3 results
Precision Infection Prevention (PIP) as a New Standard of Practice Within Longitudinal Infection Prevention and Surveillance
- Donald Chen, Moira Quinn, Rita M. Sussner, Teresa Rowland, Georgeta Rinck, Sophie Labrecque, Lynda Mack, Barbara Clones, Guiqing Wang, Melissa Chanza, Weihua Huang, Corey Scurlock, Christian D. Becker, Alan J. Doty, Judy L. Ashworth, Mary M. Fortunato-Habib, Brian E. Wong, Devon J. Holler, Kyle Hansen, Amir Abdolahi, Juan J. Carmona, Brian D. Gross
-
- Journal:
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology / Volume 41 / Issue S1 / October 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 November 2020, pp. s449-s450
- Print publication:
- October 2020
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Background: Infection prevention and control (IPC) workflows are often retrospective and manual. New tools, however, have entered the field to facilitate rapid prospective monitoring of infections in hospitals. Although artificial intelligence (AI)–enabled platforms facilitate timely, on-demand integration of clinical data feeds with pathogen whole-genome sequencing (WGS), a standardized workflow to fully harness the power of such tools is lacking. We report a novel, evidence-based workflow that promotes quicker infection surveillance via AI-assisted clinical and WGS data analysis. The algorithm suggests clusters based on a combination of similar minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) data, timing of sample collection, and shared location stays between patients. It helps to proactively guide IPC professionals during investigation of infectious outbreaks and surveillance of multidrug-resistant organisms and healthcare-acquired infections. Methods: Our team established a 1-year workgroup comprised of IPC practitioners, clinical experts, and scientists in the field. We held weekly roundtables to study lessons learned in an ongoing surveillance effort at a tertiary care hospital—utilizing Philips IntelliSpace Epidemiology (ISEpi), an AI-powered system—to understand how such a tool can enhance practice. Based on real-time case discussions and evidence from the literature, a workflow guidance tool and checklist were codified. Results: In our workflow, data-informed clusters posed by ISEpi underwent triage and expert follow-up analysis to assess: (1) likelihood of transmission(s); (2) potential vector(s) identity; (3) need to request WGS; and (4) intervention(s) to be pursued, if warranted. In a representative sample (spanning October 17, 2019, to November 7, 2019) of 67 total isolates suggested for inclusion in 19 unique cluster investigations, we determined that 9 investigations merited follow-up. Collectively, these 9 investigations involved 21 patients and required 115 minutes to review in ISEpi and an additional 70 minutes of review outside of ISEpi. After review, 6 investigations were deemed unlikely to represent a transmission; the other 3 had potential to represent transmission for which interventions would be performed. Conclusions: This study offers an important framework for adaptation of existing infection control workflow strategies to leverage the utility of rapidly integrated clinical and WGS data. This workflow can also facilitate time-sensitive decisions regarding sequencing of specific pathogens given the preponderance of available clinical data supporting investigations. In this regard, our work sets a new standard of practice: precision infection prevention (PIP). Ongoing effort is aimed at development of AI-powered capabilities for enterprise-level quality and safety improvement initiatives.
Funding: Philips Healthcare provided support for this study.
Disclosures: Alan Doty and Juan Jose Carmona report salary from Philips Healthcare.
Accuracy of Infection Control Surveillance in Identifying Genomically Confirmed Cross Transmission Clusters
- Kyle Hansen, Richard T. Ellison, Doyle V. Ward, Devon J. Holler, Judy L. Ashworth, Mary M. Fortunato-Habib, Juan J. Carmona, Brian D. Gross
-
- Journal:
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology / Volume 41 / Issue S1 / October 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 November 2020, pp. s439-s440
- Print publication:
- October 2020
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Background: Infection prevention surveillance for cross transmission is often performed by manual review of microbiologic culture results to identify geotemporally related clusters. However, the sensitivity and specificity of this approach remains uncertain. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) analysis can help provide a gold-standard for identifying cross-transmission events. Objective: We employed a published WGS program, the Philips IntelliSpace Epidemiology platform, to compare accuracy of two surveillance methods: (i.) a virtual infection practitioner (VIP) with perfect recall and automated analysis of antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST), sample collection timing, and patient location data and (ii) a novel clinical matching (CM) algorithm that provides cluster suggestions based on a nuanced weighted analysis of AST data, timing of sample collection, and shared location stays between patients. Methods: WGS was performed routinely on inpatient and emergency department isolates of Enterobacter cloacae, Enterococcus faecium, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa at an academic medical center. Single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) were compared within core genome regions on a per-species basis to determine cross-transmission clusters. Moreover, one unique strain per patient was included within each analysis, and duplicates were excluded from the final results. Results: Between May 2018 and April 2019, clinical data from 121 patients were paired with WGS data from 28 E. cloacae, 21 E. faecium, 61 K. pneumoniae, and 46 P. aeruginosa isolates. Previously published SNV relatedness thresholds were applied to define genomically related isolates. Mapping of genomic relatedness defined clusters as follows: 4 patients in 2 E. faecium clusters and 2 patients in 1 P. aeruginosa cluster. The VIP method identified 12 potential clusters involving 28 patients, all of which were “pseudoclusters.” Importantly, the CM method identified 7 clusters consisting of 27 patients, which included 1 true E. faecium cluster of 2 patients with genomically related isolates. Conclusions: In light of the WGS data, all of the potential clusters identified by the VIP were pseudoclusters, lacking sufficient genomic relatedness. In contrast, the CM method showed increased sensitivity and specificity: it decreased the percentage of pseudoclusters by 14% and it identified a related genomic cluster of E. faecium. These findings suggest that integrating clinical data analytics and WGS is likely to benefit institutions in limiting expenditure of resources on pseudoclusters. Therefore, WGS combined with more sophisticated surveillance approaches, over standard methods as modeled by the VIP, are needed to better identify and address true cross-transmission events.
Funding: This study was supported by Philips Healthcare.
Disclosures: None
Contributors
-
- By Kyle Adams, Regina N. Bradley, Richard Bramwell, Brenna Reinhart Byrd, Christopher Deis, Mike D’Errico, Sujatha Fernandes, Travis L. Gosa, Kjetil Falkenberg Hansen, Geoff Harkness, Anthony Kwame Harrison, Adam Haupt, Michael P. Jeffries, Imani Kai Johnson, Loren Kajikawa, Oliver Kautny, Noriko Manabe, Ivor Miller, Ali Colleen Neff, Nicole Hodges Persley, Alice Price-Styles, Amanda Sewell, Chris Tabron, Justin A. Williams, Christina Zanfagna
- Edited by Justin A. Williams, University of Bristol
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Companion to Hip-Hop
- Published online:
- 05 February 2015
- Print publication:
- 12 February 2015, pp xii-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation