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

Background: Hand hygiene (HH) remains arguably the most effective way to prevent healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and ultimately improve the prospect of patient safety. Studies have shown that as many as 50%–70% of infections are transmitted through hands due to poor HH practices. HH with use of alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) is preferred over handwashing with soap and water because of its wide microbial efficacy, time efficiency, and improved skin tolerance. It is also well known that ABHR can be used as an effective prevention measure during disease outbreaks. Before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, health facilities in Sierra Leone have been challenged with HH infrastructural problems such as lack of sinks with constant running water. Before Sierra Leone recorded its first case of COVID-19 in March 2020, the consumption of ABHR in the health facilities was estimated to be 24,000 L per year, which doubled during the COVID-19 pandemic. The demand for commercially available ABHR increased, leading to acute shortages. The estimated cost of the locally produced ABHR ~$2–3 per 500 mL, although it may cost up to $10 for 500 mL when buying imported ABHR products from the local market. Methods: All ingredients were procured locally, and ABHR production was based on WHO formula 1. The production was set for 12 months to cover the estimated annual consumption of ABHR, with periodic monitoring to ensure effective distribution and availability at the point of care. Analysis of assessment results in 12 hospitals from the pre-COVID-19 era (2019) to the COVID-19 era (2021) was performed based on the WHO IPC Assessment Framework (IPCAF) indicator. Results: With an average monthly production of 3,482 L, a total of 41,780 L ABHR was produced and packaged in branded 500-mL containers for distribution to healthcare facilities. This quantity exceeded the estimated demand for ABHR during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data show a considerable increase (from 25% to 44%) in the number of available and functioning HH stations with mainly locally produced ABHR. Results from the monitoring of 575 peripheral health units (PHUs) in 2021 also showed that >67% of PHUs had HH facilities in all clinical areas and that the locally produced ABHR was used in 79% of these HH stations. Conclusions: Locally produced ABHR has shown to be a cost-effective and evidence-based intervention to optimize HH at the point of care. Therefore, localities are encouraged to undertake this realistic and sustainable approach to address issues of acute shortage of ABHR, especially during a global pandemic.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

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

In a prospective cohort of healthcare personnel (HCP), we measured severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleocapsid IgG antibodies after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among 79 HCP, 68 (86%) were seropositive 14–28 days after their positive PCR test, and 54 (77%) of 70 were seropositive at the 70–180-day follow-up. Many seropositive HCP (95%) experienced an antibody decline by the second visit.

Background: Inappropriate antibiotic use for SARS-CoV-2 infection has the potential to increase the burden of antibiotic resistance. Brazil experienced spread of a new SARS-CoV-2 variant in the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2020, resulting in the highest case counts in Latin America, raising concerns of antibiotic overuse. To better understand antibiotic use during the COVID-19 pandemic, we evaluated prescribing changes in antibiotics commonly used for outpatient respiratory infections (amoxicillin-clavulanate, azithromycin, and levofloxacin or moxifloxacin [AALM]) among adults aged ≥20 years in Brazil in 2020 versus 2019. Methods: We analyzed the IQVIA MIDAS medical data set for AALM prescribing by age group (20–39, 40–59, 60–64, 65–74, ≥75 years), comparing Q4 2020 rates to those in Q4 2019. We estimated crude rate ratios and 95% CIs using prescription number as the numerator (assuming Poisson counts) and age-adjusted population as the denominator. We also determined the most common prescribing specialties for each antibiotic across both time points. Results: Compared to Q4 2019, Q4 2020 azithromycin prescribing increased among all ages, ranging from 90.7% (95% CI, 90.0%–91.4%) in those aged 20–39 years to 927.2% (95% CI, 912.9%–941.7%) in those aged 65–74 years (Fig. 1). Amoxicillin-clavulanate prescribing decreased for most ages, ranging from −78.4% (95% CI, −78.7% to −78.1%) in those aged 60–64 years to −25.8% (95% CI, −26.6% to −25.0%) in those aged 65–74 years. Prescribing of levofloxacin or moxifloxacin decreased for most ages, ranging from −39.1% (95% CI, −39.4% to −38.8%) in those aged 20–39 years to −16.9% (95% CI, −18.1% to −15.7%) in those aged 60–64 years. For those aged ≥75 years, prescribing of amoxicillin-clavulanate and levofloxacin or moxifloxacin increased by 13.2% (95% CI, 11.9%–14.5%) and 43.1% (95% CI, 41.7%–44.5%), respectively. In Q4 2019 and Q4 2020, the 2 most common prescribing specialties for azithromycin were general practice (48%–50% of prescriptions) and gynecology (19%–25%). Compared to Q4 2019, infectious disease specialists in Q4 2020 saw the largest decline in percentage of azithromycin prescriptions (10% to 1%) and surgeons saw the largest increase (0% to 7%). General practitioners were also the most common prescribers of the remaining antibiotics (43%–54%), followed by gynecology for levofloxacin or moxifloxacin (25%–29%) and otolaryngology for amoxicillin-clavulanate (14%–20%). Conclusions: Despite decreases in prescribing of amoxicillin-clavulanate and respiratory fluoroquinolones for most adults, azithromycin prescribing increased dramatically across all adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. Targeting inappropriate outpatient antibiotic use in Brazil, particularly azithromycin prescribing among general practitioners, gynecologists, and surgeons, may be high-yield targets for antibiotic stewardship.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is recommended for select patients with cirrhosis, but long-term antibiotic therapy has risks. We evaluated concordance with guideline recommendations in 179 veterans with cirrhosis; 55% received guideline-concordant management of SBP prophylaxis. Despite stable guideline recommendations since 2012, guideline adherence remains low.

Background: Evidence-based infection prevention and control (IPC) practices to reduce healthcare-associated infections in low- and middle-income countries may be difficult to implement due to lack of resources. We pilot-tested the feasibility of virtual assessments of IPC practices in African facilities caring for small and/or sick neonates for opportunities to improve IPC. Methods: We created a checklist (in English and French) to assess IPC practices in African facilities caring for small and/or sick neonates Results: In total, 10 sites participated in this pilot study. Among them, 3 sites had unreliable Internet connections, and all checklist items could be observed and scored in these videos and photos. The lowest scores occurred for kangaroo mother care (KMC) spacing and presence of screens (Table 1). Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of using virtual assessments of IPC practices. We identified several potentially low-cost opportunities to improve IPC. We are recruiting additional sites to confirm the findings of this pilot study.

Funding: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Disclosures: None

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted essential health services (EHS) delivery worldwide; however, there are limited data for healthcare facility (HCF)–level EHS disruptions in low- and middle-income countries. We surveyed HCFs in 3 counties in Kenya to understand the extent of and reasons for EHS disruptions occurring during February 2020–May 2021. Methods: We included 3 counties in Kenya with high burden of COVID-19 at the time of study initiation. Stratified sampling of HCFs occurred by HCF level. HCF administrators were interviewed to collect information on types of EHS disruptions that occurred and reasons for disruptions, including those related to infection prevention and control (IPC). Analyses included descriptive statistics with proportions for categorical variables and median with interquartile range (IQR) for continuous variables. Results: In total, 59 HCFs in Kenya provided complete data. All 59 HCFs (100%) reported EHS disruptions due to COVID-19. Among all HCFs, limiting patient volumes was the most common disruption reported (97%), while 56% of HCFs reduced staffing of EHS and 52% suspended EHS. Median duration of disruptions ranged from 7 weeks (IQR, 0–15) for inpatient ward closures to 25 weeks (IQR, 14–37) for limiting patient volumes accessing EHS. Among HCFs that reported disruptions, the most cited reason (ie, 95% of HCFs) was fewer patients receiving services. The most common IPC-related reason for disruption was diversion of resources to accommodate physical distancing measures (76%) followed by COVID-19 outbreaks among patients or staff (34%); staff shortages due to COVID-19 illness (25%) or perceived infection risk (19%); and lack of adequate personal protective equipment (20%). Conclusions: Most HCFs reported disruptions to EHS during the pandemic, including many that were related to IPC. Some disruptions may be mitigated by strengthening IPC infrastructure and practices, including protecting healthcare personnel to prevent staffing shortages.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: In 2021, the California Department of Public Health Healthcare-Associated Infections Program developed new infection prevention and control (IPC) training for skilled nursing facility (SNF) certified nursing assistants (CNAs), as part of the CDC Project Firstline. CNAs comprise approximately one-third of SNF healthcare personnel (HCP) nationwide; ~50,000 CNAs are employed in California SNFs. Despite making up a large proportion of direct care HCP, CNAs can frequently lack understanding of fundamental IPC practices, including hand hygiene and appropriate personal protective equipment use. We conducted a learning needs assessment for SNF can and leadership to understand and design our program to mecanCNA IPC training needs and preferences. Methods: We distributed the learning needs assessment via SurveyMonkey in English and Spanish with questions regarding current IPC practices and challenges, as well as preferred training delivery methods and posttraining support. We leveraged partnershipscanth CNA-affiliated organizations to engage CNAs throughout California. Results: Of 193 respondents, 80 (41%) were CNAs and 113 (59%) were leadership staff, representing 97 SNFs in 41 local health jurisdictions. Among CNAs, 34 (43%) believed that they had to do workarounds in their IPC practice and 18 (23%) stated that they would benefit from one-on-one question-and-answer sessions with an infection prevention expert. Also, 50 (63%) selected visual learning, 34 selected (43%) in-person learning, and 30 (38%) selected live or online trainings as their preferred learning style and training method. Most CNAs stated that they were most comfortable listening and speaking (73%) and reading (76%) in English only, followed by listening and speaking (16%) and reading (13%) in English and Spanish. For posttraining support, CNAs preferred access to online training materials (75%), digital materials (68%), virtual office hours with IPC educators (53%), and regular webinars (49%). Conclusions: The results of our learning needs assessment confirm the need for accessible IPC training and materials and continued engagement with posttraining support for CNAs. We will continue to provide online training and resources, access to IPC experts including an ‘AskBox’ for CNAs to e-mail IPC questions or request one-on-one support, and monthly office hours. Even though most CNAs are comfortable with training in English only, we will translate curricula into Spanish to support our bilingual Spanish-canaking CNA population. We are developing a tool kit to support SNFs and local health jurisdictions interested in providing their own training using our materials, and we will offer icanerson CNA training. We will use our experience from this process in future learning needs assessments to inform other frontline HCP training, including for SNF environmental services staff.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Cascade reporting is an antimicrobial stewardship strategy that has been successfully implemented in inpatient settings, but evidence of its impact on outpatient settings is scarce. We report on the impact on fluroquinolone prescribing at a network of urgent care clinics following the implementation of cascade reporting of Enterobacterales in urine cultures.

Background: Long-term care facility (LTCF) employees pose potential risk for COVID-19 outbreaks. Association between employee infection prevention (IP) adherence with facility COVID-19 outbreaks remains a knowledge gap. Methods: From April through December 2020, prior to COVID-19 vaccination, we tested asymptomatic Veterans’ Affairs (VA) community living center (CLC) residents twice weekly and employees monthly, which increased to weekly with known exposure, for SARS-CoV-2 via nasopharyngeal PCR. Employees voluntarily completed multiple choice questionnaires assessing self-reported IP adherence at and outside work. Surveys were longitudinally administered in April, June, July, and October 2020. Changes in paired employee responses for each period were analyzed using the McNemar test. We obtained COVID-19 community rates from surrounding Davidson and Rutherford counties from the Tennessee Department of Health public data set. CLC resident COVID-19 cases were obtained from VA IP data. Incidence rate and number of positive tests were calculated. Results: Between April and December 2020, 444 employees completed at least 1 survey; 177 completed surveys in both April and June, 179 completed surveys in both June and July, and 140 completed surveys in both July and October (Fig. 1). Across periods, employee surveys demonstrated an increase in masking at work and outside work between April and June (63% to 95% [P < .01] and 36% to 63% [P < .01], respectively), and June to July (95% to 99% [P < .05] and 71% to 84% [P < .01], respectively) that were both maintained between July and October (Fig. 2). Distancing at work and limiting social contacts outside work significantly decreased from April to June but increased in subsequent periods, although not significantly. COVID-19 community incidence peaked in July and again in December, but CLC resident COVID-19 cases peaked in August, declined, and remained low through December (Fig. 3). Discussion: Wearing a mask at work, which was mandatory, increased, and voluntary employee masking outside work also increased. CLC COVID-19 cases mirrored community increases in July and August; however, community cases increased again later in 2020 while CLC cases remained low. Employees reporting distancing at work and limiting social contacts outside work decreased preceding the initial rise in CLC cases but increased and remained high after July. Conclusions: These data from the pre–COVID-19 vaccination era suggest that widespread, increased support for and emphasis on LTCF IP adherence, especially masking, may have effectively prevented COVID-19 outbreaks in the vulnerable LTCF population.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Antibiograms are important for guiding empiric antibiotics for febrile neutropenia. However, hospital-wide antibiograms may not capture complexities of patients with hematologic malignancies. We created a hematology-oncology unit-specific antibiogram and found higher resistance among Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumonia, and Enterococcus isolates compared to hospital-wide data.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the fundamental vulnerability of long-term care hospitals (LTCHs) related to infection control and prevention (ICP). We examined the experiences of nurses who worked at a hospital where a COVID-19 outbreak occurred from February 24 to March 16, 2021. Method: This qualitative research was performed with 9 nurses who were engaged during the COVID-19 outbreak. We prepared a semistructured questionnaire based on the main question, “How was the experience among the nurses during the outbreak, and what difficulties did they encounter while resolving the situation?” The data were collected through in-depth, individual interviews from May to August 2021 after the approval of the institutional review board, and the results were analyzed thematically. Results: The average age of the participants was 52.1 years, and they had an average of 15.2 years of clinical experience. We extracted 4 themes and 16 subthemes from the results. The first theme, “sudden onset of the outbreak,” included the following subthemes: (1) found myself accustomed to COVID-19 and desensitized; (2) unavoidable occurrence despite compliance with ICP guidelines; (3) LTCHs are gradually recognized as a breeding ground for COVID-19 by the public; and (4) fear of spreading the infection in the hospital and of becoming a spreader. The second theme, “heavier workload,” included (1) daily overtime and extra shifts in violation of self-quarantine recommendations due to the shortage of nurses; (2) a barrage of phone calls from family members, other departments, public health centers, and hospitals where confirmed cases were transferred; (3) nursing assistants and private caregivers who do not have ICP knowledge as well as patients who do not cooperate due to cognitive impairment; and (4) accomplishing additional tasks while wearing personal protective equipment with some suffocation. The third theme, “emotions and lessons,” included (1) unsatisfied with the initial responses; (2) awareness of the entire infectious disease; (3) increased compassion and attachment for patients; and (4) take pride in the job and the profession as a nurse. The fourth theme, “necessary support and attention,” included (1) need to install isolation rooms and replenish infection control supplies; (2) need for ICP specialists in LTCHs; (3) need for continuous national-based monitoring on ICP for LTCHs; and (4) need to improve working environment and acknowledge nurses in LTCHs. Conclusions: Overall, participants expressed their experiences with the insufficient infection control and response system toward COVID-19 in the LTCH. To enhance ICP in LTCHs, customized policies, regulations, and financial support for infection control activities and ICP professionals must be established.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

To investigate factors that influence antibiotic prescribing decisions, we interviewed 49 antibiotic stewardship champions and stakeholders across 15 hospitals. We conducted thematic analysis and subcoding of decisional factors. We identified 31 factors that influence antibiotic prescribing decisions. These factors may help stewardship programs identify educational targets and design more effective interventions.

Background:Pseudomonas aeruginosa is an important pathogen in the hospital setting; it has the ability to cause severe disease and a high mortality rate. Its increasing ability to elude even novel antimicrobial mechanisms of action is a significant cause for concern. More effective treatment options and increasing understanding of this pathogen likely effect P. aeruginosa incidence and severity; however, longer-term studies are lacking. The Veterans’ Health Administration (VHA) population is a socially, demographically, and medically distinct entity, representing a rich source of data for studying contributing factors to P. aeruginosa infection and mortality. We sought to identify the system-wide case count and mortality rate of P. aeruginosa bacteremia and the rate of resistance to antipseudomonal agents over the course of several years. We described trends observed over the study period. Methods: We utilized the nationwide VHA database to identify all inpatients with a positive blood culture for P. aeruginosa treated between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2020. We identified the annual count of bacteremia cases and associated 30-day mortality rate. Additionally, we determined rates of resistance to antipseudomonal agents. Results: In total, 7,480 cases of P. aeruginosa bacteremia were identified. The total case count of P. aeruginosa bacteremia decreased from 774 in 2009 to 519 in 2014, then remained relatively stable. The 30-day mortality rate decreased from 26.5 in 2009 to 19.3 in 2019, but this rate increased to 23.6 in 2020 (Fig. 1). The fluoroquinolone class had the highest resistance rate at 23%, followed by ceftazidime, cefepime, and the carbapenem class with rates of ~15%–16%. All classes were noted to have decreased resistance over time (Fig. 2). Conclusions: Occurrences, mortality rate, and associated resistance of P. aeruginosa bacteremia across the VHA system generally decreased during the study period. Potential explanations for these observations include improved infection control measures, more effective therapeutic agents, and enhanced antimicrobial stewardship efforts. The increased mortality in 2020 could be related to concomitant COVID-19 or the result of delayed medical care in the pandemic setting. Limitations of this study include inability to identify causative factors for observed trends and potential variability between labs affecting the rates of observed resistance. Additionally, VHA data may not be representative of entire adult population. Future studies could explore the relationship between P. aeruginosa bacteremia and infection prevention and antimicrobial stewardship efforts and could describe associations between P. aeruginosa and COVID-19 and identify risk factors associated with P. aeruginosa bacteremia and mortality.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None