BackgroundMultidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) carriage may have an adverse impact on the quality of life of carriers, in particular those who have experienced hospital precautionary measures. This study aims to gain a deeper understanding of how MDRO carriage has affected the daily lives of carriers with these experiences.MethodsThis was a qualitative study based on 15 semi-structured interviews with MDRO carriers or parents of carriers, which were analysed by thematic analysis.ResultsThree main themes were identified: (1) Feeling dirty and unworthy portrays the feelings that MDRO carriers often expressed and how these were related to the language usage describing the MDRO, the perceived avoidance by staff and those in their personal networks, and the effects of the precautionary measures implemented in the hospital. (2) MDROs are invisible, but impact is visible covers how the microbe, despite its apparent invisibility, still impacted carriers in their physical and psychological health. MDRO carriage disrupted their lives, by affecting their other unrelated medical conditions at times and by causing varying levels of fear for their own and others’ health. (3) Carrying the burden on one’s own shoulders describes the lingering questions, uncertainties and confusion that carriers continued to live with and the perceived burden and responsibility that lay on their own shoulders with respect to carrying and preventing the transmission of the MDRO.ConclusionsMDRO carriage can negatively influence the quality of people’s lives in various ways. Improved support and sensitivity from health care providers (HCPs) are needed to address feelings of unworthiness among MDRO carriers and the fears that many experience. Clearer information and guidelines are also needed from HCPs to address the many questions and uncertainties that MDRO carriers face outside of the hospital in their daily lives.

IntroductionHealthcare workers often experience skin dryness and irritation from performing hand hygiene frequently. Low acceptability and tolerability of a formulation are barriers to hand hygiene compliance, though little research has been conducted on what specific types of formulation have higher acceptability than others.ObjectiveTo compare the acceptability and tolerability of an ethanol-based handrub gel with superfatting agents to the isopropanol-based formulations (a rub and a gel formulation) currently used by healthcare workers at the University of Geneva Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.MethodsForty-two participants were randomized to two sequences, testing the isopropanol-based formulation that they are using currently (Hopirub® or Hopigel®), and the ethanol-based formulation containing superfatting agents (Saniswiss Sanitizer Hands H1). Participants tested each of the formulations over 7–10 day work shifts, after which skin condition was assessed and feedback was collected.ResultsH1 scored significantly better than the control formulations for skin dryness (P = 0.0209), and participants felt less discomfort in their hands when using that formulation (P = 0.0448). H1 caused less skin dryness than Hopirub®/Hopigel® (P = 0.0210). Though overall preference was quite polarized, 21 participants preferred H1 intervention formulation and 17 preferred the Hopirub®/Hopigel® formulation that they normally used in their care activities.ConclusionWe observed a difference in acceptability and strongly polarized preferences among the participants' reactions to the formulations tested. These results indicate that giving healthcare workers a choice between different high-quality products is important to ensure maximum acceptability.

BackgroundMicrobial etiology for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is evolving with pathogens known for high CAP mortality e.g., Pseudomonas species. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients are at risk for hospitalization for CAP. Understanding regional patterns and risk factors for multidrug-resistant (MDR) Pseudomonas acquisition has implications for antimicrobial stewardship.ObjectivesTo evaluate the regional epidemiology of MDR Pseudomonas CAP and its association with COPD.MethodsWe queried the electronic medical records of the University of Alabama at Birmingham Healthcare System to identify patients hospitalized for CAP with Pseudomonas positive respiratory samples between 01/01/2013–12/31/2019. Log binomial regression models were used to examine associations between COPD diagnosis and risk of Pseudomonas/MDR Pseudomonas CAP.ResultsCohort consisted of 913 culture positive CAP cases aged 59-year (IQR:48–68), 61% (560) male, 60% (547) white, 65% (580) current/past smokers, and 42% (384) COPD. Prevalence of Pseudomonas CAP in culture positive CAP was 18% (167), MDR Pseudomonas CAP in Pseudomonas CAP was 22% (36), and yearly incidence of MDR Pseudomonas CAP was stable (p = 0.169). COPD was associated with Pseudomonas CAP (RR 1.39; 95% CI 1.01, 1.91; p = 0.041) but not with MDR Pseudomonas CAP (0.71; 95% CI 0.35, 1.45; p = 0.349). Stroke (RR 2.64; 95% CI 1.51, 4.61; p = 0.0006) and use of supplemental oxygen (RR 2.31; 95% CI 1.30, 4.12; p = 0.005) were associated with MDR Pseudomonas CAP.ConclusionIncidence of MDR Pseudomonas CAP was stable over time. COPD was associated with Pseudomonas CAP but not with MDR Pseudomonas CAP. Larger cohort studies are needed to confirm findings.

BackgroundMultidrug resistant organisms (MDROs) occur more commonly in burns patients than in other hospital patients and are an increasingly frequent cause of burn-related mortality. We examined the incidence, trends and risk factors for MDRO acquisition in a specialist burns service housed in an open general surgical ward, and general intensive care unit.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of adult patients admitted with an acute burn injury to our specialist statewide tertiary burns service between July 2014 and October 2020. We linked patient demographics, injury, treatment, and outcome details from our prospective burns service registry to microbiology and antimicrobial prescribing data. The outcome of interest was first MDRO detection, stratified into the following groups of interest: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE), two groups of Pseudomonas (carbapenem resistant, and piperacillin-tazobactam or cefepime resistant), carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter species, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-PE). We used a Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate the association between antibiotic exposure and MDRO acquisition.ResultsThere were 2,036 acute admissions, of which 230 (11.3%) had at least one MDRO isolated from clinical specimens, most frequently wound swabs. While acquisition rates of individual MDRO groups varied over the study period, acquisition rate of any MDRO was reasonably stable over time. Carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas was acquired at the highest rate over the study period (3.5/1000 patient days). The 12.8% (29/226) of MDROs isolated within 48 h were predominantly MRSA and Stenotrophomonas. Median (IQR) time from admission to MDRO detection was 10.9 (5.6–20.5) days, ranging from 9.8 (2.7–24.2) for MRSA to 23.6 (15.7–36.0) for carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa. Patients with MDROs were older, had more extensive burns, longer length of stay, and were more likely to have operative burn management. We were unable to detect a relationship between antibiotic exposure and emergence of MDROs.ConclusionsMDROs are a common and consistent presence in our burns unit. The pattern of acquisition suggests various causes, including introduction from the community and nosocomial spread. More regular surveillance of incidence and targeted interventions may decrease their prevalence, and limit the development of invasive infection.

BackgroundPatients hospitalised for COVID-19 may present with or acquire bacterial or fungal infections that can affect the course of the disease. The aim of this study was to describe the microbiological characteristics of laboratory-confirmed infections in hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19.MethodsWe reviewed the hospital charts of a sample of patients deceased with COVID-19 from the Italian National COVID-19 Surveillance, who had laboratory-confirmed bacterial or fungal bloodstream infections (BSI) or lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI), evaluating the pathogens responsible for the infections and their antimicrobial susceptibility.ResultsAmong 157 patients with infections hospitalised from February 2020 to April 2021, 28 (17.8%) had co-infections (≤ 48 h from admission) and 138 (87.9%) had secondary infections (> 48 h). Most infections were bacterial; LRTI were more frequent than BSI. The most common co-infection was pneumococcal LRTI. In secondary infections, Enterococci were the most frequently recovered pathogens in BSI (21.7% of patients), followed by Enterobacterales, mainly K. pneumoniae, while LRTI were mostly associated with Gram-negative bacteria, firstly Enterobacterales (27.4% of patients, K. pneumoniae 15.3%), followed by A. baumannii (19.1%). Fungal infections, both BSI and LRTI, were mostly due to C. albicans. Antibiotic resistance rates were extremely high in Gram-negative bacteria, with almost all A. baumannii isolates resistant to carbapenems (95.5%), and K. pneumoniae and P. aeruginosa showing carbapenem resistance rates of 59.5% and 34.6%, respectively.ConclusionsIn hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19, secondary infections are considerably more common than co-infections, and are mostly due to Gram-negative bacterial pathogens showing a very high rate of antibiotic resistance.

BackgroundA tool, the Infection Risk Scan has been developed to measure the quality of infection control and antimicrobial use. This tool measures various patient-, ward- and care-related variables in a standardized way. We describe the implementation of this tool in nine hospitals in the Dutch/Belgian border area and the obtained results.MethodsThe IRIS consists of a set of objective and reproducible measurements: patient comorbidities, (appropriate) use of indwelling medical devices, (appropriate) use of antimicrobial therapy, rectal carriage of Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing Enterobacterales and their clonal relatedness, environmental contamination, hand hygiene performance, personal hygiene of health care workers and presence of infection prevention preconditions. The Infection Risk Scan was implemented by an expert team. In each setting, local infection control practitioners were trained to achieve a standardized implementation of the tool and an unambiguous assessment of data.ResultsThe IRIS was implemented in 34 wards in six Dutch and three Belgian hospitals. The tool provided ward specific results and revealed differences between wards and countries. There were significant differences in the prevalence of ESBL-E carriage between countries (Belgium: 15% versus The Netherlands: 9.6%), environmental contamination (median adenosine triphosphate (ATP) level Belgium: 431 versus median ATP level The Netherlands: 793) and calculated hand hygiene actions based on alcohol based handrub consumption (Belgium: 12.5/day versus The Netherlands: 6.3/day) were found.ConclusionThe Infection risk Scan was successfully implemented in multiple hospitals in a large cross-border project and provided data that made the quality of infection control and antimicrobial use more transparent. The observed differences provide potential targets for improvement of the quality of care.

BackgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health challenge, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where antibiotics are widely available to consumers, leading to their misuse. However, AMR educational interventions for engaging parents of schoolchildren are mainly lacking in Sub-Saharan Africa. This study aimed to assess the potential of AMR animation and schoolchildren in influencing parents’ AMR knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs.MethodsParents of schoolchildren aged 11–15 years in Tema, a city in Ghana, watched and discussed an AMR animation designed with ideas from the schoolchildren’s top stories and picture drawings. The children from two schools were first engaged with AMR lessons, with one school using storytelling, the other school using picture drawing, and none serving as a control. The children were then asked to discuss the lessons with their parents. Baseline surveys of parents of randomly selected children were conducted to assess AMR knowledge, attitudes and beliefs before engaging the students and parents, and immediately after the parents participated in viewing and discussing the animation. McNemar and t-tests were used to assess changes in AMR knowledge, attitudes and beliefs.ResultsParents who participated in the animation event, and whose schoolchildren were in the storytelling intervention school had significantly improved knowledge regarding the statement “Antibiotics will cure any infection” (p = 0.021, χ2 = 0.711; 88% vs 50%) between baseline and endline. However, these parents also had statistically significant decreased scores regarding the statement “Antibiotics do not kill our good bacteria” (p = 0.021, χ2 = 1.042; 71.4% vs 40%) between baseline and endline. There was no significant effect on any statement among parents whose children were in the picture drawing school. However, t-test results combining the statements as composite scores showed statistically significant difference in only the attitude construct among parents whose children participated in storytelling intervention (p = 0.043) or picture drawing intervention (p = 0.019). There were no statistically significant changes in knowledge and beliefs constructs.ConclusionsThis study shows that interventions involving schoolchildren with parents engagements and AMR animation could influence parents’ AMR attitudes. The intervention could also positively or negatively impact parents’ AMR knowledge. Modifications of the interventions may be needed for tackling AMR.

BackgroundTo establish effective infection control protocols, understanding pathogen transmission pathways is essential. Non-infectious surrogate tracers may safely explore these pathways and challenge pre-existing assumptions. We used silica nanoparticles with encapsulated DNA (SPED) for the first time in a real-life hospital setting to investigate potential transmission routes of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in the context of a prolonged outbreak.MethodsThe two study experiments took place in the 900-bed University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. A three-run ‘Patient experiment’ investigated pathogen transmission via toilet seats in a two-patient room with shared bathroom. First, various predetermined body and fomite sites in a two-bed patient room were probed at baseline. Then, after the first patient was contaminated with SPED at the subgluteal region, both patients sequentially performed a toilet routine. All sites were consequently swabbed again for SPED contamination. Eight hours later, further spread was tested at predefined sites in the patient room and throughout the ward. A two-run ‘Mobile device experiment’ explored the potential transmission by mobile phones and stethoscopes in a quasi-realistic setting. All SPED contamination statuses and levels were determined by real-time qPCR.ResultsOver all three runs, the ‘Patient experiment’ yielded SPED in 59 of 73 (80.8%) predefined body and environmental sites. Specifically, positivity rates were 100% on subgluteal skin, toilet seats, tap handles, and entertainment devices, the initially contaminated patients’ hands; 83.3% on patient phones and bed controls; 80% on intravenous pumps; 75% on toilet flush plates and door handles, and 0% on the initially not contaminated patients’ hands. SPED spread as far as doctor’s keyboards (66.6%), staff mobile phones (33.3%) and nurses’ keyboards (33.3%) after eight hours. The ‘Mobile device experiment’ resulted in 16 of 22 (72.7%) positive follow-up samples, and transmission to the second patient occurred in one of the two runs.ConclusionsFor the first time SPED were used to investigate potential transmission pathways in a real hospital setting. The results suggest that, in the absence of targeted cleaning, toilet seats and mobile devices may result in widespread transmission of pathogens departing from one contaminated patient skin region.

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study is to describe the situation of COVID-19 in European countries and to identify important factors related to prevention and control.MethodsWe obtained data from World Health Statistics 2020 and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME). We calculated the Rt values of 51 countries in Europe under different prevention and control measures. We used lasso regression to screen factors associated with morbidity and mortality. For the selected variables, we used quantile regression to analyse the relevant influencing factors in countries with different levels of morbidity or mortality.ResultsThe government has a great influence on the change in Rt value through prevention and control measures. The most important factors for personal and group prevention and control are the mobility index, testing, the closure of educational facilities, restrictions on large-scale gatherings, and commercial restrictions. The number of ICU beds and doctors in medical resources are also key factors. Basic sanitation facilities, such as the proportion of safe drinking water, also have an impact on the COVID-19 epidemic.ConclusionsWe described the current status of COVID-19 in European countries. Our findings demonstrated key factors in individual and group prevention measures.

BackgroundWe developed SmartRub® powered by iQati®, an electronic device composed of a wristband and an alcohol-based handrub pocket-sized dispenser that measures and provides feedback on the duration of hand friction and the volume poured during each hand hygiene action. We aimed to assess the accuracy of SmartRub®.MethodsThe specificity, sensitivity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) of SmartRub® were assessed in a 3-phased experiment: (1) laboratory-controlled conditions with volunteers; (2) pre-planned clinical path with volunteers and (3) real clinical conditions with healthcare workers. The accuracy of SmartRub® was evaluated by quantifying its ability to correctly capture true hand hygiene actions and to not record other actions performed while wearing the device.ResultsIn the laboratory, 7 volunteers performed 816 actions. Overall sensitivity was 94.1% (95% CI 91.4–96.2%) with a PPV of 99.0% (95% CI 97.3–99.6%) and specificity was 99.0% (95% CI 97.5–99.7%) with a NPV of 94.4% (95% CI 91.9–96.1%). During the pre-planned clinical path phase, 13 volunteers performed 98 planned paths and a total of 967 actions were performed. Overall sensitivity was 94.6% (95% CI 92.2–96.5%) with a PPV of 84.3% (95% CI 81.6–86.7%) and specificity was 82.4% (95% CI 78.7–85.7%) with a NPV of 93.9% (95% CI 91.3–95.7%). During the real clinical conditions phase, 17 healthcare workers were observed for a total of 15 h and 3 min while they performed 485 actions. Sensitivity was 96.8% (95% CI 93.8–98.6%) with a PPV of 98.3% (95% CI 95.6–99.3%) and specificity was 98.3% (95% CI 95.7–99.5%) with a NPV of 96.8% (95% CI 93.9–98.4%).ConclusionsSmartrub® is a highly reliable device for capturing hand hygiene actions under a range of conditions, from the laboratory to clinical care activities.