Background: The 2022 WHO global survey on infection prevention and control (IPC) exposes significant gaps in IPC in the WHO Southeast Asia region. A better understanding of IPC vulnerabilities will inform improvement initiatives. We describe an evaluation of IPC practices known to prevent and contain carbapenem-resistant organisms (CROs) at hospitals participating in the United States Centers for Disease Control Global Action in Healthcare Network –Antimicrobial Resistance in India. Prior hospital evaluations suggest resistance to carbapenems among gram-negative isolates is up to 45%. Methods: We conducted a mixed methods evaluation including cross-sectional surveys, semi-structured interviews, and site observations at five hospitals (one government, two private tertiary care, and two private teaching) located in three cities. The number of hospital beds ranged from 362 to 2,011. Hospital and IPC program characteristics, and CRO prevention and containment activities were examined virtually. Site observations focused on hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, personal protective equipment (PPE), CRO containment practices and use of water for patient care. Results: All sites had IPC programs with established policies and qualified IPC staff. The IPC nurse-to-bed ratio ranged from 1:73 to 1:432 (mean, 1:209). Due to the integral role of microbiology staff in IPC at these hospitals, the two departments had strong communication channels associated with CRO identification. Screening for CRO colonization, if done, targeted patients from outside hospitals. Three of the five hospitals routinely implemented contact precautions for patients with identified CROs, displayed isolation signage at the bedside, and provided adequate PPE at point-of-use; however, all sites reported barriers to effective isolation and/or cohorting patients with CROs. Timely communication of CROs to clinical staff varied and no sites effectively relayed CRO status upon patient discharge to another facility. IPC teams identified gaps in environmental cleaning procedures and practices related to medical devices and equipment. All sites used alternatives to tap water for clinical care and sink etiquette was evident. Each IPC team performed audits of patient isolation and hand hygiene practices. Despite the considerable proportion of IPC resources dedicated to daily education and feedback in clinical areas, the IPC teams reported that improvement was often difficult to achieve. Conclusion: Given the high burden of CROs and limited IPC resources, detailed knowledge of IPC opportunities for improvement will help hospitals target novel interventions for CRO prevention and containment. Further investigation of colonization rates and effective performance improvement methods in these settings is needed.

Disclosure: Patricia Simner: Research Contracts: BD Diagnostics, OpGen Inc., Qiagen Sciences Inc, T2 Diagnostics, Accelerate Diagnostics; Research Collaborators:Ares Genetics, CosmosID, IDbyDNA, Illumina; Consulting: OpGen Inc., BD Diagnostics, Shionogi Inc., GeneCapture, Qiagen Sciences Inc, Entasis, Day Zero Diagnostics, Next Gen Diagnostics

Introduction: There is a need to optimize blood culture (BC) utilization among hospitalized adults. A previous study showed an evidence-based BC algorithm improved BC utilization in a medical intensive care unit (MICU) at a large academic center. Our aim is to evaluate the impact of an intervention based on this algorithm on blood culture utilization in the MICU at Stanford Health Care, a referral center known for its high volume of solid organ transplants. Methods: We conducted a before-after study evaluating the impact of a BC diagnostic stewardship program in the MICU at Stanford Health Care, a 20-bed unit with an average of 20% lung transplant patients per day. All patients ≥18 years of age admitted to the unit during the study period were included. We adopted a previously published evidence-based algorithm detailing syndromes with low and high risk for bacteremia, which was referenced during patient rounds. Additionally, education and feedback to providers about BC utilization and indication inappropriateness was performed during leadership meetings every other month. We performed an interrupted time series analysis using historical data 17 months before the implementation of the blood culture stewardship program on April 1, 2022 and 8 months after. We assessed changes on BC utilization adjusted to patient days and crude mortality rate during the same period as a balancing measure. Results: Before the implementation of the program, the median BC utilization was 216 per 1,000 patient days (range 150–250 per 1,000 patient days). Following the introduction of the program, there was a significant decrease in blood culture utilization by 5% (95% CI -10% to -1%, p=.02; Figure 1). Post-intervention, the blood culture stabilized, with no significant increase observed (0.09% increase, 95% CI -0.7% to 1%, p=.81). The mortality rate, prior to the implementation of the program, had shown a significant downward trend of 1.4% over time (95% CI -3% to -0.2%, p=.02). After the intervention, a nonsignificant decrease of 8% was observed (95% CI -44% to 27%, p=.62; Figure 2), followed by a nonsignificant upward trend of 6% (95% CI -1% to 13%, p=.10). Conclusion: We observed a significant reduction in BC utilization after implementing the BC diagnostic stewardship program in a MICU frequented by a high number of lung transplant patients.

Background: The burden of hospital-associated infections (HAIs) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Latin America is high. Improving engagement by healthcare workers (HCWs) in infection prevention and control (IPC) may lead to better patient outcomes; however, little is known about HCW perceptions of IPC in the region. We sought to understand HCW perceptions of IPC processes and practices. Methods: During August–September 2022, HCWs from 30 hospitals with IPC programs in 4 Latin American countries (Panama, Guatemala, Ecuador, and Argentina) were invited to participate in an electronic, voluntary, anonymous survey about their perceptions of IPC at their hospitals. Physicians, nurses, and environmental care (EVC) personnel were prioritized for recruitment. All respondents were asked 18 questions; IPC team members were asked 5 additional questions about specific activities implemented by IPC programs, how data are used, and how IPC could be improved. Answers with 5-point Likert scale responses were categorized into 2 groups (eg, strongly agree or agree vs neutral, disagree, or strongly disagree) for analysis. Results: Of 1,252 HCWs who completed the survey, 181 (14%) were IPC team members, 1,095 (87%) had direct patient contact, and 1,156 (92%) worked >20 hours per week. Figure 1 shows participant characteristics. Most participants (56%) rated their IPC program as very good, 38% rated it as good, and 6% rated it as bad. Physicians were less likely to give a favorable rating. Compliance with prevention bundles and hand hygiene (HH) by colleagues was rated as poor by 28% and 22% of HCWs, respectively; however, only 11% and 5% indicated that their own compliance was poor, respectively. Also, 25% of participants reported not receiving or only occasionally receiving HH compliance data. Similarly, 41% of participants reported not receiving HAI data on a regular basis, and 19% of IPC nurses reported not receiving data despite being responsible for conducting surveillance. Furthermore, 41% of respondents indicated not receiving or only occasionally receiving IPC training or education relevant to their role. When asked about the safety climate, 16% of participants reported not feeling appreciated. In addition, 22% of IPC nurses and 37% of individuals in the “other” category (eg, health technicians and therapists) were more likely to report this. When IPC team members were asked how frequently specific activities were conducted (Fig. 2), several opportunities for improvement were identified, including improving HCW access to HH data and development of strategic plans. Conclusions: Improving HCW access to training on IPC and to data on HAI burden and compliance with HH and prevention bundles should be emphasized in Latin American hospitals.

Disclosures: None

We evaluated antibiotic use in a private health insurance network in Bolivia with two different healthcare plans. The Health Maintenance Organization plan had 29% lower antibiotic consumption and fewer broad-spectrum antibiotics prescribed than the Preferred Provider Organization. Furthermore, we identified potential targets for future antibiotic stewardship efforts.

We provide an overview of diagnostic stewardship with key concepts that include the diagnostic pathway and the multiple points where interventions can be implemented, strategies for interventions, the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration, and key microbiologic diagnostic tests that should be considered for diagnostic stewardship. The document focuses on microbiologic laboratory testing for adult and pediatric patients and is intended for a target audience of healthcare workers involved in diagnostic stewardship interventions and all workers affected by any step of the diagnostic pathway (ie, ordering, collecting, processing, reporting, and interpreting results of a diagnostic test). This document was developed by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Diagnostic Stewardship Taskforce.

Implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in well-resourced countries has been associated with reductions in antibiotic-resistant infections and improved patient outcomes. Several guidance documents providing recommendations on how to structure antimicrobial stewardship activities at the national and hospital level in resource-limited settings have been published. However, few hospitals in Latin America report having a structure or resources needed for a successful ASP. Given the alarming increases in antimicrobial resistance in Latin America, better understanding of barriers to promote implementation of effective ASPs is urgently needed. We have summarized past and present antimicrobial stewardship activities in Latin American hospitals, and we describe key elements needed in future efforts to strengthen antimicrobial stewardship in the region.

The optimal timing of blood culture (BCx) sets collection has not been evaluated with continuous BCx detection systems. The yield of BCx was similar between short intervals (median, 3 minutes) and longer intervals (median, 16 or 43 minutes) among 5,856 BCx, except for improved polymicrobial bacteremia detection with long-interval BCx.

Severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmissions among healthcare workers and hospitalized patients are challenging to confirm. Investigation of infected persons often reveals multiple potential risk factors for viral acquisition. We combined exposure investigation with genomic analysis confirming 2 hospital-based clusters. Prolonged close contact with unmasked, unrecognized infectious, individuals was a common risk.

We analyzed the impact of a 7-day recurring asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 testing protocol for all patients hospitalized at a large academic center. Overall, 40 new cases were identified, and 1 of 3 occurred after 14 days of hospitalization. Recurring testing can identify unrecognized infections, especially during periods of elevated community transmission.

In a multicenter cohort of 963 adults hospitalized due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), 5% had a proven hospital-acquired infection (HAI) and 21% had a proven, probable, or possible HAI. Risk factors for proven or probable HAIs included intensive care unit admission, dexamethasone use, severe COVID-19, heart failure, and antibiotic exposure upon admission.

Background: In 2018, the Maryland Department of Health, in collaboration with the University of Maryland and Johns Hopkins University, created the Statewide Prevention and Reduction of Clostridioides difficile (SPARC) collaborative to reduce C. difficile as specified in Healthy People 2020. Methods: The SPARC collaborative recruited hospitals contributing most cases to statewide C. difficile standardized infection ratio (SIR), according to data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). SPARC developed intervention bundles around 4 domains: infection prevention, environmental cleaning, and diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship. Each facility completed a self-assessment followed by an on-site, day-long, peer-to-peer (P2P) evaluation with 8–12 SPARC subject matter experts (SMEs) representing each domain. The SMEs met with hospital executive leadership and then led 4 domain-based group discussions with relevant hospital team leaders. To identify policy and practice gaps, SMEs visited hospital inpatient units for informal interviews with frontline staff. In a closing session, SPARC SMEs, hospital executives, and team leaders reconvened to discuss preliminary findings. This included review of covert observation data (hand hygiene, personal protective equipment compliance, environmental cleaning) obtained by SPARC team 1–2 weeks prior. Final SPARC P2P written recommendations guided development of customized interventions at each hospital. SPARC provided continuous support (follow up phone calls, educational webinars, technical support, didactic training for antimicrobial stewardship pharmacists) to enhance facility-specific implementation. For every quarter, we categorized C. difficile NHSN data for each Maryland hospital into “SPARC” or “non-SPARC” based on participation status. Using negative binomial mixed models, we analyzed difference-in-difference of pre- and postincidence rate ratios (IRRs) for SPARC and non-SPARC hospitals, which allowed estimation of change attributable to SPARC participation independent of other time-varying factors. Results: Overall, 13 of 48 (27%) hospitals in Maryland participated in the intervention. The baseline SIR for all Maryland hospitals was 0.92, and the post-SPARC SIR was 0.67. The SPARC hospitals had a greater reduction in hospital-onset C. difficile incidence; 8.6 and 4.3 events per 10,000 patient days for baseline and most recent quarter, respectively. For non-SPARC hospitals, these hospital-onset C. difficile incidences were 5.1 preintervention and 4.3 postintervention. We found a statistically significant difference-in-difference between SPARC and non-SPARC hospital C. difficile reduction rates (ratio of IRR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44−0.89; P = .01). Conclusions: The Maryland SPARC collaborative, a public health-academic partnership, was associated with a 25% reduction in the Maryland C. difficile SIR. Hospitals participating in SPARC demonstrated significantly reduced C. difficile incidences to match that of high-performing hospitals in Maryland.

Funding: None

Disclosure: Aaron Milstone, BD – consulting.

Background: Bedside nurses have been recognized as potential antibiotic stewards; however, data on effective ways that nurses can contribute to stewardship activities in acute-care hospitals are scarce. Methods: A nurse-driven urine culture intervention to improve urine culture ordering practices was implemented in a medicine and a neurocritical care unit (NCCU) at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. Bedside nurses implemented an algorithm (Fig. 1) developed by the antibiotic stewardship program (ASP) to review the appropriateness of urine culture and to guide discussions with ordering providers regarding unnecessary urine cultures. Nurses received in-person training by an ASP physician champion on how to use the algorithm and education on the definition and indications for evaluation for asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infections. The ASP physician periodically visited the units to address concerns and questions. In both units, a nurse champion was identified to serve as liaison between the ASP and bedside nurses, and physician support was obtained before the intervention. The pre- and postintervention periods for the medicine unit were September 2017–August 2018 and September 2018–August 2019, respectively. For the NCCU, these periods were September 2018–February 2019 and March 2019–September 2019, respectively. Trends in urine cultures per 100 patient days (PD) were examined with statistical process charts and compared before and after the intervention using a standard incident ratio (IRR) and Poisson regression. Results: In total, 327 urine cultures were collected in the medicine unit and 293 in the NCCU over the study period. Although the intervention led to a significant 34% reduction in the rate of urine cultures on the medicine unit (from 2.3 to 1.5 cultures/100 PD; IRR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50–0.87; P < .01), the number of urine cultures remained without a significant change in the NCCU (from 4.5 to 3.7 cultures/100 PD; IRR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.65–1.22; P = .48) (Fig. 2). Conclusions: Algorithm-based, nurse-driven review of urine culture indications reduced urine cultures on a medicine unit but not in a neurosciences ICU. Success on the medicine unit may have been driven by highly engaged nurse and physician champions and by patients being able to respond questions about symptoms. The following factors might have impacted results on NCCU: presence of conflicting protocols (eg, panculturing patients every 48 hours per a hypothermia protocol), unit tradition (eg, obtaining cultures to assess treatment response), perception of greater risk benefit in NCCU patients, and unit dynamics (open unit with other primary services placing orders for patients). Unit and team dynamics can affect effective implementation of antimicrobial stewardship interventions by nurses.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Patients with a penicillin/aminopenicillin (PCN) allergy label are more likely to receive non–β-lactam antibiotics and to experience worse clinical outcomes. Given that nurses are often first to interact with patients, we pilot tested a nurse-driven quality improvement initiative to improve PCN allergy documentation and increase β-lactam use. Methods: We conducted a before-and-after study on a labor and delivery unit at The Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) from May 2018 to September 2019. Patients aged 18 years with a PCN allergy were included. The intervention included (1) the use of an algorithm developed by the antimicrobial stewardship team to assist nurses in obtaining accurate PCN allergy histories (Fig. 1), (2) identification of a nurse champion to facilitate implementation of the algorithm, and (3) in-person education by a stewardship physician regarding the importance and impact of adequate PCN allergy documentation on clinical outcomes. Readmissions were counted as separate encounters. The primary outcome was improved allergy documentation (either fewer blank documentations, nonspecified rash reactions, drug intolerance documentations (eg, isolated nausea), documentation of signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis not specified as such). The secondary outcome was β-lactam use. Categorical variables were compared using the 2 test and continuous variables were compared with the Student t test. Severe allergic reactions were defined as anaphylaxis, severe skin reactions (eg, Stevens-Johnson syndrome), and organ involvement (eg, hepatitis). Results: Overall, 382 patient admissions were included, 305 in the preintervention (May 2018 to May 2019) and 77 in the postintervention period (June 2019 to September 2019). Mean age and length-of-stay were 30 years and 4 days, respectively, for both periods. The proportion of admitted patients with a PCN allergy label was 8% and 7% for pre- and postintervention periods. Documentation findings in the pre- and postintervention periods respectively were as follows: blank documentation 11% and 12% (P = .89), documentation of specified rashes 0.6% and 1.3% (P = .56), documentation of drug intolerance 11% and 8% (P = .39), documentation of reactions that were indicative of anaphylaxis but not documented specifically as anaphylaxis 8% and 13% (P = .20). Among patients with a documented PCN allergy who received antibiotics, 83 of 177 (47%) and 27 of 43 (63%) received β-lactams (P = .01) in the pre- and postintervention periods, with cefazolin being the antibiotic most commonly used in both periods. Conclusions: Nursing education and an algorithm did not result in significant improvements in PCN allergy documentation in the 3 months after implementation. More data collection is planned to assess the impact of the intervention.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Hospital antibiotic use in Argentina has not been described. We present results of point prevalence surveys on antibiotic use conducted in 109 Argentinian hospitals in November 2018 and submitted to the National Program of Epidemiology and Control of Hospital-Acquired Infections, and we discuss potential areas for improvement.

No standardized surveillance criteria exist for surgical site infection after breast tissue expander (BTE) access. This report provides a framework for defining postaccess BTE infections and identifies contributing factors to infection during the expansion period. Implementing infection prevention guidelines for BTE access may reduce postaccess BTE infections.