Linezolid may be an option for severe group A Streptococcus (GAS) infections based on its potent in vitro activity and antitoxin effects, but clinical data supporting its use over clindamycin are limited. This study evaluated treatment outcomes in patients with severe GAS skin and soft tissue infections who received either linezolid or clindamycin. This retrospective single-center cohort study examined patients with GAS isolated from blood and/or tissue cultures with invasive soft tissue infection or necrotizing fasciitis who underwent surgical debridement and received linezolid or clindamycin for at least 48 hours. The primary outcome was percentage change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score from baseline through 72 hours of hospitalization. After adjustment for time to first surgical intervention among patients with a baseline SOFA score >0 (n = 23 per group), there was no difference in reduction of SOFA score over the first 72 hours in patients receiving clindamycin vs linezolid. In the entire cohort (n = 26, clindamycin; n = 29, linezolid), there was no difference in inpatient mortality (2% vs 1%) or any secondary outcomes, including duration of vasopressor therapy, intensive care unit length of stay, and antibiotic-associated adverse drug events. There was no difference in reduction of critical illness as measured by SOFA score between baseline and 72 hours among patients treated with clindamycin vs linezolid. Given its more favorable side effect profile, linezolid may be a viable option for the treatment of serious GAS infections and should be further studied.

Background Hospital-onset bacteraemia and fungaemia (HOB) is being explored as a surveillance and quality metric. The objectives of the current study were to determine sources and preventability of HOB in hospitalised patients in the USA and to identify factors associated with perceived preventability. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study of HOB events at 10 academic and three community hospitals using structured chart review. HOB was defined as a blood culture on or after hospital day 4 with growth of one or more bacterial or fungal organisms. HOB events were stratified by commensal and non-commensal organisms. Medical resident physicians, infectious disease fellows or infection preventionists reviewed charts to determine HOB source, and infectious disease physicians with training in infection prevention/hospital epidemiology rated preventability from 1 to 6 (1=definitely preventable to 6=definitely not preventable) using a structured guide. Ratings of 1–3 were collectively considered ‘potentially preventable’ and 4–6 ‘potentially not preventable’. Results Among 1789 HOB events with non-commensal organisms, gastrointestinal (including neutropenic translocation) (35%) and endovascular (32%) were the most common sources. Overall, 636/1789 (36%) non-commensal and 238/320 (74%) commensal HOB events were rated potentially preventable. In logistic regression analysis among non-commensal HOB events, events attributed to intravascular catheter-related infection, indwelling urinary catheter-related infection and surgical site infection had higher odds of being rated preventable while events with neutropenia, immunosuppression, gastrointestinal sources, polymicrobial cultures and previous positive blood culture in the same admission had lower odds of being rated preventable, compared with events without those attributes. Of 636 potentially preventable non-commensal HOB events, 47% were endovascular in origin, followed by gastrointestinal, respiratory and urinary sources; approximately 40% of those events would not be captured through existing healthcare-associated infection surveillance. Discussion Factors identified as associated with higher or lower preventability should be used to guide inclusion, exclusion and risk adjustment for an HOB-related quality metric.

Background: Contact precautions for endemic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) are a resource-intensive intervention to reduce healthcare-associated infections, potentially impeding patient throughput and limiting bed availability to isolate other contagious pathogens. We investigated the impact of the discontinuation of contact precautions (DcCP) for endemic MRSA and VRE on patient outcomes and operations metrics in an acute care setting. Methods: This is a retrospective, quasi-experimental analysis of the 12 months before and after DcCP for MRSA and VRE at an academic medical centre. The frequency for bed closures due to contact isolation was measured, and personal protective equipment (PPE) expenditures and patient satisfaction survey results were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Using an interrupted time series design, emergency department (ED) admission wait times and rates of patient falls, pressure ulcers and nosocomial MRSA and VRE clinical isolates were compared using GEEs. Results: Prior to DcCP, bed closures for MRSA and/or VRE isolation were associated with estimated lost hospital charges of $9383 per 100 bed days (95% CI: 8447 to 10 318). No change in ED wait times or change in trend was observed following DcCP. There were significant reductions in monthly expenditures on gowns (−61.0%) and gloves (−16.3%). Patient satisfaction survey results remained stable. No significant changes in rates or trends were observed for patient falls or pressure ulcers. Incidence rates of nosocomial MRSA (1.58 (95% CI: 0.82 to 3.04)) and VRE (1.02 (95% CI: 0.82 to 1.27)) did not significantly change. Conclusions: DcCP was associated with an increase in bed availability and revenue recovery, and a reduction in PPE expenditures. Benefits for other hospital operations metrics and patient outcomes were not identified.

A hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia (HOB) metric will expand hospital surveillance of bloodstream infections beyond current state and provide an opportunity to re-evaluate infection prevention strategies. Here we consider the added value and potential pitfalls of HOB surveillance and present a framework for the standardized assessment of HOB events.

Clinicians and infection control (IC) experts have raised concerns about the validity and impact of public reporting of health care–associated infection (HAI) on clinical care.^1,2 Time spent collecting, processing, and responding to publicly reported HAIs may limit other IC activities and patient safety.¹ We conducted a survey of US IC experts to evaluate perceptions of commonly reported HAI measures.

Objective: To assess preventability of hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia (HOB), we developed and evaluated a structured rating guide accounting for intrinsic patient and extrinsic healthcare-related risks.Design: HOB preventability rating guide was compared against a reference standard expert panel.Participants: A 10-member panel of clinical experts was assembled as the standard of preventability assessment, and 2 physician reviewers applied the rating guide for comparison.Methods: The expert panel independently rated 82 hypothetical HOB scenarios using a 6-point Likert scale collapsed into 3 categories: preventable, uncertain, or not preventable. Consensus was defined as concurrence on the same category among ≥70% experts. Scenarios without consensus were deliberated and followed by a second round of rating.Two reviewers independently applied the rating guide to adjudicate the same 82 scenarios in 2 rounds, with interim revisions. Interrater reliability was evaluated using the κ (kappa) statistic.Results: Expert panel consensus criteria were met for 52 scenarios (63%) after 2 rounds.After 2 rounds, guide-based rating matched expert panel consensus in 40 of 52 (77%) and 39 of 52 (75%) cases for reviewers 1 and 2, respectively. Agreement rates between the 2 reviewers were 84% overall (κ, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64–0.88]) and 87% (κ, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65–0.94) for the 52 scenarios with expert consensus.Conclusions: Preventability ratings of HOB scenarios by 2 reviewers using a rating guide matched expert consensus in most cases with moderately high interreviewer reliability. Although diversity of expert opinions and uncertainty of preventability merit further exploration, this is a step toward standardized assessment of HOB preventability.