To evaluate host characteristics, mode of infection acquisition, and infection control procedures in patients with a positive respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) test result after the introduction of the GenXpert Influenza/RSV polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay.

Retrospective cohort study.

Adults with a positive PCR test result for RSV who were hospitalized in a tertiary academic medical center between January 2015 and December 2016 were included in this study. Our infection control policy applies contact isolation precautions only for immunocompromised patients.

Patients were identified through 2 databases, 1 consisting of patients isolated because of RSV infection and 1 with automatically collected laboratory results. Baseline and clinical characteristics were collected through a retrospective medical chart review. The rate of and clinical factors associated with healthcare-associated RSV infections were evaluated.

In total, 108 episodes in 106 patients hospitalized with a positive Xpert RSV test result were recorded during the study period. Among them, 11 episodes were healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and 97 were community-acquired infections (CAIs). The mean length of hospital stay (LOS, 40.2 vs 11.2 days), the mean number of room switches (3.5 vs 1.7) and ward switches (1.5 vs 0.4), and the mean numbers of contact patients (9.9 vs 3.8) were significantly longer and higher in the HAI group than in the CAI group (P<.0001). Surveillance of microbiology records and clinical data did not reveal evidence for a cluster or an epidemic during the 2-year observation period.

The introduction of a rapid molecular diagnostic test systematically applied to patients with influenza-like illness may challenge current infection control policies. In our study, patients with HAIs had a prolonged hospital stay and a high number of contact patients, and they switched rooms and wards frequently.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1291–1297

Infections and colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) identified >48 hours after hospital admission are considered healthcare-acquired according to the definition of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Some may originate from delayed diagnosis rather than true acquisition in the hospital, potentially diluting the impact of infection control programs. In addition, such infections are not necessarily reimbursed in a healthcare system based on the diagnosis-related groups (DRGs).

The goal of the study was to estimate the preventable proportion of healthcare-acquired infections in a tertiary care hospital in Switzerland by analyzing patients colonized or infected with MDROs.

All hospitalized patients with healthcare-acquired MDRO infection or colonization (HAMIC) or according to the CDC definition (CDC-HAMIC) were prospectively assessed from 2002 to 2011 to determine whether there was evidence for nosocomial transmission. We utilized an additional work-up with epidemiological, microbiological, and molecular typing data to determine the true preventable proportion of HAMICs.

Overall, 1,190 cases with infection or colonization with MDROs were analyzed; 274 (23.0%) were classified as CDC-HAMICs. Only 51.8% of CDC-HAMICs had confirmed evidence of hospital-acquisition and were considered preventable. Specifically, 57% of MRSA infections, 83.3% of VRE infections, 43.9% of ESBL infections, and 74.1% of non-ESBL MDRO infections were preventable HAMICs.

The CDC definition overestimates the preventable proportion of HAMICs with MDROs by more than 50%. Relying only on the CDC definition of HAMICs may lead to inaccurate measurement of the impact of infection control interventions and to inadequate reimbursement under the DRG system.

Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2016;1–6

To evaluate the feasibility of implementation of the refined window for routine antimicrobial prophylaxis (RAP) of 30-74 minutes before skin incision compared to the World Health Organization (WHO) standard of 0-60 minutes.

Prospective study on timing of routine antimicrobial prophylaxis in 2 different time periods.

Tertiary referral university hospital with 30,000 surgical procedures per year.

In all consecutive vascular, visceral, and trauma procedures, the timing was prospectively recorded during a first time period of 2 years (A; baseline) and a second period of 1 year (B; after intervention). An intensive intervention program was initiated after baseline. The primary outcome parameter was timing; the secondary outcome parameter was surgical site infection (SSI) rate in the subgroup of patients undergoing cholecystectomy/colon resection.

During baseline time period A (3,836 procedures), RAP was administered 30–74 minutes before skin incision in 1,750 (41.0%) procedures; during time period B (1,537 procedures), it was administered in 914 (56.0%; P < .001). The subgroup analysis did not reveal a significant difference in SSI rate.

This bundle of interventions resulted in a statistically significant improvement of timing of RAP even at a shortened window compared to the WHO standard.

Research has shown 1.5 minutes of surgical hand antisepsis with alcohol-based hand rub to be at least as effective under experimental conditions as the 3-minute reference disinfection recommended by European Norm 12791. The aim of the present study was to validate the effectiveness of 1.5 minutes of surgical hand antisepsis in a clinical setting by comparing the effectiveness of 1.5- and 3-minute applications of alcohol-based hand rub (45% vol/vol 2-propanol, 30% vol/vol 1-propanol, and 0.2% mecetronium ethylsulphate).

Prospective crossover trial in which each surgeon served as his or her own control, with individual randomization to the 1.5-or the 3-minute group during the first part of the trial.

Basel University Hospital, Switzerland.

Thirty-two surgeons with different levels of postdoctoral training.

We measured the bactericidal effectiveness of 1.5 minutes and 3 minutes of surgical hand antisepsis with alcohol-based hand rub by assessing the mean (± SD) log10 number of colony-forming units before the application of hand rub (baseline), after the application of hand rub (immediate effect), and after surgery (sustained effect) so as to follow European Norm 12791 as closely as possible.

The immediate mean (± SD) log10 reduction in colony-forming units (cfu) was 2.66 ±1.13 log10 cfu for the 1.5-minute group and 3.01 ±1.06 log10 cfu for the 3-minute group (P = .204). Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to the sustained effect; the mean ( ± SD) log10 increase in bacterial density during surgery was 1.08 ± 1.13 log10 cfu for the 1.5-minute group and 0.95 ± 1.27 log10 cfu for the 3-minute group (P = .708). No adverse effects were recorded.

In this clinical trial, surgical hand antisepsis with alcohol-based hand rub resulted in a similar bacterial reduction, regardless of whether it was applied for 3 or 1.5 minutes, which confirms experimental data generated with healthy volunteers.

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of octenidine hydrochloride, a non-alcoholic skin antiseptic, for the care of central venous catheter (CVC) insertion sites.

Prospective, observational study.

Bone marrow transplantation unit of a university hospital.

All consecutive patients with a nontunneled CVC were enrolled prospectively after informed consent.

Octenidine hydrochloride (0.1%) was applied for disinfection at the CVC insertion site during dressing changes. The following cultures were performed weekly as well as at the occurrence of any systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria: cultures of the skin surrounding the CVC entry site, cultures of the three-way hub connected to the CVC, blood cultures, and cultures of the CVC tip on removal. Enhanced microbiological methods (skin swabs of a 24-cm2 standardized area, roll plate, and sonication of catheter tips) were applied.

One hundred thirty-five CVCs were inserted in 62 patients during the study period and remained for a mean period of 19.1 days, corresponding to 2,462 catheter-days. Bacterial density at the insertion site declined substantially over time, and most cultures became negative 2 weeks after insertion. Only 6 patients had a documented catheter-related bloodstream infection. The incidence density was 2.39 catheter infections per 1,000 catheter-days. No side effects were noted with application of the antiseptic.

Disinfection with a skin antiseptic that contains octenidine hydrochloride is highly active and well tolerated. It leads to a decrease in skin colonization over time and may be a new option for CVC care.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has published a new guideline on hand hygiene promoting the use of the alcohol-based handrub, but the technique was not addressed. The goal of this study was to evaluate the influence of technique on the efficacy of the alcohol-based handrub.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) attending a course in hospital epidemiology.

A fluorescent dye was added to a hand antiseptic, and hands were checked under ultraviolet light after antiseptic cleansing. Data regarding the numbers of predefined fluorescent areas on the skin were collected in addition to demographic data such as age, gender, job description, and job experience. Results of the visualization test were compared with the data from microbiological samples before and after the procedure by the hand plate technique.

Sixty HCWs were tested, 63% of whom had worked in infection control for more than 10 years. Sixty-six percent of all participants still had detectable bacteria after antisepsis. The mean log10 CFU reduction was 2.0 (range, 0–3.85). Twenty-five percent of all HCWs achieved less than 1.1 log10 CFU. Staphylococcus aureus was isolated from 13% (one of them being methicillin resistant) and gram-negative bacilli from 6.7%. After using the alcohol handrub, one subject still remained positive for S. aureus. Years of experience was the single most important factor predicting antimicrobial efficacy.

Technique is of crucial importance in hand antisepsis. Major deficiencies were detected among even highly trained HCWs. Training should be provided before switching from handwashing to the alcohol handrub.