Allergy testing of multiple patients should no longer be performed with a common syringe

Perioperative Infection Transmission: the Role of the Anesthesia Provider in Infection Control and Healthcare-Associated Infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to highlight key factors in the perioperative environment that contribute to transmission of infectious pathogens, leading to healthcare-associated infection. This knowledge will provide anesthesia providers the tools to optimize preventive measures, with the goal of improved patient and provider safety.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the past decade, much has been learned about the epidemiology of perioperative pathogen transmission. Patients, providers, and the environment serve as reservoirs of origin that contribute to infection development. Ongoing surveillance of pathogen transmission among these reservoirs is essential to ensure effective perioperative infection prevention.

SUMMARY

Recent work has proven the efficacy of a strategic approach for perioperative optimization of hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, patient decolonization, and intravascular catheter design and handling improvement protocols. This work, proven to generate substantial reductions in surgical site infections, can also be applied to aide prevention of SARS-CoV-2 spread in the COVID-19 era.

Infection Prevention and Control in the Podiatric Medical Setting. Challenges to Providing Consistently Safe Care

Unsafe practices are an underestimated contributor to the disease burden of bloodborne viruses. Outbreaks associated with failures in basic infection prevention have been identified in nonhospital settings with increased frequency in the United States during the past 15 years, representing an alarming trend and indicating that the challenge of providing consistently safe care is not always met. As has been the case with most medical specialties, public health investigations by state and local health departments, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, have identified some instances of unsafe practices that have placed podiatric medical patients at risk for viral, bacterial, and fungal infections. All health-care providers, including podiatric physicians, must make infection prevention a priority in any setting in which care is delivered.

Guideline for Prevention of Intravascular-Device–Related Infections

The “Guideline for Prevention of Intravascular Device-Related Infections” is designed to reduce the incidence of intravascular device-related infections by providing an over view of the evidence for recommendations considered prudent by consensus of Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisor y Committee (HICPAC) members. This two-part document updates and replaces the previously published Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) Guideline for Intravascular Infections (Am J Infect Control1983;11:183-199). Part I, “Intravascular Device-Related Infections: An Over view” discusses many of the issues and controversies in intravascular-device use and maintenance. These issues include definitions and diagnosis of catheter-related infection, appropriate barrier precautions during catheter insertion, inter vals for replacement of catheters, intravenous (IV) fluids and administration sets, catheter-site care, the role of specialized IV personnel, and the use of prophylactic antimi-crobials, flush solutions, and anticoagulants. Part II, “Recommendations for Prevention of Intravascular Device-Related Infections” provides consensus recommendations of the HICPAC for the prevention and control of intravascular device-related infections. A working draft of this document also was reviewed by experts in hospital infection control, internal medicine, pediatrics, and intravenous therapy. However, all recommendations contained in the guideline may not reflect the opinion of all reviewers.

Injection practices among clinicians in United States health care settings

BACKGROUND

Improper use of syringes, needles, and medication vials has resulted in patient-to-patient transmission of bloodborne pathogens, including hepatitis C virus. This study examined the injection practices of health care providers to identify trends and target opportunities for education on safe practices.

METHODS

An on-line survey was conducted in May and June 2010 of clinicians in US health care settings that prepare and/or administer parenteral medications.

RESULTS

The majority of the 5446 eligible respondents reported injection practices consistent with current recommendations. However, the following unsafe practices were identified: 6.0% "sometimes or always" use single-dose/single-use vials for more than 1 patient; 0.9% "sometimes or always" reuse a syringe but change the needle for use on a second patient; 15.1% reuse a syringe to enter a multidose vial and then 6.5% save that vial for use on another patient (1.1% overall).

CONCLUSION

Unsafe injection practices represent an ongoing threat to patient safety. Ensuring safe injection practices in all health care settings will require a multifaceted approach that focuses on surveillance, oversight, enforcement, and continuing education.

US outbreak investigations highlight the need for safe injection practices and basic infection control

Current understanding of viral hepatitis transmission in United States health care settings indicates progress over the past several decades with respect to the risks from transfusions or blood products. Likewise, risks to health care providers from sharps injuries and other blood and body fluid exposures have been reduced as a consequence of widespread hepatitis B vaccination and the adoption of safer work practices. Increasing recognition of outbreaks involving patient-to-patient spread of hepatitis B and hepatitis C virus infections, however, has uncovered a disturbing trend. This article highlights the importance of basic infection control and the need for increased awareness of safe injection practices.

A cluster of hepatitis C virus infections associated with ozone-enriched transfusion of autologous blood in Rome, Italy

OBJECTIVE

To describe an outbreak of hepatitis C virus (HCV).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Outpatient department of a hospital in Rome, Italy.

PATIENTS

All 42 patients exposed to ozone therapy by autohemotherapy or intramuscular injection from January to June 2001.

METHODS

Epidemiologic investigation, serologic analysis, and virus genotyping.

RESULTS

Thirty-one (74%) of the patients agreed to participate in the study. Three (9.7%) had symptoms of HCV infection. This incidence rate was higher than the rate of 1.4 per 100,000 per year in the regional population. Six patients were positive for HCV antibodies and HCV RNA for a prevalence rate of 19.4%, which was much higher than the estimate of 0.9% in the population. Virus genotype 1b was found in two case-patients (one symptomatic) and 2c in four case-patients (two symptomatic), one of whom was known to have an HCV infection since 1986 and could have been the source of infection. The infected patients were all being exposed to ozone-enriched transfusions of autologous blood. Although the specific mode of transmission between patients was not detected, transmission probably occurred during one of the three busiest therapeutic sessions in the 6-month period.

CONCLUSIONS

Transmission of HCV infection may occur during medical procedures with limited bleeding. Standard precautions must be applied in any healthcare setting; restricting the number of individuals treated during each therapeutic session could be an effective way of avoiding accidental transmission of infection.

A large nosocomial outbreak of hepatitis C and hepatitis B among patients receiving pain remediation treatments

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In August 2002, the Oklahoma State Department of Health received a report of six patients with unexplained hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection treated in the same pain remediation clinic. We investigated the outbreak's extent and etiology.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of clinic patients, including a serologic survey, interviews of infected patients, and reviews of medical records and staff infection control practices. Patients received outpatient pain remediation treatments one afternoon a week in a clinic within a hospital. Cases were defined as HCV or hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections among patients who reported no prior diagnosis or risk factors for disease or reported previous risk factors but had evidence of acute infection.

RESULTS

Of 908 patients, 795 (87.6%) were tested, and 71 HCV-infected patients (8.9%) and 31 HBV-infected patients (3.9%) met the case definition. Multiple HCV genotypes were identified. Significantly higher HCV infection rates were found among individuals treated after an HCV-infected patient during the same visit (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 6.2; 95% confidence interval [CI95], 2.4-15.8); a similar association was observed for HBV (AOR, 2.9; CI95, 1.3-6.5). Review of staff practices revealed the nurse anesthetist had been using the same syringe-needle to sequentially administer sedation medications to every treated patient each clinic day.

CONCLUSIONS

Reuse of needles-syringes was the mechanism for patient-to-patient transmission of HCV and HBV in this large nosocomial outbreak. Further education and stricter oversight of infection control practices may prevent future outbreaks.

Evidence of patient-to-patient transmission of hepatitis C virus through contaminated intravenous anaesthetic ampoules

Two separate cases of acute hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection following medical procedures, arthroscopy and colonoscopy, are reported. In both episodes, patient risk factors were reviewed, and staff and other patients' sera were tested for HCV antibodies and RNA. HCV RNA positive samples were genotyped, sequenced, and subjected to phylogenetic analysis. No risk factors for HCV infection were identified for either case except for medical procedures. HCV RNA positive patients were identified preceding both cases on the respective theatre lists. HCV infection in a second low risk patient was also identified. Nucleic acid sequencing and phylogenetic analysis of HCV from the two putative source patients and the three recipient patients demonstrated a high degree of relatedness respectively. The results suggest that patient-to-patient transmission occurred in both episodes via contamination of intravenous anaesthetic ampoules with HCV used on multiple patients. Injectable medication ampoules should not be used for more than one patient.

Transmission of hepatitis C in a pharmacologic study

OBJECTIVE

To describe an outbreak of hepatitis C in a clinical research study.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care hospital.

PATIENTS

Healthcare workers who volunteered to be subjects in a study of the metabolic effects of inhaled and oral corticosteroids who were unwittingly exposed to hepatitis C virus (HCV).

METHODS

Epidemiological investigation and serological analyses.

RESULTS

One chronic carrier of HCV was identified. Four fellow workers volunteering in the studies became infected with HCV, with 96% homology among strains. There was no evidence of spread from infected healthcare workers to patients on whom they had performed arterial punctures (2 of 214 positive, unrelated to each other and to the outbreak strain).

CONCLUSION

Infection control standards in clinical research must be maintained vigorously to prevent transmission of blood-borne pathogens such as HCV.

Postoperative infections traced to contamination of an intravenous anesthetic, propofol

BACKGROUND

Between June 1990 and February 1993, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted investigations at seven hospitals because of unusual outbreaks of bloodstream infections, surgical-site infections, and acute febrile episodes after surgical procedures.

METHODS

We conducted case-control or cohort studies, or both, to identify risk factors. A case patient was defined as any patient who had an organism-specific infection or acute febrile episode after a surgical procedure during the study period in that hospital. The investigations also included reviews of procedures, cultures, and microbiologic studies of infecting, contaminating, and colonizing strains.

RESULTS

Sixty-two case patients were identified, 49 (79 percent) of whom underwent surgery during an epidemic period. Postoperative complications were more frequent during the epidemic period than before it. Only exposure to propofol, a lipid-based anesthetic agent, was significantly associated with the postoperative complications at all seven hospitals. In six of the outbreaks, an etiologic agent (Staphylococcus aureus, Candida albicans, Moraxella osloensis, Enterobacter agglomerans, or Serratia marcescens) was identified, and the same strains were isolated from the case patients. Although cultures of unopened containers of propofol were negative, at two hospitals cultures of propofol from syringes currently in use were positive. At one hospital, the recovered organism was identical to the organism isolated from the case patients. Interviews with and observation of anesthesiology personnel documented a wide variety of lapses in aseptic techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

With the increasing use of lipid-based medications, which support rapid bacterial growth at room temperature, strict aseptic techniques are essential during the handling of these agents to prevent extrinsic contamination and dangerous infectious complications.

Risk of cross-infection related to the multiple use of disposable syringes

The rate of blood contamination of IV tubings used in anaesthesia practice was investigated. Only IV tubings started in the operating room were studied. First, 300 tubings of three different types were tested at the three distal injection sites. The contamination rate was 3.3 per cent at the injection site closest to the IV catheter and 0.3 per cent at the furthest. The presence of a check-valve did not affect the contamination rate. Second, 300 third injection sites fixed at a level equal to or above the IV catheter were tested. None of them was contaminated. Finally, in order to evaluate whether changing the needle alone could prevent the contamination of syringes, injections were made into a tubing where blood was flowing. Thirty-four per cent of the syringes tested positive for blood. We conclude that IV tubings have a significant contamination rate in usual practice. This rate decreases as the distance from the IV catheter increases. The use of the third site fixed at a level equal to or above the IV catheter carries a lower risk of contamination. Changing the needle alone is a useless procedure to prevent cross-contamination.