Infections cause substantial morbidity and mortality among patients receiving care in outpatient hemodialysis facilities. We describe comprehensive infection prevention assessments by US public health departments using standardized interview and observation tools. Results demonstrated how facility layouts can undermine infection prevention and that clinical practices often fall short of policies.

BACKGROUND: Performing catheter-care observations in outpatient hemodialysis facilities are one of the CDC's core interventions, which have been proven to reduce bloodstream infections. However, staff have many competing responsibilities. Efforts to increase and streamline the process of performing observations are needed. We developed an electronic catheter checklist, formatted for easy access with a mobile device, and conducted a pilot project to determine the feasibility of implementing it in outpatient dialysis facilities. METHODS: The tool contained the following content: (1) patient education videos; (2) catheter-care checklists (connection, disconnection, and exit-site care); (3) prepilot and postpilot surveys; and (4) a pilot implementation guide. Participating hemodialysis facilities performed catheter-care observations on either a weekly or monthly schedule and provided feedback on implementation of the tool. RESULTS: The pilot data were collected from January 6 through March 12, 2020, at seven participating facilities. A total of 954 individual observations were performed. The catheter-connection, disconnection, and exit-site steps were performed correctly for most individual steps; however, areas for improvement were (1) allowing for appropriate antiseptic dry time, (2) avoiding contact after antisepsis, and (3) applying antibiotic ointment to the exit site. Postpilot feedback from staff was mostly favorable. Use of the electronic checklists facilitated patient engagement with staff and was preferred over paper checklists, because data are easily downloaded and available for use in facility Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings. The educational video content was a unique learning opportunity for both patients and staff. CONCLUSIONS: Converting the CDC's existing catheter checklists to electronic forms reduced paperwork and improved the ease of collating data for use during QAPI meetings. An additional benefit was the educational content provided on the tablet, which was readily available for viewing by patients and staff while in the hemodialysis facility.

This quality improvement study assesses COVID-19 vaccination in dialysis clinics, vaccination coverage, and disparities from December 1, 2020, to June 13, 2021.

In their article, “Inappropriate intravenous antimicrobial starts: An antimicrobial stewardship metric for hemodialysis facilities,” Hahn et al Reference Hahn, Figgatt, Peritz and Coffin1 describe their application of data reported to CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) to determine appropriateness of IV antibiotic use in outpatient hemodialysis centers. NHSN’s Dialysis Event (DE) surveillance system was designed to track bloodstream infections (BSIs) and other vascular access infections in hemodialysis outpatients through monitoring of events such as positive blood cultures. The authors examined outpatient IV antimicrobial start (IVAS) events reported to NHSN and considered any IVAS without documentation of coreported positive blood culture, collection of blood sample for culture, or local access site infection to be inappropriate, even when symptoms such as fever, chills, rigors, or drop in blood pressure were present. We applaud these investigators for drawing necessary attention to the issue of antibiotic use in dialysis patients, which is an important area of study with limited data, and for exploring the use of data to inform improvement in practice. However, we have concerns about their approach to the categorization of antibiotic use without incorporation of relevant clinical information or validation of NHSN data for this purpose, and the potential for unintended consequences among patients at high risk for infections and sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Catheter associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) and central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) represent a substantial portion of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) reported in the United States. The Targeted Assessment for Prevention (TAP) Strategy is a quality improvement framework to reduce HAIs. Data from the TAP Facility Assessments were used to determine common infection prevention gaps for CAUTI and CLABSI. METHODS: Data from 2,044 CAUTI and 1,680 CLABSI Assessments were included in the analysis. Items were defined as potential gaps if ≥33% respondents answered Unknown, ≥33% No, or ≥50% No or Unknown or Never, Rarely, Sometimes, or Unknown to questions pertaining to those areas. Review of response frequencies and stratification by respondent role were performed to highlight opportunities for improvement. RESULTS: Across CAUTI and CLABSI Assessments, lack of physician champions (<35% Yes) and nurse champions (<55% Yes), along with lack of awareness of competency assessments, audits, and feedback were reported. Lack of practices to facilitate timely removal of urinary catheters were identified for CAUTI and issues with select device insertion practices, such as maintaining aseptic technique, were perceived as areas for improvement for CLABSI. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest common gaps in critical components of infection prevention and control programs. The identification of these gaps has the potential to inform targeted CAUTI and CLABSI prevention efforts.

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), can spread rapidly in nursing homes once it is introduced (1,2). To prevent outbreaks, more data are needed to identify sources of introduction and means of transmission within nursing homes. Nursing home residents who receive hemodialysis (dialysis) might be at higher risk for SARS-CoV-2 infections because of their frequent exposures outside the nursing home to both community dialysis patients and staff members at dialysis centers (3). Investigation of a COVID-19 outbreak in a Maryland nursing home (facility A) identified a higher prevalence of infection among residents undergoing dialysis (47%; 15 of 32) than among those not receiving dialysis (16%; 22 of 138) (p<0.001). Among residents with COVID-19, the 30-day hospitalization rate among those receiving dialysis (53%) was higher than that among residents not receiving dialysis (18%) (p = 0.03); the proportion of dialysis patients who died was 40% compared with those who did not receive dialysis (27%) (p = 0.42).Careful consideration of infection control practices throughout the dialysis process (e.g., transportation, time spent in waiting areas, spacing of machines, and cohorting), clear communication between nursing homes and dialysis centers, and coordination of testing practices between these sites are critical to preventing COVID-19 outbreaks in this medically vulnerable population.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), first detected in China in December, 2019. In January, 2020, state, local, and federal public health agencies investigated the first case of COVID-19 in Illinois, USA. METHODS: Patients with confirmed COVID-19 were defined as those with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Contacts were people with exposure to a patient with COVID-19 on or after the patient's symptom onset date. Contacts underwent active symptom monitoring for 14 days following their last exposure. Contacts who developed fever, cough, or shortness of breath became persons under investigation and were tested for SARS-CoV-2. A convenience sample of 32 asymptomatic health-care personnel contacts were also tested. FINDINGS: Patient 1-a woman in her 60s-returned from China in mid-January, 2020. One week later, she was hospitalised with pneumonia and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Her husband (Patient 2) did not travel but had frequent close contact with his wife. He was admitted 8 days later and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Overall, 372 contacts of both cases were identified; 347 underwent active symptom monitoring, including 152 community contacts and 195 health-care personnel. Of monitored contacts, 43 became persons under investigation, in addition to Patient 2. These 43 persons under investigation and all 32 asymptomatic health-care personnel tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. INTERPRETATION: Person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 occurred between two people with prolonged, unprotected exposure while Patient 1 was symptomatic. Despite active symptom monitoring and testing of symptomatic and some asymptomatic contacts, no further transmission was detected. FUNDING: None.

OBJECTIVE: To describe pathogen distribution and rates for central-line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) from different acute-care locations during 2011-2017 to inform prevention efforts. METHODS: CLABSI data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) were analyzed. Percentages and pooled mean incidence density rates were calculated for a variety of pathogens and stratified by acute-care location groups (adult intensive care units [ICUs], pediatric ICUs [PICUs], adult wards, pediatric wards, and oncology wards). RESULTS: From 2011 to 2017, 136,264 CLABSIs were reported to the NHSN by adult and pediatric acute-care locations; adult ICUs and wards reported the most CLABSIs: 59,461 (44%) and 40,763 (30%), respectively. In 2017, the most common pathogens were Candida spp/yeast in adult ICUs (27%) and Enterobacteriaceae in adult wards, pediatric wards, oncology wards, and PICUs (23%-31%). Most pathogen-specific CLABSI rates decreased over time, excepting Candida spp/yeast in adult ICUs and Enterobacteriaceae in oncology wards, which increased, and Staphylococcus aureus rates in pediatric locations, which did not change. CONCLUSIONS: The pathogens associated with CLABSIs differ across acute-care location groups. Learning how pathogen-targeted prevention efforts could augment current prevention strategies, such as strategies aimed at preventing Candida spp/yeast and Enterobacteriaceae CLABSIs, might further reduce national rates.

BACKGROUND: Infectious Diseases Society of America/Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (IDSA/SHEA) guidelines describe recommended therapy for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). OBJECTIVE: To describe CDI treatment and, among those with severe CDI, determine predictors of adherence to the 2010 IDSA/SHEA treatment guidelines. DESIGN: We analyzed 2013-2015 CDI treatment data collected through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Emerging Infections Program. Generalized linear mixed models were used to identify predictors of guideline-adherent therapy. PATIENTS: A CDI case was defined as a positive stool specimen in a person aged >/= 18 years without a positive test in the prior 8 weeks; severe CDI cases were defined as having a white blood cell count >/= 15,000 cells/mul. MAIN MEASURES: Prescribing and predictors of guideline-adherent CDI therapy for severe disease. KEY RESULTS: Of 18,243 cases, 14,257 (78%) were treated with metronidazole, 7683 (42%) with vancomycin, and 313 (2%) with fidaxomicin. The median duration of therapy was 14 (interquartile range, 11-15) days. Severe CDI was identified in 3250 (18%) cases; of 3121 with treatment data available, 1480 (47%) were prescribed guideline-adherent therapy. Among severe CDI cases, hospital admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.90, 3.24), age >/= 65 years (aOR 1.37; 95% CI 1.10, 1.71), Charlson comorbidity index >/= 3 (aOR 1.27; 95% CI 1.04, 1.55), immunosuppressive therapy (aOR 1.21; 95% CI 1.02, 1.42), and inflammatory bowel disease (aOR 1.56; 95% CI 1.13, 2.17) were associated with being prescribed guideline-adherent therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Provider adherence to the 2010 treatment guidelines for severe CDI was low. Although the updated 2017 CDI guidelines, which expand the use of oral vancomycin for all CDI, might improve adherence by removing the need to apply severity criteria, other efforts to improve adherence are likely needed, including educating providers and addressing barriers to prescribing guideline-adherent therapy, particularly in outpatient settings.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Contaminated water and other fluids are increasingly recognized to be associated with health care-associated infections. We investigated an outbreak of Gram-negative bloodstream infections at 3 outpatient hemodialysis facilities. STUDY DESIGN: Matched case-control investigations. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients who received hemodialysis at Facility A, B, or C from July 2015 to November 2016. EXPOSURES: Infection control practices, sources of water, dialyzer reuse, injection medication handling, dialysis circuit priming, water and dialysate test findings, environmental reservoirs such as wall boxes, vascular access care practices, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, and whole-genome sequencing of bacterial isolates. OUTCOMES: Cases were defined by a positive blood culture for any Gram-negative bacteria drawn July 1, 2015 to November 30, 2016 from a patient who had received hemodialysis at Facility A, B, or C. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Exposures in cases and controls were compared using matched univariate conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: 58 cases of Gram-negative bloodstream infection occurred; 48 (83%) required hospitalization. The predominant organisms were Serratia marcescens (n=21) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n=12). Compared with controls, cases had higher odds of using a central venous catheter for dialysis (matched odds ratio, 54.32; lower bound of the 95% CI, 12.19). Facility staff reported pooling and regurgitation of waste fluid at recessed wall boxes that house connections for dialysate components and the effluent drain within dialysis treatment stations. Environmental samples yielded S marcescens and P aeruginosa from wall boxes. S marcescens isolated from wall boxes and case-patients from the same facilities were closely related by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and whole-genome sequencing. We identified opportunities for health care workers' hands to contaminate central venous catheters with contaminated fluid from the wall boxes. LIMITATIONS: Limited patient isolates for testing, on-site investigation occurred after peak of infections. CONCLUSIONS: This large outbreak was linked to wall boxes, a previously undescribed source of contaminated fluid and biofilms in the immediate patient care environment.

In 2016, Zika virus disease developed in a man (patient A) who had no known risk factors beyond caring for a relative who died of this disease (index patient). We investigated the source of infection for patient A by surveying other family contacts, healthcare personnel, and community members, and testing samples for Zika virus. We identified 19 family contacts who had similar exposures to the index patient; 86 healthcare personnel had contact with the index patient, including 57 (66%) who had contact with body fluids. Of 218 community members interviewed, 28 (13%) reported signs/symptoms and 132 (61%) provided a sample. Except for patient A, no other persons tested had laboratory evidence of recent Zika virus infection. Of 5,875 mosquitoes collected, none were known vectors of Zika virus and all were negative for Zika virus. The mechanism of transmission to patient A remains unknown but was likely person-to-person contact with the index patient.

Background: Mycoplasma hominis is a commensal genitourinary tract organism that can cause infections outside the genitourinary tract. We investigated a cluster of M. hominis surgical site infections in patients who underwent spine surgery, all associated with amniotic tissue linked to a common donor. Methods: Laboratory tests of tissue product from the donor, including culture, quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR), and whole genome sequencing were performed. Use of this amniotic tissue product was reviewed. A multi-state investigation to identify additional cases and locate any unused products was conducted. Results: Twenty-seven tissue product vials from a donor were distributed to facilities in seven states; at least 20 vials from this donor were used in 14 patients. Of these, 4/14 (29%) developed surgical site infections, including two M. hominis infections. M. hominis was detected by culture and qPCR in two unused vials from the donor. Sequencing indicated >99% similarity between patient and unopened vial isolates. For five of 27 (19%) vials, the final disposition could not be confirmed. Conclusions: M. hominis was transmitted through amniotic tissue from a single donor to two recipients. Current routine donor screening and product testing does not detect all potential pathogens. Clinicians should be aware that M. hominis can cause surgical site infections, and may not be detected by routine clinical cultures. The lack of a standardized system to track tissue products in healthcare facilities limits the ability of public health agencies to respond to outbreaks and investigate other adverse events associated with these products.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a serious and often fatal clinical syndrome, resulting from infection. Information on patient demographics, risk factors, and infections leading to sepsis is needed to integrate comprehensive sepsis prevention, early recognition, and treatment strategies. METHODS: To describe characteristics of patients with sepsis, CDC and partners conducted a retrospective chart review in four New York hospitals. Random samples of medical records from adult and pediatric patients with administrative codes for severe sepsis or septic shock were reviewed. RESULTS: Medical records of 246 adults and 79 children (aged birth to 17 years) were reviewed. Overall, 72% of patients had a health care factor during the 30 days before sepsis admission or a selected chronic condition likely to require frequent medical care. Pneumonia was the most common infection leading to sepsis. The most common pathogens isolated from blood cultures were Escherichia coli in adults aged ≥18 years, Klebsiella spp. in children aged ≥1 year, and Enterococcus spp. in infants aged <1 year; for 106 (33%) patients, no pathogen was isolated. Eighty-two (25%) patients with sepsis died, including 65 (26%) adults and 17 (22%) infants and children. CONCLUSIONS: Infection prevention strategies (e.g., vaccination, reducing transmission of pathogens in health care environments, and appropriate management of chronic diseases) are likely to have a substantial impact on reducing sepsis. CDC, in partnership with organizations representing clinicians, patients, and other stakeholders, is launching a comprehensive campaign to demonstrate that prevention of infections that cause sepsis, and early recognition of sepsis, are integral to overall patient safety.

On September 17, 2015, the Pennsylvania Department of Health (PADOH) notified CDC of a cluster of three potentially health care-associated mucormycete infections that occurred among solid organ transplant recipients during a 12-month period at hospital A. On September 18, hospital B reported that it had identified an additional transplant recipient with mucormycosis. Hospitals A and B are part of the same health care system and are connected by a pedestrian bridge. PADOH requested CDC's assistance with an on-site investigation, which started on September 22, to identify possible sources of infection and prevent additional infections.

No consensus has previously been formed regarding the types and presentations of infectious pathogens to be considered as 'opportunistic infections' (OIs) within the setting of biologic therapy. We systematically reviewed published literature reporting OIs in the setting of biologic therapy for inflammatory diseases. The review sought to describe the OI definitions used within these studies and the types of OIs reported. These findings informed a consensus committee (infectious diseases and rheumatology specialists) in deliberations regarding the development of a candidate list of infections that should be considered as OIs in the setting of biologic therapy. We reviewed 368 clinical trials (randomised controlled/long-term extension), 195 observational studies and numerous case reports/series. Only 11 observational studies defined OIs within their methods; no consistent OI definition was identified across studies. Across all study formats, the most numerous OIs reported were granulomatous infections. The consensus group developed a working definition for OIs as 'indicator' infections, defined as specific pathogens or presentations of pathogens that 'indicate' the likelihood of an alteration in host immunity in the setting of biologic therapy. Using this framework, consensus was reached upon a list of OIs and case-definitions for their reporting during clinical trials and other studies. Prior studies of OIs in the setting of biologic therapy have used inconsistent definitions. The consensus committee reached agreement upon an OI definition, developed case definitions for reporting of each pathogen, and recommended these be used in future studies to facilitate comparison of infection risk between biologic therapies.