Impact of single-room contact precautions on acquisition and transmission of vancomycin-resistant enterococci on haematological and oncological wards, multicentre cohort-study, Germany, January-December 2016

Does the removal of isolation for VRE-infected patients change the incidence of health care-associated VRE?: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several single-center studies have suggested that eliminating isolation for vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) control in the context of endemic or nonoutbreak settings, has no impact on infection rates. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of discontinuing isolation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science through April 10, 2024 for studies evaluating discontinuation of isolation for VRE. Subgroup analyses assessed sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included in the final review. Four reported the incidence of hospital-acquired VRE (HA-VRE) infections and 5 reported the incidence of hospital-acquired VRE bloodstream infections (HA-VRE BSI). No significant difference between the rates of HA-VRE infection before and after stopping isolation was observed (risk ratios, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.26; P = .62), as well as no significant difference on the incidence of HA-VRE BSI (risk ratios, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.07, P = .09). Furthermore, we conducted 2 subgroup analyses: one stratified by whether the studies were conducted during Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19), and the other stratified by whether clinicians continued to use personal protective equipment. Both analyses revealed no significant differences in the incidence of HA-VRE BSI and termination of isolation between the subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of endemic or nonoutbreak settings, discontinuation of isolation for VRE patients has not been associated with an increased rate of HA-VRE infections.

Cumulative incidence of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium detection by patient characteristics or possible exposures: Prioritization of patients for active screening culture

OBJECTIVES

The target population for active surveillance culture (ASC) of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus species (VRE) by stool or rectal swabs has not been fully determined during VRE outbreaks in healthcare settings in non-VRE endemic situation. We evaluated cumulative incidences of VRE detection during a vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium outbreak to determine reasonable target populations for ASC.

METHODS

Cases included inpatients whose first VRE-positive sample was obtained at Shizuoka General Hospital between February 2022 and January 2023, during which we conducted admission screening for possible high-risk patients, biweekly screening of all inpatients, admission and discharge screening in the high-care unit, and screening of contacts in each ward by using stool or rectal samples. We calculated cumulative incidences of VRE detection for those screened by patient characteristics or possible exposure.

FINDINGS

Among 60 cases identified, 55 (92%) were by ASC. Cumulative incidence was higher for contacts (6.4%, 15/234) than for those identified by other screening methods (0.5%, 40/8565). Among the patients identified through admission screening, those previously hospitalized in areas of reported VRE outbreaks had the highest cumulative incidence (6.6%, 5/78) followed by patients requiring toilet assistance (3.7%, 6/161). A bundle approach including ASC and prompt contact precautions by the hospital infection control team, local public health centre, and local and national infection control experts helped terminate the outbreak in seven months.

CONCLUSION

Patients with contacts, prior hospitalization in areas with known VRE outbreaks, and who need toilet assistance appear to be high-risk populations for VRE detection and are candidates for ASC.

Prevention in adults of transmission of infection with multidrug-resistant organisms: an updated systematic review from Making Healthcare Safer IV

BACKGROUND

Healthcare-associated infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) remain a high priority patient safety topic, despite broad acceptance as standard-of-care safety practices to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infection, catheter-associated urinary tract infection and ventilator-associated pneumonia. Prior editions of Making Healthcare Safer have mixed certainty evidence for various other patient safety practices.

OBJECTIVES

As part of Making Healthcare Safer IV, we performed an updated systematic review on the certainty of evidence for the following safety practices at reducing in-facility MDRO infections in adult patients: universal gloving, contact precautions, cohorting, environmental decontamination, patient decolonisation and the adverse effects of isolation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library 2011-May 2023 for systematic reviews and original research studies, both randomised and observational. Settings were limited to high-income countries. Screening and eligibility were done in duplicate, while data extraction was done by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. The synthesis of results is narrative. Certainty of evidence was based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework.

RESULTS

Three systematic reviews and three original research studies provided moderate certainty evidence that patient decolonisation reduced MDRO infections, although restricted to certain populations and organisms. One systematic review provided low certainty evidence that universal gloving was beneficial, again limited to certain populations. One systematic review and two original research studies provided low certainty evidence of benefit for environmental decontamination. One systematic review and one new original study provided low certainty evidence of benefit for cohorting in outbreak settings, and very low certainty evidence of benefit in endemic settings. Six original research studies provide mixed evidence for benefit of contact precautions. There is very low certainty evidence of a signal of increased non-infectious adverse events under patients in contact isolation.

CONCLUSION

In general, the reviewed patient safety practices reduced MDRO infections, but certainty of evidence was low.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023444973.

Hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in patients with cancer: current knowledge and future directions

Patients with cancer experience higher rates of preventable harm from hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (haBSIs) and central-line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) compared with the general hospital population. The prevention of haBSIs and CLABSIs in patients with cancer is an urgent priority, and requires standardized surveillance and reporting efforts. The application of haBSI and CLABSI definitions, classification systems and surveillance strategies for patients with cancer is complex, and there is wide variation in clinical practice. Existing systems were not designed explicitly for patients with cancer, and have different strengths and weaknesses in the cancer setting. For these reasons, epidemiological estimates of haBSIs and CLABSIs in patients with cancer also require careful interpretation. This complexity can be a barrier to identifying appropriate targets for intervention and reducing preventable harm. This review provides an overview of key concepts and challenges in haBSI surveillance and prevention specific to patients with cancer. In addition, this review summarizes the strengths and weaknesses of commonly used surveillance definitions and denominators in the setting of cancer care; existing surveillance practice; epidemiology of haBSIs and CLABSIs; prevention strategies; and current knowledge gaps. A global collaborative effort to harmonize the surveillance of hospital-acquired infections in patients with cancer would be invaluable to improve the accuracy and utility of existing data, advance efforts to prevent hospital-acquired infections, and improve patient safety.

The impact of discontinuing single-room isolation of patients with vancomycin-resistant enterococci: a quasi-experimental single-centre study in South Korea

OBJECTIVES

There is limited data on the effects of discontinuing single-room isolation while maintaining contact precautions, such as the use of gowns and gloves. In April 2021, our hospital ceased single-room isolation for patients with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) because of single-room unavailability. This study assessed the impact of this policy by examining the incidence of hospital-acquired VRE bloodstream infections (HA-VRE BSI).

METHODS

This retrospective quasi-experimental study was conducted at a tertiary-care hospital in Seoul, South Korea. Time-series analysis was used to evaluate HA-VRE BSI incidence at the hospital level and in the haematology unit before (phase 1) and after (phase 2) the policy change.

RESULTS

At the hospital level, HA-VRE BSI incidence level (VRE BSI per 1000 patient-days per month) and trend did not change significantly between phase 1 and phase 2 (coefficient -0.015, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.053 to 0.023, P=0.45 and 0.000, 95% CI: -0.002 to 0.002, P=0.84, respectively). Similarly, HA-VRE BSI incidence level and trend in the haematology unit (-0.285, 95% CI: -0.618 to 0.048, P=0.09 and -0.018, 95% CI: -0.036 to 0.000, P = 0.054, respectively) did not change significantly across the two phases.

CONCLUSIONS

Discontinuing single-room isolation of VRE-colonized or infected patients was not associated with an increase in the incidence of VRE BSI at the hospital level or among high-risk patients in the haematology unit. Horizontal intervention for multi-drug-resistant organisms, including measures such as enhanced hand hygiene and environmental cleaning, may be more effective at preventing VRE transmission.

Patient perspectives on infection prevention and control in cancer care: a survey of knowledge and attitudes among persons with cancer and their next of kin

BACKGROUND

With the growing prevalence of antimicrobial resistance, there may be a need to strengthen infection prevention and control (IPC) measures in cancer care. When developing clinical guidelines, it is important to incorporate patient perspectives.

AIM

To determine the knowledge of, and attitudes towards, IPC among persons with cancer and their next of kin in Norway.

METHODS

Through discussions in expert panels and a pilot study, a survey was developed consisting of 13 knowledge statements to be judged true/false and 40 attitude items to be judged using a Likert scale and was sent to a panel of people with cancer experience on August 22nd, 2023. The mean correct responses and attitude scores were reported.

FINDINGS

Of 551 respondents, the mean correct response to IPC-related knowledge questions was 79% (95% confidence interval: 78-80). Respondents were most knowledgeable about hand hygiene (99%, 546/551), but least knowledgeable about its role in preventing antibiotic resistance (41%, 225/551). Strong support was noted for IPC, especially within the patient responsibilities theme, with a mean score of 4.83. However, there was a notable reluctance towards some selected intrusive IPC measures, such as reducing contact with close relations.

CONCLUSION

This survey revealed a high level of knowledge and attitudes that support the importance of IPC among persons with cancer in Norway and their next of kin. We recommend including patient perspectives in future development of IPC guidelines.

Adaptation and validation of a quantitative vanA/vanB DNA screening assay on a high-throughput PCR system

Vancomycin resistant enterococci (VRE) are a leading cause of ICU-acquired bloodstream infections in Europe. The bacterial load in enteral colonization may be associated with a higher probability of transmission. Here, we aimed to establish a quantitative vanA/vanB DNA real-time PCR assay on a high-throughput system. Limits of detection (LOD), linear range and precision were determined using serial bacterial dilutions. LOD was 46.9 digital copies (dcp)/ml for vanA and 60.8 dcp/ml for vanB. The assay showed excellent linearity between 4.7 × 101 and 3.5 × 105 dcp/ml (vanA) and 6.7 × 102 and 6.7 × 105 dcp/ml (vanB). Sensitivity was 100% for vanA and vanB, with high positive predictive value (PPV) for vanA (100%), but lower PPV for vanB (34.6%) likely due to the presence of vanB DNA positive anerobic bacteria in rectal swabs. Using the assay on enriched VRE broth vanB PPV increased to 87.2%. Quantification revealed median 2.0 × 104 dcp/ml in PCR positive but VRE culture negative samples and median 9.1 × 104 dcp/ml in VRE culture positive patients (maximum: 107 dcp/ml). The automated vanA/B_UTC assay can be used for vanA/vanB detection and quantification in different diagnostic settings and may support future clinical studies assessing the impact of bacterial load on risk of infection and transmission.

Current practice of screening and antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent Gram-negative bacterial infection in high-risk haematology patients: results from a pan-European survey

Background

Bacterial infections frequently occur in haematological patients, especially during prolonged neutropenia after intensive chemotherapy, often leading to bloodstream infections and pneumonia.

Objective

Routine antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) for high-risk haematology patients is still debated while prevalence of multi-drug resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) is rising globally. We aimed to assess the current practice of AMP in this population.

Design

Cross-sectional observational survey study.

Methods

Haematologists and infectious diseases physicians Europewide were invited to an online survey including questions on routine screening for GNB, incidence of MDR-GNB colonization, antimicrobial prophylaxis practices, rates of bloodstream infections (BSI), ICU admission and mortality differentiated by infections due to GNB versus MDR-GNB.

Results

120 haematology centres from 28 countries participated. Screening for MDR-GNB is performed in 86.7% of centres, mostly via rectal swabs (58.3%). In 39.2% of routine AMP is used, mostly with fluoroquinolones. Estimates of GNB-BSI yielded higher rates in patients not receiving anti-GNB prophylaxis than in those who do for E. coli (10% vs 7%) Klebsiella spp. (10% vs 5%), and Pseudomonas spp. (5% vs 4%). Rates for MDR-GNB infection were estimated lower in centres that administer AMP for MDR E. coli (5% vs 3%) Klebsiella spp. (5% vs 3%), and Pseudomonas spp. (2% vs 1%). In an exploratory analysis, Southern and Eastern European countries expected higher rates of MDR-GNB infections with lower ICU admission and mortality rates which may be subject to estimation bias.

Conclusion

Screening for MDR-GNB is frequently performed. AMP against GNB infections is still often implemented. Estimated BSI rates are rather low, while the rate of MDR-GNB infections rises. Tailored prophylaxis including antimicrobial stewardship becomes more important.

Impact of a new hospital with close to 100% single-occupancy rooms on environmental contamination and incidence of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium colonization or infection: a genomic surveillance study

BACKGROUND

Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) is a leading cause of nosocomial infection, driven by its ability to spread between patients and persist in the hospital environment.

AIM

To investigate the impact of a long-established cardiothoracic hospital moving to new premises with close to 100% single-occupancy rooms on the rates of environmental contamination and infection or colonization by VRE.

METHODS

Prospective environmental surveillance for VRE was conducted at five time-points between April and November 2019, once in the original building, and four times in the new building. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of VRE infection/colonization were determined for the one-year period before and after the hospital move, and compared to a nearby hospital.

FINDINGS

In the original location, the first environmental screen found 29% VRE positivity. The following four screens in the new location showed a significant reduction in positivity (1-6%; P<0.0001). The VRE infection/colonization rates were halved in the new location (IRR: 0.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.38-0.84), compared to the original location, contrasting with an increase in a nearby hospital (1.62; 1.17-2.27) over the same time-period. Genomic analysis of the environmental isolates was consistent with reduced transmission in the new hospital.

CONCLUSION

The use of single-occupancy rooms was associated with reduced environmental contamination with VRE, and lower transmission and isolation of VRE from clinical samples. The cost-effectiveness of single-occupancy room hospitals in reducing healthcare-associated infections should be reassessed in the context of operational costs of emerging pandemic and increasing antimicrobial resistance threats.

Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in hospital settings across European borders: a scoping review comparing the epidemiology in the Netherlands and Germany

The rising prevalence of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) is a matter of concern in hospital settings across Europe without a distinct geographical pattern. In this scoping review, we compared the epidemiology of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. in hospitals in the Netherlands and Germany, between 1991 and 2022. We searched PubMed and summarized the national antibiotic resistance surveillance data of the two countries. We included 46 studies and summarized national surveillance data from the NethMap in the Netherlands, the National Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance database in Germany, and the EARS-Net data. In total, 12 studies were conducted in hospitals in the Netherlands, 32 were conducted in German hospitals, and an additional two studies were conducted in a cross-border setting. The most significant difference between the two countries was that studies in Germany showed an increasing trend in the prevalence of VRE in hospitals, and no such trend was observed in studies in the Netherlands. Furthermore, in both Dutch and German hospitals, it has been revealed that the molecular epidemiology of VREfm has shifted from a predominance of vanA towards vanB over the years. According to national surveillance reports, vancomycin resistance in Enterococcus faecium clinical isolates fluctuates below 1% in Dutch hospitals, whereas it follows an increasing trend in German hospitals (above 20%), as supported by individual studies. This review demonstrates that VRE is more frequently encountered in German than in Dutch hospitals and discusses the underlying factors for the difference in VRE occurrence in these two neighboring countries by comparing differences in healthcare systems, infection prevention control (IPC) guidelines, and antibiotic use in the Netherlands and Germany.

Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium and the emergence of new Sequence Types associated with Hospital Infection

Enterococcus faecium is a major cause of vancomycin-resistant enterococcal (VRE) infection. New variants of the pathogen have emerged and become dominant in healthcare settings. Two such examples, vanB ST796 and vanA ST1421 sequence types, originally arose in Australia and proceeded to cause VRE outbreaks in other countries. Of concern is the detection of a vancomycin variable enterococcal (VVE) variant of ST1421 in Europe that exhibits a vancomycin-susceptible phenotype but which can revert to resistant in the presence of vancomycin. The recent application of genome sequencing for increasing our understanding of the evolution and spread of VRE is also explored here.

Impact of discontinuing isolation in a private room for patients infected or colonized with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) on the incidence of healthcare-associated VRE bacteraemia in a hospital with a predominantly shared-room setting

BACKGROUND

Isolating patients infected or colonized with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in a private room or cohort room to prevent hospital transmission is controversial.

AIM

To evaluate the effect of a relaxed isolation policy for VRE-infected or colonized patients on healthcare-associated (HA) VRE bacteraemia in an acute care hospital with a predominantly shared-room setting.

METHODS

The incidence of HA VRE bacteraemia was compared during a private isolation era (October 2014-September 2017), a cohort isolation era (October 2017-June 2020), and a no isolation era (July 2020-June 2022). Using Poisson regression modelling, an interrupted time-series analysis was conducted to analyse level changes and trends in incidences of HA VRE bacteraemia for each era.

FINDINGS

The proportion of VRE-infected or -colonized patients staying in shared rooms increased from 18.3% in the private isolation era to 82.6% in the no isolation era (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the incidences of HA VRE bacteraemia between the private isolation era and the cohort isolation era (relative risk: 1.01; 95% confidence interval: 0.52-1.98; P = 0.977) or between the cohort isolation era and the no isolation era (0.99; 0.77-1.26; P = 0.903). In addition, there was no significant slope increase in the incidence of HA VRE bacteraemia between any of the eras.

CONCLUSION

In a hospital with predominantly shared rooms, the relaxation of isolation policy did not result in increased HA VRE bacteraemia, when other infection control measures were maintained.

Effectiveness of patient and staff cohorting to reduce the risk of vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE) acquisition: a retrospective cohort study during a VRE outbreak in Japan

BACKGROUND

Patient and staff cohorting is part of a bundle approach in the response to multi-drug-resistant organisms, but its effectiveness is not fully clarified. This study compared the risks of acquiring vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREfm) at a hospital during a VREfm outbreak based on contact characteristics in order to better understand the effectiveness of cohorting.

METHODS

Exposure came from contact with patients with VREfm (infectors), including existing patients with VREfm and patients who acquired VREfm during the study period. Contact was defined as length of contact time, degree of sharing space, and care by the same nurses as those caring for infectors between January and March 2018. The outcome was VREfm acquisition as determined through monthly stool or rectal screening cultures. Incidence rates were calculated based on contact patterns, and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were compared.

FINDINGS

Among 272 inpatients (4038 patient-days), 43 patients acquired VREfm with the same or similar pulsotype. Incidence rates were 8.45 per 1000 patient-days when susceptible inpatients were on the same ward as an infector but cared for by different nurses (reference), 16.96 when susceptible inpatients were on the same ward as an infector and cared for by the same nurses [IRR 2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-10.28], and 52.91 when susceptible inpatients shared a room with an infector (IRR 6.26, 95% CI 1.61-35.40).

CONCLUSION

Compared with susceptible inpatients in a different room from infectors and not being cared for by the same nurses, the risk of VREfm acquisition could be six times higher for susceptible inpatients who are in the same room as infectors, and could be double for susceptible inpatients cared for by the same nurses as infectors.