. Two studies suggested shedding continues > 24 hours post-fever resolution for both viruses. Symptom onset occurred in ≥ 80% of secondary cases by the end of day seven post-primary case symptom onset for omicron and day six for influenza.

Omicron shedding is consistent with previous recommendations to exclude infected HCWs from work for 10 days; and influenza follows a similar trend. Earlier symptom onset in most secondary cases for both pathogens indicates that, despite persistent viral shedding, most transmission occurs earlier; and the cumulative serial interval might better approximate the duration of infectiousness.