Dataset Information

Characterization of Bacterial and Fungal Infections in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Factors Associated With Health Care-Associated Infections.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at increased risk of health care-associated infections (HAIs), especially with prolonged hospital stays. We sought to identify incidence, antimicrobial susceptibilities, and outcomes associated with bacterial/fungal secondary infections in a large cohort of patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We evaluated adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 2 March and 31 May 2020 and hospitalized >24 hours. Data extracted from medical records included diagnoses, vital signs, laboratory results, microbiological data, and antibiotic use. Microbiologically confirmed bacterial and fungal pathogens from clinical cultures were evaluated to characterize community- and health care-associated infections, including describing temporal changes in predominant organisms on presentation and throughout hospitalization. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate risk factors for HAIs.

Results

A total of 3028 patients were included and accounted for 899 positive clinical cultures. Overall, 516 (17%) patients with positive cultures met criteria for infection. Community-associated coinfections were identified in 183 (6%) patients, whereas HAIs occurred in 350 (12%) patients. Fifty-seven percent of HAIs were caused by gram-negative bacteria and 19% by fungi. Antibiotic resistance increased with longer hospital stays, with incremental increases in the proportion of vancomycin resistance among enterococci and ceftriaxone and carbapenem resistance among Enterobacterales. Intensive care unit stay, invasive mechanical ventilation, and steroids were associated with HAIs.

Conclusions

HAIs occur in a small proportion of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and are most often caused by gram-negative and fungal pathogens. Antibiotic resistance is more prevalent with prolonged hospital stays. Antimicrobial stewardship is imperative in this population to minimize unnecessary broad-spectrum antibiotic use.

SUBMITTER: Kubin CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8135866 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic dramatically increased the number of patients requiring treatment in an intensive care unit or invasive mechanical ventilation worldwide. Delirium is a well-known neuropsychiatric complication of patients with acute respiratory diseases, representing the most frequent clinical expression of acute brain dysfunction in critically ill patients, especially in those undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, delirium incidence ranges from 11% to 80%, depending on the studied population and hospital setting.ObjectiveTo determine risk factors for the development of delirium in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.MethodsWe retrospectively studied consecutive hospitalized adult (≥18 y) patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia from March 15 to July 15, 2020, in a tertiary-care hospital in Mexico City. Delirium was assessed by the attending physician or trained nurse, with either the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit or the Confusion Assessment Method brief version, according to the appropriate diagnostic tool for each hospital setting. Consultation-liaison psychiatrists and neurologists confirmed all diagnoses. We calculated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a Cox proportional-hazards regression model.ResultsWe studied 1017 (64.2% men; median age, 54 y; interquartile range 44-64), of whom 166 (16.3%) developed delirium (hyperactive in 75.3%); 78.9% of our delirium cases were detected in patients under invasive mechanical ventilation. The median of days from admission to diagnosis was 14 (interquartile range 8-21) days. Unadjusted mortality rates between delirium and no delirium groups were similar (23.3% vs. 24.1; risk ratio 0.962, 95% CI 0.70-1.33). Age (aHR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.04; P = 0.006), an initial neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio ≥9 (aHR 1.81, 95% CI 1.23-2.65; P = 0.003), and requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation (aHR 3.39, 95% CI 1.47-7.84; P = 0.004) were independent risk factors for in-hospital delirium development.ConclusionsDelirium is a common in-hospital complication of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, associated with disease severity; given the extensive number of active COVID-19 cases worldwide, it is essential to detect patients who are most likely to develop delirium during hospitalization. Improving its preventive measures may reduce the risk of the long-term cognitive and functional sequelae associated with this neuropsychiatric complication.

Project description:ImportanceHealth care workers exposed to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) could be psychologically stressed.ObjectiveTo assess the magnitude of mental health outcomes and associated factors among health care workers treating patients exposed to COVID-19 in China.Design, settings, and participantsThis cross-sectional, survey-based, region-stratified study collected demographic data and mental health measurements from 1257 health care workers in 34 hospitals from January 29, 2020, to February 3, 2020, in China. Health care workers in hospitals equipped with fever clinics or wards for patients with COVID-19 were eligible.Main outcomes and measuresThe degree of symptoms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and distress was assessed by the Chinese versions of the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the 7-item Insomnia Severity Index, and the 22-item Impact of Event Scale-Revised, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with mental health outcomes.ResultsA total of 1257 of 1830 contacted individuals completed the survey, with a participation rate of 68.7%. A total of 813 (64.7%) were aged 26 to 40 years, and 964 (76.7%) were women. Of all participants, 764 (60.8%) were nurses, and 493 (39.2%) were physicians; 760 (60.5%) worked in hospitals in Wuhan, and 522 (41.5%) were frontline health care workers. A considerable proportion of participants reported symptoms of depression (634 [50.4%]), anxiety (560 [44.6%]), insomnia (427 [34.0%]), and distress (899 [71.5%]). Nurses, women, frontline health care workers, and those working in Wuhan, China, reported more severe degrees of all measurements of mental health symptoms than other health care workers (eg, median [IQR] Patient Health Questionnaire scores among physicians vs nurses: 4.0 [1.0-7.0] vs 5.0 [2.0-8.0]; P = .007; median [interquartile range {IQR}] Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale scores among men vs women: 2.0 [0-6.0] vs 4.0 [1.0-7.0]; P < .001; median [IQR] Insomnia Severity Index scores among frontline vs second-line workers: 6.0 [2.0-11.0] vs 4.0 [1.0-8.0]; P < .001; median [IQR] Impact of Event Scale-Revised scores among those in Wuhan vs those in Hubei outside Wuhan and those outside Hubei: 21.0 [8.5-34.5] vs 18.0 [6.0-28.0] in Hubei outside Wuhan and 15.0 [4.0-26.0] outside Hubei; P < .001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed participants from outside Hubei province were associated with lower risk of experiencing symptoms of distress compared with those in Wuhan (odds ratio [OR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.88; P = .008). Frontline health care workers engaged in direct diagnosis, treatment, and care of patients with COVID-19 were associated with a higher risk of symptoms of depression (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.11-2.09; P = .01), anxiety (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.22-2.02; P < .001), insomnia (OR, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.92-4.60; P < .001), and distress (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.25-2.04; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this survey of heath care workers in hospitals equipped with fever clinics or wards for patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan and other regions in China, participants reported experiencing psychological burden, especially nurses, women, those in Wuhan, and frontline health care workers directly engaged in the diagnosis, treatment, and care for patients with COVID-19.

Project description:BackgroundImmunosuppressive therapies proposed for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) management may predispose to secondary infections. We evaluated the association of immunosuppressive therapies with bloodstream-infections (BSIs) in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.MethodsThis was an institutional review board-approved retrospective, multicenter, cohort study of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 over a 5-month period. We obtained clinical, microbiologic and laboratory data from electronic medical records. Propensity-score-matching helped create balanced exposure groups. Demographic characteristics were compared across outcome groups (BSI/no BSI) using two-sample t-test and Chi-Square test for continuous and categorical variables respectively, while immunosuppressive therapy use was compared using McNemar's test. Conditional logistic regression helped assess the association between immunosuppressive therapies and BSIs.Results13,007 patients were originally included, with propensity-score-matching producing a sample of 6,520 patients. 3.74% and 3.97% were diagnosed with clinically significant BSIs in the original and propensity-score-matched populations respectively. COVID-19 patients with BSIs had significantly longer hospitalizations, higher intensive care unit admission and mortality rates compared to those without BSIs. On univariable analysis, combinations of corticosteroids/anakinra [odds-ratio (OR) 2.00, 95% confidence intervals (C.I.) 1.05-3.80, P value.0342] and corticosteroids/tocilizumab [OR 2.13, 95% C.I. 1.16-3.94, P value .0155] were significantly associated with BSIs. On multivariable analysis (adjusting for confounders), combination corticosteroids/tocilizumab were significantly associated with any BSI [OR 1.97, 95% C.I. 1.04-3.73, P value.0386] and with bacterial BSIs [OR 2.13, 95% C.I. 1.12-4.05, p-value 0.0217].ConclusionsCombination immunosuppressive therapies were significantly associated with BSI occurrence in COVID-19 patients; their use warrants increased BSI surveillance. Further studies are needed to establish their causative role.