Treatment for hoarding disorder is typically performed by mental health professionals, potentially limiting access to care in underserved areas.

We aimed to conduct a non-inferiority trial of group peer-facilitated therapy (G-PFT) and group psychologist-led cognitive–behavioural therapy (G-CBT).

We randomised 323 adults with hording disorder 15 weeks of G-PFT or 16 weeks of G-CBT and assessed at baseline, post-treatment and longitudinally (≥3 months post-treatment: mean 14.4 months, range 3–25). Predictors of treatment response were examined.

G-PFT (effect size 1.20) was as effective as G-CBT (effect size 1.21; between-group difference 1.82 points, t = −1.71, d.f. = 245, P = 0.04). More homework completion and ongoing help from family and friends resulted in lower severity scores at longitudinal follow-up (t = 2.79, d.f. = 175, P = 0.006; t = 2.89, d.f. = 175, P = 0.004).

Peer-led groups were as effective as psychologist-led groups, providing a novel treatment avenue for individuals without access to mental health professionals.

C.A.M. has received grant funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and travel reimbursement and speakers’ honoraria from the Tourette Association of America (TAA), as well as honoraria and travel reimbursement from the NIH for serving as an NIH Study Section reviewer. K.D. receives research support from the NIH and honoraria and travel reimbursement from the NIH for serving as an NIH Study Section reviewer. R.S.M. receives research support from the National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute of Aging, the Hillblom Foundation, Janssen Pharmaceuticals (research grant) and the Alzheimer's Association. R.S.M. has also received travel support from the National Institute of Mental Health for Workshop participation. J.Y.T. receives research support from the NIH, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the California Tobacco Related Research Program, and honoraria and travel reimbursement from the NIH for serving as an NIH Study Section reviewer. All other authors report no conflicts of interest.

To determine the scope, source, and mode of transmission of a multifacility outbreak of extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Acinetobacter baumannii.

Outbreak investigation.

Residents and patients in skilled nursing facilities, long-term acute-care hospital, and acute-care hospitals.

A case was defined as the incident isolate from clinical or surveillance cultures of XDR Acinetobacter baumannii resistant to imipenem or meropenem and nonsusceptible to all but 1 or 2 antibiotic classes in a patient in an Oregon healthcare facility during January 2012–December 2014. We queried clinical laboratories, reviewed medical records, oversaw patient and environmental surveillance surveys at 2 facilities, and recommended interventions. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and molecular analysis were performed.

We identified 21 cases, highly related by PFGE or healthcare facility exposure. Overall, 17 patients (81%) were admitted to either long-term acute-care hospital A (n=8), or skilled nursing facility A (n=8), or both (n=1) prior to XDR A. baumannii isolation. Interfacility communication of patient or resident XDR status was not performed during transfer between facilities. The rare plasmid-encoded carbapenemase gene blaOXA-237 was present in 16 outbreak isolates. Contact precautions, chlorhexidine baths, enhanced environmental cleaning, and interfacility communication were implemented for cases to halt transmission.

Interfacility transmission of XDR A. baumannii carrying the rare blaOXA-237 was facilitated by transfer of affected patients without communication to receiving facilities.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1335–1341

Multidisciplinary team interaction has become a commonplace phrase in the discussion of disaster response. Theme 6 explored multidisciplinary team interactions and attempted to identify some of the key issues and possible solutions to the seemingly intractable problems inherent in this endeavour.

Details of the methods used are provided in the introductory paper. The Cochairs moderated all presentations and produced a summary that was presented to an assembly of all of the delegates. The Cochairs then presided over a workshop that resulted in the generation of a set of Action Plans that then were reported to the collective group of all delegates.

Main points developed during the presentations and discussion included: (1) promotion of multidisciplinary collaboration, (2) standardization, (3) the Incident Command System, (4) professionalism, (5) regional disparities, and (6) psychosocial impact.

Action plans recommended: (1) a standardized template for Needs Assessment be developed, implemented, and applied using collaboration with international organizations, focusing on needs and criteria appropriate to each type of event, and (2) team needs assessments be recognized for local responses and for determination of when international assistance may be required, for planning a command system, and for evaluating the psychosocial impact.

There is a clear need for the development of standardized methods for the assessment of needs, development and implementation of a command structure, and for appreciation of regional differences and the psychosocial impact of all interventions.