Protocols designed to facilitate N95 filtering facepiece respirator (FFR) decontamination by commercial sterilization devices do not recommend that operators verify the device’s performance against pathogens deposited on FFRs. Here, we compared the treatment efficacy of 4 hydrogen peroxide-based systems that were authorized for N95 decontamination during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Suspensions prepared from S. aureus ATCC 29213 and 44300, B. subtilis ATCC 6633, a vancomycin-resistant E. faecium isolate (VRE), E. coli ATCC 25922, and P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853 colonies were inoculated onto nine 1-cm2 areas on a 3M 1805, 1860, 1860S, 1870+, 8210, 8110S, or 9105S FFR. Contaminated respirators were treated according to protocols recommended by the STERRAD 100NX, Bioquell Z-2, Sterizone VP4, or Clēan Works Mini systems. Decontamination efficacy was determined by comparing colony counts cultured from excised segments of treated and untreated FFR.

All devices achieved a 6-log reduction in bacterial burden and met FDA sterilization criteria. The Bioquell Z-2 device demonstrated 100% efficacy against both gram-positive and gram-negative organisms with all FFRs tested. Colonies of S. aureus ATCC 29213 and 44300 and VRE were cultivable from up to 9 (100%) of 9 STERRAD 100NX– and Sterizone VP4–treated segments. Viable B. subtilis ATCC 6633 organisms were recovered from 76.0% of STERRAD 100NX–treated FFR segments.

Variability in decontamination efficacy was noted across devices and FFR types. gram-positive organisms were more difficult to completely eliminate than were gram-negative organisms. Prior to initiating FFR decontamination practices, institutions should verify the effectiveness of their devices and the safety of treated FFR.

Evidence supporting collection of follow-up blood cultures for Gram-negative bacteremia is mixed. We sought to understand why providers order follow-up blood cultures when managing P. aeruginosa bacteremia and whether follow-up blood cultures in this context are associated with short- and long-term survival.

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult inpatients with P. aeruginosa bacteremia at the University of Maryland Medical Center in 2015–2020. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox regression with time-varying covariates were used to evaluate the association between follow-up blood cultures and time to mortality within 30 days of first positive blood culture. Provider justifications for follow-up blood cultures were identified through chart review.

Of 159 eligible patients, 127 (80%) had follow-up blood cultures, including 9 (7%) that were positive for P. aeruginosa and 10 (8%) that were positive for other organisms. Follow-up blood cultures were typically collected “to ensure clearance” or “to guide antibiotic therapy.” Overall, 30-day mortality was 25.2%. After risk adjustment for patient characteristics, follow-up blood cultures were associated with a nonsignificant reduction in mortality risk (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.08; P = .071). In exploratory analyses, the potential mortality reduction from follow-up blood cultures was driven by their use in patients with Pitt bacteremia scores >0.

Follow-up blood cultures are commonly collected for P. aeruginosa bacteremia but infrequently identify persistent bacteremia. Targeted use of follow-up blood cultures based on severity of illness may reduce unnecessary culturing.

To evaluate the frequency of antibiotic prescribing for common infections via telemedicine compared to face-to-face visits.

Systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, Embase (Elsevier platform) and Cochrane CENTRAL to identify studies comparing frequency of antibiotic prescribing via telemedicine and face-to-face visits without restrictions by publish dates or language used. We conducted meta-analyses of 5 infections: sinusitis, pharyngitis, otitis media, upper respiratory infection (URI) and urinary tract infection (UTI). Random-effect models were used to obtain pooled odds ratios (ORs). Heterogeneity was evaluated with I2 estimation and the Cochran Q statistic test.

Among 3,106 studies screened, 23 studies (1 randomized control study, 22 observational studies) were included in the systematic literature review. Most of the studies (21 of 23) were conducted in the United States. Studies were substantially heterogenous, but stratified analyses revealed that providers prescribed antibiotics more frequently via telemedicine for otitis media (pooled odds ratio [OR], 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04–1.52; I2 = 31%) and pharyngitis (pooled OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01–1.33; I2 = 0%). We detected no significant difference in the frequencies of antibiotic prescribing for sinusitis (pooled OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70–1.06; I2 = 91%), URI (pooled OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.59–2.39; I2 = 100%), or UTI (pooled OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 0.88–7.46; I2 = 91%).

Telemedicine visits for otitis media and pharyngitis were associated with higher rates of antibiotic prescribing. The interpretation of these findings requires caution due to substantial heterogeneity among available studies. Large-scale, well-designed studies with comprehensive assessment of antibiotic prescribing for common outpatient infections comparing telemedicine and face-to-face visits are needed to validate our findings.

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is the leading cause of infectious nosocomial diarrhea. Although initial fidaxomicin or vancomycin treatment is recommended by most major guidelines to treat severe CDI, there exists varied recommendations for first-episode non-severe CDI. Given the discrepancy in current treatment guidelines, we sought to evaluate the use of initial vancomycin versus metronidazole for first-episode non-severe CDI.

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all adult inpatients with first-episode CDI at our institution from January 2013 to May 2018. The initial vancomycin versus initial metronidazole cohorts were examined using a multivariate logistic regression model.

The study cohort of 737 patients had a median age of 72.3 years, and 357 of these patients (48.4%) had hospital-acquired infection. Among 326 patients with non-severe CDI, recurrence, new incident infection, and 30-day mortality rates were 16.2%, 10.9%, and 5.3%, respectively, when treated with initial metronidazole, compared to 20.0%, 1.4%, and 10.0%, respectively, when treated with initial vancomycin. In an adjusted multivariable analysis, the use of initial vancomycin for the treatment of non-severe CDI was associated with a reduction in new incident infection (adjusted odds ratio [ORadj], 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02–0.86; P = .035), compared to initial metronidazole.

Initial vancomycin was associated with a reduced rate of new incident infection in the treatment of adult inpatients with first-episode non-severe CDI. These findings support the use of initial vancomycin for all inpatients with CDI, when fidaxomicin is unavailable.

To determine the impact of an inpatient stewardship intervention targeting fluoroquinolone use on inpatient and postdischarge Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI).

We used an interrupted time series study design to evaluate the rate of hospital-onset CDI (HO-CDI), postdischarge CDI (PD-CDI) within 12 weeks, and inpatient fluoroquinolone use from 2 years prior to 1 year after a stewardship intervention.

An academic healthcare system with 4 hospitals.

All inpatients hospitalized between January 2017 and September 2020, excluding those discharged from locations caring for oncology, bone marrow transplant, or solid-organ transplant patients.

Introduction of electronic order sets designed to reduce inpatient fluoroquinolone prescribing.

Among 163,117 admissions, there were 683 cases of HO-CDI and 1,104 cases of PD-CDI. In the context of a 2% month-to-month decline starting in the preintervention period (P < .01), we observed a reduction in fluoroquinolone days of therapy per 1,000 patient days of 21% after the intervention (level change, P < .05). HO-CDI rates were stable throughout the study period. In contrast, we also detected a change in the trend of PD-CDI rates from a stable monthly rate in the preintervention period to a monthly decrease of 2.5% in the postintervention period (P < .01).

Our systemwide intervention reduced inpatient fluoroquinolone use immediately, but not HO-CDI. However, a downward trend in PD-CDI occurred. Relying on outcome measures limited to the inpatient setting may not reflect the full impact of inpatient stewardship efforts.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk of COVID-19 due to high levels of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Thus, effective vaccines are needed. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis on COVID-19 short-term vaccine effectiveness among HCWs.

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science from December 2019 to June 11, 2021, for studies evaluating vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 among HCWs. To meta-analyze the extracted data, we calculated the pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for COVID-19 between vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as 100% × (1 − DOR). We also performed a stratified analysis for vaccine effectiveness by vaccination status: 1 dose and 2 doses of the vaccine.

We included 13 studies, including 173,742 HCWs evaluated for vaccine effectiveness in the meta-analysis. The vast majority (99.9%) of HCWs were vaccinated with the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. The pooled DOR for symptomatic COVID-19 among vaccinated HCWs was 0.072 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.028–0.184) with an estimated vaccine effectiveness of 92.8% (95% CI, 81.6%–97.2%). In stratified analyses, the estimated vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 among HCWs who had received 1 dose of vaccine was 82.1% (95% CI, 46.1%–94.1%) and the vaccine effectiveness among HCWs who had received 2 doses was 93.5% (95% CI, 82.5%–97.6%).

The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are highly effective against symptomatic COVID-19, even with 1 dose. More observational studies are needed to evaluate the vaccine effectiveness of other COVID-19 vaccines, COVID-19 breakthrough after vaccination, and vaccine efficacy against new variants.

To estimate prior severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among skilled nursing facility (SNF) staff in the state of Georgia and to identify risk factors for seropositivity as of fall 2020.

Baseline survey and seroprevalence of the ongoing longitudinal Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) Prevention in Nursing Homes study.

The study included 14 SNFs in the state of Georgia.

In total, 792 SNF staff employed or contracted with participating SNFs were included in this study. The analysis included 749 participants with SARS-CoV-2 serostatus results who provided age, sex, and complete survey information.

We estimated unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for potential risk factors and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. We estimated adjusted ORs using a logistic regression model including age, sex, community case rate, SNF resident infection rate, working at other facilities, and job role.

Staff working in high-infection SNFs were twice as likely (unadjusted OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.45–3.00) to be seropositive as those in low-infection SNFs. Certified nursing assistants and nurses were 3 times more likely to be seropositive than administrative, pharmacy, or nonresident care staff: unadjusted OR, 2.93 (95% CI, 1.58–5.78) and unadjusted OR, 3.08 (95% CI, 1.66–6.07). Logistic regression yielded similar adjusted ORs.

Working at high-infection SNFs was a risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Even after accounting for resident infections, certified nursing assistants and nurses had a 3-fold higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity than nonclinical staff. This knowledge can guide prioritized implementation of safer ways for caregivers to provide necessary care to SNF residents.

We evaluated the effect of a behaviorally enhanced quality improvement intervention in reducing the number of antibiotic prescriptions written for antibiotic nonresponsive acute respiratory infections (ARIs). A secondary objective was identifying whether a reduction in inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions, if present, persisted after the immediate implementation of the intervention.

Nonrandomized, quasi-experimental study conducted from January 2017 through February 2020.

University of California, Davis Health outpatient clinics. In total, 21 pediatric, family, and internal medicine practices in 10 cities and towns were included.

Patients evaluated by a participating physician at an enrolled practice site during the study period with diagnoses (primary and secondary) from the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes consistent with antibiotic nonresponsive ARI diagnoses.

A behaviorally enhanced quality improvement intervention to reduce inappropriate prescribing for antibiotic nonresponsive ARI.

In total, 63,028 eligible patient visits across 21 locations were included in the analysis. The most frequently prescribed antibiotic for antibiotic nonresponsive ARI was azithromycin (n = 3,551), followed by amoxicillin (n = 924). Overall, the intervention was associated with an immediate 46% reduction in antibiotic prescriptions for antibiotic nonresponsive ARI (P = .001) following the intervention. We detected no significant change in the month-to-month trend after the intervention was implemented (P = .87), indicating that the reduction was sustained throughout the postintervention period.

Our findings demonstrate that a behaviorally enhanced quality improvement intervention to reduce inappropriate prescribing for antibiotic nonresponsive ARI in ambulatory care encounters was successful in reducing potentially inappropriate prescriptions for presumed antibiotic nonresponsive ARI.

To identify drugs that were administered off label to hospitalized patients with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to identify adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and drug–drug interactions associated with these therapies.

This case–control study was conducted in a Brazilian hospital from March to April 2020 among patients with suspected COVID-19, comparing those with positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results and those with negative results.

The most commonly used medications in both groups were azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine. There was a significantly higher prevalence of reactions among patients with positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 (48.5% vs 28.8%; P = .008) in the propensity score–matched cohort, and the most commonly reported ADRs among these patients were diarrhea (43.8%), elevated liver enzymes (31.3%), and nausea and vomiting (29.7%).

Our data demonstrate that ADRs and drug–drug interactions are common with off-label treatments for COVID-19.

Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) infections have been associated with increased mortality and poor outcomes. VRE screening has been used to identify colonized patients to prevent transmission; however, little is known about the utility of screening results to guide antibiotic therapy.

A retrospective review was performed at a tertiary-care center between June 1, 2015, and May 31, 2018.

All patients who underwent VRE polymerase chain reaction assay (PCR) screening and had a bacterial culture from 7 days before to 90 days after the screening test were included. In total, 1,374 patients who had a VRE screening test met inclusion criteria.

Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of VRE screening for VRE infection were calculated. The appropriateness of the antibiotic therapy for each patient based on screening results was also assessed.

We detected no difference in the appropriateness of antibiotic therapy between patients with a positive screen and those with a negative screen (59.3% vs 61.0%; P = .8657). The VRE PCR demonstrated 54% sensitivity, 89% specificity, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 13% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 98%.

The high NPV and specificity indicate that patients with a negative VRE screening results may not require empiric antibiotic coverage for VRE. Although VRE screening may have utility to detect colonization in high-risk patients, a positive VRE screen is of limited value in determining the need for an antibiotic with VRE culture-directed coverage.