Hepatitis C virus transmission in a skilled nursing facility, North Dakota, 2013

Effective infection prevention and control measures in long-term care facilities in non-outbreak and outbreak settings: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Healthcare-associated infections in long-term care are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. While infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines are well-defined in the acute care setting, evidence of effectiveness for long-term care facilities (LTCF) is missing. We therefore performed a systematic literature review to examine the effect of IPC measures in the long-term care setting.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and Cochrane libraries for articles evaluating the effect of IPC measures in the LTCF setting since 2017, as earlier reviews on this topic covered the timeframe up to this date. Cross-referenced studies from identified articles and from mentioned earlier reviews were also evaluated. We included randomized-controlled trials, quasi-experimental, observational studies, and outbreak reports. The included studies were analyzed regarding study design, type of intervention, description of intervention, outcomes and quality. We distinguished between non-outbreak and outbreak settings.

RESULTS

We included 74 studies, 34 (46%) in the non-outbreak setting and 40 (54%) in the outbreak setting. The most commonly studied interventions in the non-outbreak setting included the effect of hand hygiene (N = 10), oral hygiene (N = 6), antimicrobial stewardship (N = 4), vaccination of residents (N = 3), education (N = 2) as well as IPC bundles (N = 7). All but one study assessing hand hygiene interventions reported a reduction of infection rates. Further successful interventions were oral hygiene (N = 6) and vaccination of residents (N = 3). In outbreak settings, studies mostly focused on the effects of IPC bundles (N = 24) or mass testing (N = 11). In most of the studies evaluating an IPC bundle, containment of the outbreak was reported. Overall, only four articles (5.4%) were rated as high quality.

CONCLUSION

In the non-outbreak setting in LTCF, especially hand hygiene and oral hygiene have a beneficial effect on infection rates. In contrast, IPC bundles, as well as mass testing seem to be promising in an outbreak setting.

Meta-analysis: risk of hepatitis C virus infection associated with hospital-based invasive procedures

BACKGROUND

Healthcare settings, where invasive procedures are frequently performed, may play an important role in the transmission dynamics of blood-borne pathogens when compliance with infection control precautions is suboptimal.

AIMS

To understand and quantify the role of hospital-based invasive procedures on hepatitis C virus (HCV) transmission.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify recent studies reporting association measures of HCV infection risk that are linked to iatrogenic procedures. Based on expert opinion, invasive procedures were categorised into 10 groups for which pooled measures were calculated. Finally, the relationship between pooled measures and the country-level HCV prevalence or the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) index was assessed by meta-regression.

RESULTS

We included 71 studies in the analysis. The most frequently evaluated procedures were blood transfusion (66 measures) and surgery (43 measures). The pooled odds ratio (OR) of HCV infection varied widely, ranging from 1.46 (95% confidence interval: 1.14-1.88) for dental procedures to 3.22 (1.7-6.11) for transplantation. The OR for blood transfusion was higher for transfusions performed before 1998 (3.77, 2.42-5.88) than for those without a specified/recent date (2.20, 1.77-2.75). In procedure-specific analyses, the HCV infection risk was significantly negatively associated with the HAQ for endoscopy and positively associated with HCV prevalence for endoscopy and surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Various invasive procedures were significantly associated with HCV infection. Our results provide a ranking of procedures in terms of HCV risk that may be used for prioritisation of infection control interventions, especially in high HCV prevalence settings.

Outbreak of hepatitis B and hepatitis C virus infections associated with a cardiology clinic, West Virginia, 2012-2014

OBJECTIVE

To stop transmission of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections in association with myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) at a cardiology clinic.

DESIGN

Outbreak investigation and quasispecies analysis of HCV hypervariable region 1 genome.

SETTING

Outpatient cardiology clinic.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing MPI.

METHODS

Case patients met definitions for HBV or HCV infection. Cases were identified through surveillance registry cross-matching against clinic records and serological screening. Observations of clinic practices were performed.

RESULTS

During 2012-2014, 7 cases of HCV and 4 cases of HBV occurred in 4 distinct clusters among patients at a cardiology clinic. Among 3 case patients with HCV infection who had MPI on June 25, 2014, 2 had 98.48% genetic identity of HCV RNA. Among 4 case patients with HCV infection who had MPI on March 13, 2014, 3 had 96.96%-99.24% molecular identity of HCV RNA. Also, 2 clusters of 2 patients each with HBV infection had MPI on March 7, 2012, and December 4, 2014. Clinic staff reused saline vials for >1 patient. No infection control breaches were identified at the compounding pharmacy that supplied the clinic. Patients seen in clinic through March 27, 2015, were encouraged to seek testing for HBV, HCV, and human immunodeficiency virus. The clinic switched to all single-dose medications and single-use intravenous flushes on March 27, 2015, and no further cases were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

This prolonged healthcare-associated outbreak of HBV and HCV was most likely related to breaches in injection safety. Providers should follow injection safety guidelines in all practice settings.

Hepatitis C outbreak in a respiratory care ward associated with frequent injections: Taiwan, 2017

BACKGROUND

Healthcare-associated outbreaks of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection pose serious risks of harm to patients. During May-July 2017, the Taiwan Centers for Disease Control were notified of four patients with acute HCV infection in a respiratory care ward (RCW). To prevent further infection, an investigation was conducted to identify the transmission route and risk factors for infection.

METHODS

We tested patients and staff members of the RCW for HCV, reviewed medical records, observed infection control practices on-site, and undertook a case-control study. We defined cases as individuals who had stayed in the RCW 2 weeks to 6 months prior to the laboratory diagnosis date of the first case and were infected with HCV after admission. Patients who were hospitalized during the same period but whose HCV tests were negative were selected as controls. We used Mann-Whitney U test to compare the frequency of injections among cases and controls.

RESULTS

Of 19 staff and 29 patients, we identified four case-patients and one patient with chronic hepatitis C whose HCV RNA similarity was >98%. Compared to the 12 controls, the case-patients received more injections per day (4.4 vs. 0.1; p = 0.01). The RCW lacked designated areas and standardized workflows for injection preparation. Disinfection of the environment and equipment was inadequate, which could possibly lead to blood contamination of the environment and parenteral medications.

CONCLUSION

HCV infection was associated with frequent injections and infection control lapses. Healthcare workers should follow safe injection practices and reduce injection frequency to prevent HCV transmission.

A systematic review on the causes of the transmission and control measures of outbreaks in long-term care facilities: Back to basics of infection control

BACKGROUND

The unique characteristics of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) including host factors and living conditions contribute to the spread of contagious pathogens. Control measures are essential to interrupt the transmission and to manage outbreaks effectively.

AIM

The aim of this systematic review was to verify the causes and problems contributing to transmission and to identify control measures during outbreaks in LTCFs.

METHODS

Four electronic databases were searched for articles published from 2007 to 2018. Articles written in English reporting outbreaks in LTCFs were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the risk-of-bias assessment tool for nonrandomized studies.

FINDINGS

A total of 37 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. The most commonly reported single pathogen was influenza virus, followed by group A streptococcus (GAS). Of the studies that identified the cause, about half of them noted outbreaks transmitted via person-to-person. Suboptimal infection control practice including inadequate decontamination and poor hand hygiene was the most frequently raised issue propagating transmission. Especially, lapses in specific care procedures were linked with outbreaks of GAS and hepatitis B and C viruses. About 60% of the included studies reported affected cases among staff, but only a few studies implemented work restriction during outbreaks.

CONCLUSIONS

This review indicates that the violation of basic infection control practice could be a major role in introducing and facilitating the spread of contagious diseases in LTCFs. It shows the need to promote compliance with basic practices of infection control to prevent outbreaks in LTCFs.

Nosocomial transmission of hepatitis C virus in a liver transplant center in Hong Kong: implication of reusable blood collection tube holder as the vehicle for transmission

BACKGROUND

A liver transplant recipient developed hospital-acquired symptomatic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 6a infection 14 months post transplant.

OBJECTIVE

Standard outbreak investigation.

METHODS

Patient chart review, interviews of patients and staff, observational study of patient care practices, environmental surveillance, blood collection simulation experiments, and phylogenetic study of HCV strains using partial envelope gene sequences (E1-E2) of HCV genotype 6a strains from the suspected source patient, the environment, and the index patient were performed.

RESULTS

Investigations and data review revealed no further cases of HCV genotype 6a infection in the transplant unit. However, a suspected source with a high HCV load was identified. HCV genotype 6a was found in a contaminated reusable blood-collection tube holder with barely visible blood and was identified as the only shared item posing risk of transmission to the index case patient. Also, 14 episodes of sequential blood collection from the source patient and the index case patient were noted on the computerized time log of the laboratory barcoding system during their 13 days of cohospitalization in the liver transplant ward. Disinfection of the tube holders was not performed after use between patients. Blood collection simulation experiments showed that HCV and technetium isotope contaminating the tip of the sleeve capping the sleeved-needle can reflux back from the vacuum-specimen tube side to the patient side.

CONCLUSIONS

A reusable blood-collection tube holder without disinfection between patients can cause a nosocomial HCV infection. Single-use disposable tube holders should be used according to the recommendations by Occupational Safety and Health Administration and World Health Organization.

Forum for Injection Technique and Therapy Expert Recommendations, India: The Indian Recommendations for Best Practice in Insulin Injection Technique, 2017

Health-care professionals in India frequently manage injection or infusion therapies in persons with diabetes (PWD). Patients taking insulin should know the importance of proper needle size, correct injection process, complication avoidance, and all other aspects of injection technique from the first visit onward. To assist health-care practitioners in their clinical practice, Forum for Injection Technique and Therapy Expert Recommendations, India, has updated the practical advice and made it more comprehensive evidence-based best practice information. Adherence to these updated recommendations, learning, and translating them into clinical practice should lead to effective therapies, improved outcomes, and lower costs for PWD.

Infection prevention outside of the acute care setting: Results from the MegaSurvey of infection preventionists

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been a significant shift of health care delivery to nonacute care settings. However, research on staffing and resources dedicated to infection prevention and control (IPC) in these settings is lacking.

METHODS

The data for this analysis come from the 2015 APIC MegaSurvey. Descriptive statistics were computed to describe infection preventionists (IPs) employed in nonacute care settings. Bivariate analyses were conducted to examine differences in facility and demographic characteristics by type of nonacute care setting.

RESULTS

In total, 861 IPs represented ambulatory surgical centers (33%), long-term care facilities (23%), long-term acute care facilities (20%), inpatient behavioral or mental health care (12%), clinic or outpatient services (10%), and home health care (3%). Few (15%) were Certified in Infection Control. Most (58%) reported that less than half of their job was officially dedicated to IPC. On average, respondents reported spending the largest proportion of their time on surveillance and epidemiologic investigation (19%). IPs lacked support for secretarial functions (23%), data management (14%), and electronic medical records (32%). IPC activities, staffing, and resources differed significantly by type of nonacute care facility.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that resources directed to IPC in nonacute care settings may be lacking and identifies important areas for IPC education and program improvement. Research is needed to further examine staffing and IPC resources in these settings, which represent unique challenges to infection prevention and control.