To reduce both inappropriate testing for and diagnosis of healthcare-onset (HO) Clostridioides difficile infections (CDIs).

We performed a retrospective analysis of C. difficile testing from hospitalized children before (October 2017–October 2018) and after (November 2018–October 2020) implementing restrictive computerized provider order entry (CPOE).

Study sites included hospital A (a ∼250-bed freestanding children’s hospital) and hospital B (a ∼100-bed children’s hospital within a larger hospital) that are part of the same multicampus institution.

In October 2018, we implemented CPOE. No testing was allowed for infants aged ≤12 months, approval of the infectious disease team was required to test children aged 13–23 months, and pathology residents’ approval was required to test all patients aged ≥24 months with recent laxative, stool softener, or enema use. Interrupted time series analysis and Mann-Whitney U test were used for analysis.

An interrupted time series analysis revealed that from October 2017 to October 2020, the numbers of tests ordered and samples sent significantly decreased in all age groups (P < .05). The monthly median number of HO-CDI cases significantly decreased after implementation of the restrictive CPOE in children aged 13–23 months (P < .001) and all ages combined (P = .003).

Restrictive CPOE for CDI in pediatrics was successfully implemented and sustained. Diagnostic stewardship for CDI is likely cost-saving and could decrease misdiagnosis, unnecessary antibiotic therapy, and overestimation of HO-CDI rates.

In March 2017, the New Jersey Department of Health received reports of 3 patients who developed septic arthritis after receiving intra-articular injections for osteoarthritis knee pain at the same private outpatient facility in New Jersey. The risk of septic arthritis resulting from intra-articular injection is low. However, outbreaks of septic arthritis associated with unsafe injection practices in outpatient settings have been reported.

An infection prevention assessment of the implicated facility’s practices was conducted because of the ongoing risk to public health. The assessment included an environmental inspection of the facility, staff interviews, infection prevention practice observations, and a medical record and office document review. A call for cases was disseminated to healthcare providers in New Jersey to identify patients treated at the facility who developed septic arthritis after receiving intra-articular injections.

We identified 41 patients with septic arthritis associated with intra-articular injections. Cultures of synovial fluid or tissue from 15 of these 41 case patients (37%) recovered bacteria consistent with oral flora. The infection prevention assessment of facility practices identified multiple breaches of recommended infection prevention practices, including inadequate hand hygiene, unsafe injection practices, and poor cleaning and disinfection practices. No additional cases were identified after infection prevention recommendations were implemented by the facility.

Aseptic technique is imperative when handling, preparing, and administering injectable medications to prevent microbial contamination.

This investigation highlights the importance of adhering to infection prevention recommendations. All healthcare personnel who prepare, handle, and administer injectable medications should be trained in infection prevention and safe injection practices.

To integrate electronic clinical decision support tools into clinical practice and to evaluate the impact on indwelling urinary catheter (IUC) use and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs).

This 4-phase observational study included all inpatients at a multicampus, academic medical center between 2011 and 2015.

Phase 1 comprised best practices training and standardization of electronic documentation. Phase 2 comprised real-time electronic tracking of IUC duration. In phase 3, a triggered alert reminded clinicians of IUC duration. In phase 4, a new IUC order (1) introduced automated order expiration and (2) required consideration of alternatives and selection of an appropriate indication.

Overall, 2,121 CAUTIs, 179,070 new catheters, 643,055 catheter days, and 2,186 reinsertions occurred in 3·85 million hospitalized patient days during the study period. The CAUTI rate per 10,000 patient days decreased incrementally in each phase from 9·06 in phase 1 to 1·65 in phase 4 (relative risk [RR], 0·182; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0·153–0·216; P<·001). New catheters per 1,000 patient days declined from 53·4 in phase 1 to 39·5 in phase 4 (RR, 0·740; 95% CI, 0·730; P<·001), and catheter days per 1,000 patient days decreased from 194·5 in phase 1 to 140·7 in phase 4 (RR, 0·723; 95% CI, 0·719–0·728; P<·001). The reinsertion rate declined from 3·66% in phase 1 to 3·25% in phase 4 (RR, 0·894; 95% CI, 0·834–0·959; P=·0017).

The phased introduction of decision support tools was associated with progressive declines in new catheters, total catheter days, and CAUTIs. Clinical decision support tools offer a viable and scalable intervention to target hospital-wide IUC use and hold promise for other quality improvement initiatives.

To assess the impact of an electronic surveillance system on isolation practices and rates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

A pre-post test intervention.

Inpatient units (except psychiatry and labor and delivery) in 4 New York City hospitals.

All patients for whom isolation precautions were indicated, May 2009–December 2011.

Trained observers assessed isolation sign postings, availability of isolation carts, and staff use of personal protective equipment (PPE). Infection rates were obtained from the infection control department. Regression analyses were used to examine the association between the surveillance system, infection prevention practices, and MRSA infection rates.

A total of 54,159 isolation days and 7,628 staff opportunities for donning PPE were observed over a 31-month period. Odds of having an appropriate sign posted were significantly higher after intervention than before intervention (odds ratio [OR], 1.10 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.01–1.20]). Relative to baseline, postintervention sign posting improved significantly for airborne and droplet precautions but not for contact precautions. Sign posting improved for vancomycin-resistant enterococci (OR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.23–1.86]; P = .0001), Clostridium difficile (OR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.27–2.02]; P = .00005), and Acinetobacter baumannii (OR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.21–1.64]; P = .00001) precautions but not for MRSA precautions (OR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.89–1.39]; P = .36). Staff and visitor adherence to PPE remained low throughout the study but improved from 29.1% to 37.0% after the intervention (OR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.01–1.29]). MRSA infection rates were not significantly different after the intervention.

An electronic surveillance system resulted in small but statistically significant improvements in isolation practices but no reductions in infection rates over the short term. Such innovations likely require considerable uptake time.

To test in a real-world setting the recommendations for measuring infection with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) from the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC).

Using data from 3 hospital settings within a healthcare network, we applied the SHEA/HICPAC recommendations to measure methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection and colonization. Data were obtained from the hospitals' electronic surveillance system and were supplemented by manual medical record review as necessary. Additionally, we tested (1) different definitions for nosocomial incidence, (2) the effect of excluding patients not at risk from the denominator for hospital-onset incidence, and (3) the appropriate time period to use when including or excluding patients with a prior history of MRSA infection or colonization from nosocomial rates. Negative binomial regression models were used to test for differences between rate definitions. A rating scale was created for each metric, assessing the extent to which manual or electronic data elements were required.

There was no statistically significant difference between using 72 hours or 3 calendar days as the cutoff to define hospital-onset incidence. Excluding patients not at risk from the denominator when calculating hospital-onset incidence led to statistically significant increases in rates. When excluding patients with a prior history of MRSA infection or colonization from nosocomial incidence rates, rates were similar regardless of whether we looked at 1, 2, or 3 years' worth of prior data.

The SHEA/HICPAC MDRO metrics are useful but can be challenging to implement. We include in our description of the data sources and processes required to calculate these metrics information that may simplify the process for institutions.