Interventions to control nosocomial infections: study designs and statistical issues

Do Contact Precautions Reduce the Incidence of Intensive Care Unit-Acquired Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infections? The DPCPYO (Detection and Contact Precautions for Patients With P. aeruginosa) Cluster-Randomized Crossover Trial

BACKGROUND

The issue of contact precautions as contributory factors for reducing Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Pa) infections in intensive care units (ICUs) remains questioned. We evaluated the impact of the addition of contact precautions to standard precautions for Pa-positive patients on incidence of ICU-acquired Pa infections.

METHODS

In this multicenter, cluster-randomized crossover trial, 10 French ICUs were randomly assigned (1:1) to sequence 0-1 (6-month control period [CP]/3-month washout period/6-month intervention period [IP]) or sequence 1-0 (6-month IP/3-month washout period/6-month CP). A surveillance screening program for Pa was implemented. Competing-risks regression models were built with death and discharge without the occurrence of ICU-acquired Pa infection (the primary outcome) as competing events. Models were adjusted for within-ICU correlation and patient- and ICU-level covariates. The Simpson diversity index (SDI) and transmission index (TI) of Pa isolates were derived from pulsed-field gel electrophoresis typing.

RESULTS

Within recruited ICUs, the cumulative incidence and incidence rate of ICU-acquired Pa infections were 3.38% (55/1625) versus 3.44% (57/1658) and 3.31 versus 3.52 per 1000 patient-days at risk during the CP and IP, respectively. Multivariable models indicated that the intervention did not significantly change the cumulative incidence (subdistribution hazard ratio, .91; 95% confidence interval [CI], .49-1.67; P = .76) or rate (cause-specific hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, .71-2.63; P = .36) of the primary outcome. SDI and TI did not significantly differ between CP and IP.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of contact precautions to standard precautions for Pa-positive patients with a surveillance screening program does not significantly reduce ICU-acquired Pa infections in non-outbreak situations. Clinical Trials Registration. ISRCTN92710225.

Interventions to reduce infections caused by multidrug resistant Enterobacteriaceae (MDR-E): A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate different interventions to reduce multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (MDR-E) infection/colonization.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating interventions for prevention of MDR-E infection/colonization among hospitalized adult patients. The co-primary outcomes were mortality and MDR-E infections. PubMed, Cochrane library, and LILACS databases were searched up till December 2019, as well as grey literature sources. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Infection/colonization/acquisition outcomes were reported per patient-days as pooled incidence ratios (IRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Interrupted time series (ITS) analysis studies were reported separately.

RESULTS

Sixty-three studies were included, 16 RCTs, 33 observational studies, and 14 ITS. For the intervention of antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP), 23 studies were included. No differences in mortality or MDR-E infections were observed with ASP, however, MDR-E colonization was significantly reduced (IR 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.82). Seventeen studies examined decolonization without significant difference in outcomes. Other interventions were scarcely represented. Among 14 ITS publications, most evaluating ASP, 11 showed benefit of the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

ASP is an effective measure in preventing MDR-E colonization. Decolonization did not show significant benefit in reducing infection or colonization. Studies are needed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of ASP and assess bundles of interventions.

Design, implementation, and analysis considerations for cluster-randomized trials in infection control and hospital epidemiology: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

In cluster-randomized trials (CRT), groups rather than individuals are randomized to interventions. The aim of this study was to present critical design, implementation, and analysis issues to consider when planning a CRT in the healthcare setting and to synthesize characteristics of published CRT in the field of healthcare epidemiology.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify CRT with infection control outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified the following 7 epidemiological principles: (1) identify design type and justify the use of CRT; (2) account for clustering when estimating sample size and report intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)/coefficient of variation (CV); (3) obtain consent; (4) define level of inference; (5) consider matching and/or stratification; (6) minimize bias and/or contamination; and (7) account for clustering in the analysis. Among 44 included studies, the most common design was CRT with crossover (n = 15, 34%), followed by parallel CRT (n = 11, 25%) and stratified CRT (n = 7, 16%). Moreover, 22 studies (50%) offered justification for their use of CRT, and 20 studies (45%) demonstrated that they accounted for clustering at the design phase. Only 15 studies (34%) reported the ICC, CV, or design effect. Also, 15 studies (34%) obtained waivers of consent, and 7 (16%) sought consent at the cluster level. Only 17 studies (39%) matched or stratified at randomization, and 10 studies (23%) did not report efforts to mitigate bias and/or contamination. Finally, 29 studies (88%) accounted for clustering in their analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

We must continue to improve the design and reporting of CRT to better evaluate the effectiveness of infection control interventions in the healthcare setting.

Decontamination of Hospital Surfaces With Multijet Cold Plasma: A Method to Enhance Infection Prevention and Control?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of a multijet cold-plasma system and its efficacy in decontaminating 2 surfaces commonly found in hospitals

DESIGN

An in vitro study of common causes of healthcare-acquired infection

METHODS

Log10 9 cultures of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, extended spectrum β-lactamase–producing Escherichia coli, and Acinetobacter baumannii were applied to 5-cm2 sections of stainless steel and mattress. Human serum albumin (HSA) was used as a proxy marker for organic material, and atomic force microscopy (AFM) was used to study the impact on bacterial cell structure. The inoculated surfaces were exposed to a cold-air-plasma–generating multijet prototype for 15, 20, 30, and 45 seconds.

RESULTS

After 45 seconds, at least 3 to 4 log reductions were achieved for all bacteria on the mattress, while 3 to 6 log reductions were observed on stainless steel. The presence of HSA had no appreciable effect on bacterial eradication. The surfaces with bacteria exposed to AFM showed significant morphological changes indicative of “etching” due to the action of highly charged ions produced by the plasma.

CONCLUSION

This multijet cold-plasma prototype has the potential to augment current environmental decontamination approaches but needs further evaluation in a clinical setting to confirm its effectiveness.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1182–1187

Positive impact of infection prevention on the management of nosocomial outbreaks at an academic hospital

Aim: Infection prevention (IP) measures are vital to prevent (nosocomial) outbreaks. Financial evaluations of these are scarce. An incremental cost analysis for an academic IP unit was performed. Material & methods: On a yearly basis, we evaluated: IP measures; costs thereof; numbers of patients at risk for causing nosocomial outbreaks; predicted outbreak patients; and actual outbreak patients. Results: IP costs rose on average yearly with €150,000; however, more IP actions were undertaken. Numbers of patients colonized with high-risk microorganisms increased. The trend of actual outbreak patients remained stable. Predicted prevented outbreak patients saved costs, leading to a positive return on investment of 1.94. Conclusion: This study shows that investments in IP can prevent outbreak cases, thereby saving enough money to earn back these investments.

Stepped wedge cluster randomised trials: a review of the statistical methodology used and available

BACKGROUND

Previous reviews have focussed on the rationale for employing the stepped wedge design (SWD), the areas of research to which the design has been applied and the general characteristics of the design. However these did not focus on the statistical methods nor addressed the appropriateness of sample size methods used.This was a review of the literature of the statistical methodology used in stepped wedge cluster randomised trials.

METHODS

Literature Review. The Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were searched for methodological guides and RCTs which employed the stepped wedge design.

RESULTS

This review identified 102 trials which employed the stepped wedge design compared to 37 from the most recent review by Beard et al. 2015. Forty six trials were cohort designs and 45 % (n = 46) had fewer than 10 clusters. Of the 42 articles discussing the design methodology 10 covered analysis and seven covered sample size. For cohort stepped wedge designs there was only one paper considering analysis and one considering sample size methods. Most trials employed either a GEE or mixed model approach to analysis (n = 77) but only 22 trials (22 %) estimated sample size in a way which accounted for the stepped wedge design that was subsequently used.

CONCLUSIONS

Many studies which employ the stepped wedge design have few clusters but use methods of analysis which may require more clusters for unbiased and efficient intervention effect estimates. There is the need for research on the minimum number of clusters required for both types of stepped wedge design. Researchers should distinguish in the sample size calculation between cohort and cross sectional stepped wedge designs. Further research is needed on the effect of adjusting for the potential confounding of time on the study power.

Evaluating a new paradigm for comparing surface disinfection in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Despite an increasing understanding of the importance of near-patient surfaces in the transmission of healthcare-associated pathogens, there remains a need to define the relative clinical effectiveness of disinfection interventions.

DESIGN

A serial 2-phase evaluation of the clinical effectiveness of 2 surface disinfectants.

SETTING

A general acute care hospital.

METHODS

A unique system for quantifying bioburden reduction while monitoring the possible impact of differences in cleaning thoroughness was used to compare the clinical effectiveness of a traditional quaternary ammonium compound (QAC) and a novel peracetic acid/hydrogen peroxide disinfectant (ND) as part of terminal room cleaning.

RESULTS

As a result of QAC cleaning, 93 (40%) of 237 cleaned surfaces confirmed by fluorescent marker (DAZO) removal were found to have complete removal of aerobic bioburden. During the ND phase of the study, bioburden was removed from 211 (77%) of 274 cleaned surfaces. Because there was no difference in the thoroughness of cleaning with either disinfectant (65.3% and 66.4%), the significant ([Formula: see text]) difference in bioburden reduction can be attributed to better cleaning efficacy with the ND.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of the study design, the ND was 1.93 times more effective in removing bacterial burden than the QAC ([Formula: see text]). Furthermore, the study design represents a new research paradigm in which 2 interventions can be compared by concomitantly and objectively analyzing both the product and process variables in a manner that can be used to define the relative effectiveness of all disinfection cleaning interventions.