2 results
Application of an Outpatient CLABSI Surveillance Definition: Results and Lessons From 7 Infusion Clinics
- Keenan Williamson, Chad Douglas Nix, Molly Hale,
-
- Journal:
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology / Volume 41 / Issue S1 / October 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 November 2020, p. s124
- Print publication:
- October 2020
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Background: The NHSN does not have a published surveillance definition for central-line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) related to healthcare in ambulatory settings. With the increasing reliance on services involving central-line care in the ambulatory setting, there is opportunity to improve healthcare performance by developing standardized surveillance. Methods: Chart review was performed on 320 patients who had a visit at an infusion clinic and a positive blood culture in 2018. A qualifying infusion clinic visit involved accessing of the central line during the encounter. Ambulatory-associated cases were defined as having a qualifying infusion clinic encounter within 7 days prior to blood culture collection. Cases were excluded if the patient’s central line had been accessed in an inpatient setting between the positive blood culture and infusion clinic visit. All other criteria were based on the NHSN inpatient CLABSI case definition. Results: Application of the proposed surveillance definition revealed 17 of 320 (5.3%) patients who met criteria for an ambulatory CLABSI. All 16 patients who met criteria (94%) had an inpatient hospital stay within 7 days of the qualifying infusion clinic encounter, for an average of 8.8 hospital days (range, 2–20). Positive blood cultures were collected on average 3.2 days after the patient’s qualifying infusion clinic encounter (range, 0–7). Moreover, 20 causative organisms were identified: 6 common commensals, 2 Staphylococcus aureus, and 12 gram-negative bacteria. Also, positive blood cultures for 7 patients (41%) were collected in ambulatory clinics. Patients reported symptom onset on average 1.2 days prior to telling a healthcare professional (range, 0–5) and an average of 2 days from their last qualifying infusion clinic visit (range, 0–6). In addition, 1 patient (6%) met for a site-specific infection outside of the defined window period during their subsequent admission. Conclusions: Application of the surveillance definition resulted in the identification of 17 CLABSIs. These results highlight important limitations in ambulatory CLABSI surveillance: Patients who access emergency services closer to their residence may have had their bloodstream infection (BSI) identified elsewhere. Ensuring comprehensive interfacility communication would increase the value of an institution’s surveillance. Additionally, ambulatory surveillance for BSI should include all possible collection locations. Although subject to recall bias, the event date could be based on symptom onset to allow for variation in healthcare-seeking behavior. In the ambulatory setting, because diagnostics are not readily available, delayed diagnosis of site-specific infections could result in an inflated ambulatory CLABSI rate.
Funding: None
Disclosures: None
Investigation of Pansusceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa Meningitis Cases in Patients With External Ventricular Devices
- Yoojin Kim, Carmen Cortes-Ramos, Chad Douglas Nix, Lauren Ogden, Molly Hale, John Townes
-
- Journal:
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology / Volume 41 / Issue S1 / October 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 November 2020, p. s306
- Print publication:
- October 2020
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Background: During a 2-month period at an academic medical system, 4 cases of pansusceptible P. aeruginosa (PsA) meningitis were identified among neuroscience intensive care unit (NSICU) patients with an external ventricular device (EVD). Methods: We reviewed microbiology data for the previous 2 years to determine background PsA rates and to identify additional cases of PsA meningitis. A case was defined as the isolation of PsA from a CSF specimen. We convened a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders to review medical records of case patients and to conduct a series of observational rounds. Scalp swab specimens were collected from NSICU patients to detect possible skin colonization. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analyses were performed on PsA isolates from the 4 case patients and 5 patients with PsA isolates from other body sites. Results: There was no hospital-wide increase in PsA incidence, and no patient without an EVD had PsA cultured from CSF. Infections occurred, on average, 10 days (range, 6–15 days) after EVD insertion. Cases were geographically dispersed in the NSICU and did not share common staff. None of the PsA isolates were genetically related and all scalp cultures were negative. Observations included multiple opportunities for contact with water sources: sinks in proximity to the head of the bed, storage of supplies next to sinks, reuse of bath basins, and use of dilute peroxide to clean surgical wounds. Multiuse shampoos, conditioners and lotions, not approved for hospital use, were found on the unit. Furthermore, 3 of 4 patients received cefazolin >24 hours after 6 of their 7 neurosurgeries for an average of 4.7 days (range, 0.8–4 days). Care practices were changed to mitigate contact between EVD sites and environmental water sources, and extended cefazolin surgical prophylaxis was discontinued. EVD practices were revised, and clinical teams had their competency confirmed. No additional cases have been identified in the 16 months following these interventions. Conclusions: This cluster of EVD infections was likely caused by patient care practices that resulted in independent introductions of PsA from multiple nonsterile or contaminated water sources. Antibiotic selection of PsA by extended use of cefazolin perioperative prophylaxis may have also contributed. EVD care practices should be designed to limit contact between and EVD insertion sites and nonsterile water sources or potentially contaminated care supplies. To substantiate performance improvement efforts and ensure interinstitutional comparability, a practical, standardized EVD-associated infection surveillance definition is needed.
Funding: None
Disclosures: None