Preparing for future waves and pandemics: a global hospital survey on infection control measures and infection rates in COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Matoori S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8685805 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Preparing for future waves and pandemics: a global hospital survey on infection control measures and infection rates in COVID-19.
Matoori Simon S Kuritzkes Daniel R DR Goh Yonggeng Y Quek Swee Tian ST Wang Liang L Sun Ziyan Z di Marco Fabiano F Borleri Daniela D Buoro Sabrina S Fagiuoli Stefano S Ferrari Tatiana T Rizzi Marco M Raimondi Federico F Cesa Simonetta S Koh Dow-Mu DM Froehlich Johannes M JM Janssen Sonja S Lange Bettina B Egle Alexander A Erb Stefan S Mossdorf Erik E Gutzeit Andreas A
Antimicrobial resistance and infection control 20211220 1
A survey of hospitals on three continents was performed to assess their infection control preparedness and measures, and their infection rate in hospital health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. All surveyed hospitals used similar PPE but differences in preparedness, PPE shortages, and infection rates were reported. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:In April, 2020, just months into the COVID-19 pandemic, an international group of public health researchers published three lessons learned from the HIV pandemic for the response to COVID-19, which were to: anticipate health inequalities, create an enabling environment to support behavioural change, and engage a multidisciplinary effort. We revisit these lessons in light of more than 2 years' experience with the COVID-19 pandemic. With specific examples, we detail how inequalities have played out within and between countries, highlight factors that support or impede the creation of enabling environments, and note ongoing issues with the scarcity of integrated science and health system approaches. We argue that to better apply lessons learned as the COVID-19 pandemic matures and other infectious disease outbreaks emerge, it will be imperative to create dialogue among polarised perspectives, identify shared priorities, and draw on multidisciplinary evidence.
| S-EPMC9764384 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLowering hospital readmission rates has become a primary target for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, but studies of the relationship between adherence to the recommended hospital care processes and readmission rates have provided inconsistent and inconclusive results.ObjectiveTo examine the association between hospital performance on Medicare's Hospital Compare process quality measures and 30-day readmission rates for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure and pneumonia, and for those undergoing major surgery.Design, setting and participantsWe assessed hospital performance on process measures using the 2007 Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting Program. The process measures for each condition were aggregated in two separate measures: Overall Measure (OM) and Appropriate Care Measure (ACM) scores. Readmission rates were calculated using Medicare claims.Main outcome measureRisk-standardized 30-day all-cause readmission rate was calculated as the ratio of predicted to expected rate standardized by the overall mean readmission rate. We calculated predicted readmission rate using hierarchical generalized linear models and adjusting for patient-level factors.ResultsAmong patients aged ≥ 66 years, the median OM score ranged from 79.4 % for abdominal surgery to 95.7 % for AMI, and the median ACM scores ranged from 45.8 % for abdominal surgery to 87.9 % for AMI. We observed a statistically significant, but weak, correlation between performance scores and readmission rates for pneumonia (correlation coefficient R = 0.07), AMI (R = 0.10), and orthopedic surgery (R = 0.06). The difference in the mean readmission rate between hospitals in the 1st and 4th quartiles of process measure performance was statistically significant only for AMI (0.25 percentage points) and pneumonia (0.31 percentage points). Performance on process measures explained less than 1 % of hospital-level variation in readmission rates.ConclusionsHospitals with greater adherence to recommended care processes did not achieve meaningfully better 30-day hospital readmission rates compared to those with lower levels of performance.
| S-EPMC3579957 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The paper studies the effects of mitigation measures on environment during a pandemic. Various mitigation measures such as business closures have been imposed to reduce health risks. Such measures also limit economic activities and reduce emissions. Measures disproportionately affect the contact-intensive sectors such as the leisure and hospitality industry, as their economic activities involve more person-to-person interactions. Thus, the extent of emission reduction depends on the severity of a measure and the size of the contact-intensive sectors. Using data on business and restaurant closures, school closures and bans on gatherings across 50 U.S. states during the Covid-19 pandemic, an empirical analysis shows that emissions decrease more in states with a more stringent measure and a larger share of the contact-intensive sectors.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10640-020-00535-9.
| S-EPMC7822760 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn a surgical setting, COVID-19 patients may trigger in-hospital outbreaks and have worse postoperative outcomes. Despite these risks, there have been no consistent statements on surgical guidelines regarding the perioperative screening or management of COVID-19 patients, and we do not have objective global data that describe the current conditions surrounding this issue. This study aimed to clarify the current global surgical practice including COVID-19 screening, preventive measures and in-hospital infection under the COVID-19 pandemic, and to clarify the international gaps on infection control policies among countries worldwide.MethodsDuring April 2-8, 2020, a cross-sectional online survey on surgical practice was distributed to surgeons worldwide through international surgical societies, social media and personal contacts. Main outcome and measures included preventive measures and screening policies of COVID-19 in surgical practice and centers' experiences of in-hospital COVID-19 infection. Data were analyzed by country's cumulative deaths number by April 8, 2020 (high risk, >5000; intermediate risk, 100-5000; low risk, <100).ResultsA total of 936 centers in 71 countries responded to the survey (high risk, 330 centers; intermediate risk, 242 centers; low risk, 364 centers). In the majority (71.9%) of the centers, local guidelines recommended preoperative testing based on symptoms or suspicious radiologic findings. Universal testing for every surgical patient was recommended in only 18.4% of the centers. In-hospital COVID-19 infection was reported from 31.5% of the centers, with higher rates in higher risk countries (high risk, 53.6%; intermediate risk, 26.4%; low risk, 14.8%; P < 0.001). Of the 295 centers that experienced in-hospital COVID-19 infection, 122 (41.4%) failed to trace it and 58 (19.7%) reported the infection originating from asymptomatic patients/staff members. Higher risk countries adopted more preventive measures including universal testing, routine testing of hospital staff and use of dedicated personal protective equipment in operation theatres, but there were remarkable discrepancies across the countries.ConclusionsThis large international survey captured the global surgical practice under the COVID-19 pandemic and highlighted the insufficient preoperative screening of COVID-19 in the current surgical practice. More intensive screening programs will be necessary particularly in severely affected countries/institutions.Study registrationRegistered in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04344197.
| S-EPMC7567431 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA striking characteristic of the past four influenza pandemic outbreaks in the United States has been the multiple waves of infections. However, the mechanisms responsible for the multiple waves of influenza or other acute infectious diseases are uncertain. Understanding these mechanisms could provide knowledge for health authorities to develop and implement prevention and control strategies.Materials and methodsWe exhibit five distinct mechanisms, each of which can generate two waves of infections for an acute infectious disease. The first two mechanisms capture changes in virus transmissibility and behavioral changes. The third mechanism involves population heterogeneity (e.g., demography, geography), where each wave spreads through one sub-population. The fourth mechanism is virus mutation which causes delayed susceptibility of individuals. The fifth mechanism is waning immunity. Each mechanism is incorporated into separate mathematical models, and outbreaks are then simulated. We use the models to examine the effects of the initial number of infected individuals (e.g., border control at the beginning of the outbreak) and the timing of and amount of available vaccinations.ResultsFour models, individually or in any combination, reproduce the two waves of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic in the United States, both qualitatively and quantitatively. One model reproduces the two waves only qualitatively. All models indicate that significantly reducing or delaying the initial numbers of infected individuals would have little impact on the attack rate. Instead, this reduction or delay results in a single wave as opposed to two waves. Furthermore, four of these models also indicate that a vaccination program started earlier than October 2009 (when the H1N1 vaccine was initially distributed) could have eliminated the second wave of infection, while more vaccine available starting in October would not have eliminated the second wave.
| S-EPMC3634039 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study examines the best way to teach genetics to family medicine residents. First year family medicine residents at the University of Toronto will be taught basic clinical genetics as well as a specific disease in genetics via 3 different educational methods. All participants will undergo an oral examination and written knowledge test 3 months after this education. Results between groups will be compared, and the best way to teach genetics to residents determined.
| 2030694 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:PurposeViral mutations and improved prevention or treatment options may have changed the association of frailty with mortality throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated how associations of frailty with in-hospital mortality changed throughout the pandemic in older people hospitalised for COVID-19.MethodsThe COVID-OLD study included COVID-19 patients aged ≥ 70 years hospitalised during the first (early 2020), second (late 2020), third (late 2021) or fourth wave (early 2022). Based on the clinical frailty scale, patients were categorised as fit (1-3), pre-frail (4-5) or frail (6-9). Associations of frailty with in-hospital mortality were assessed with pairwise comparisons with fit as reference category and modelled using binary logistic regression adjusted for age and sex.ResultsThis study included 2362 patients (mean age 79.7 years, 60% men). In the first wave, in-hospital mortality was 46% in patients with frailty and 27% in fit patients. In-hospital mortality decreased in each subsequent wave to 25% in patients with frailty and 11% in fit patients in the fourth wave. After adjustments, an overall higher risk of in-hospital mortality was found in frail (OR 2.26, 95% CI: 1.66-3.07) and pre-frail (OR 1.73, 95% CI: 1.27-2.35) patients compared to fit patients, which did not change over time (p for interaction = 0.74).ConclusionsFrailty remained associated with a higher risk of in-hospital mortality throughout the entire COVID-19 pandemic, although overall in-hospital mortality rates decreased. Frailty therefore remains a relevant risk factor in all stages of a pandemic and is important to consider in prevention and treatment guidelines for future pandemics.
| S-EPMC11377458 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AbstractIntroductionGraduate medical education (GME) lacks a standardized military training program for general surgery residents, and concern exists that they may not be prepared to serve as combat surgeons on training completion. The purpose of this study was to assess military surgery trainee satisfaction with their programs. Our hypothesis was that military residents were not completely confident to care for combat casualties on completion of current GME training.MethodsWe surveyed US Army, Navy, and Air Force general surgery residents and fellows between November 2023 and March 2024 to assess their confidence in managing combat injuries. Queried residents further rate their overall satisfaction with surgical training, perceived level of deployment preparedness and curriculum elements which they thought would be most beneficial to their training.ResultsThe survey yielded an overall 43% response rate (132/305) with a response rate of 42% (61/147) from the Army, 56% (44/79) from the Navy, and 34% (27/79) from the Air Force. Most trainees were trained in military medical treatment facility residency programs (n=91, 68.9%) and nearly half of respondents (n=64, 49%) were senior trainees (postgraduate year (PGY)4, PGY5, and fellows). Among all trainees, only two-thirds (n=88, 67%,) thought they were adequately prepared to deploy and operate on military combat casualties by the end of residency but 114 (86%) were satisfied with the training they received during general surgery residency in adult trauma, 103 (78%) in critical care, and 112 (85%) in acute care surgery. However, more than half were unsatisfied with the training they received in obstetric/gynecologic and urologic emergencies (n=72, 55%; and n=67, 51%, respectively).ConclusionAlthough the majority of military surgical residents surveyed are satisfied with their training in adult trauma, critical care, and emergency general surgery, a large number of trainees thought they would not be ready to deploy and manage combat casualties.Level of evidencePrognostic and epidemiological, Level IV.
| S-EPMC11603701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of evidence-based clinical decision-making. Clinical management guidelines (CMGs) may help reduce morbidity and mortality by improving the quality of clinical decisions. This systematic review aims to evaluate the availability, inclusivity, and quality of pandemic influenza CMGs, to identify gaps that can be addressed to strengthen pandemic preparedness in this area.MethodsOvid Medline, Ovid Embase, TRIP (Turning Research Into Practice), and Guideline Central were searched systematically from January 2008 to 23rd June 2022, complemented by a grey literature search till 16th June 2022. Pandemic influenza CMGs including supportive care or empirical treatment recommendations were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included studies and assessed their quality using AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation). The findings are presented narratively.ResultsForty-eight CMGs were included. They were produced in high- (42%, 20/48), upper-middle- (40%, 19/48), and lower-middle (8%, 4/48) income countries, or by international organisations (10%, 5/48). Most CMGs (81%, 39/48) were over 5 years old. Guidelines included treatment recommendations for children (75%, 36/48), pregnant women (54%, 26/48), people with immunosuppression (33%, 16/48), and older adults (29%, 14/48). Many CMGs were of low quality (median overall score: 3 out of 7 (range 1-7). All recommended oseltamivir; recommendations for other neuraminidase inhibitors and supportive care were limited and at times contradictory. Only 56% (27/48) and 27% (13/48) addressed oxygen and fluid therapy, respectively.ConclusionsOur data highlights the limited availability of up-to-date pandemic influenza CMGs globally. Of those identified, many were limited in scope and quality and several lacked recommendations for specific at-risk populations. Recommendations on supportive care, the mainstay of treatment, were limited and heterogeneous. The most recent guideline highlighted that the evidence-base to support antiviral treatment recommendations is still limited. There is an urgent need for trials into treatment and supportive care strategies including for different risk populations. New evidence should be incorporated into globally accessible guidelines, to benefit patient outcomes. A 'living guideline' framework is recommended and further research into guideline implementation in different resourced settings, particularly low- and middle-income countries.
| S-EPMC9640791 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Emerging evidence suggests a resurgence of COVID-19 in the coming years. It is thus critical to optimize emergency response planning from a broad, integrated perspective. We developed a mathematical model incorporating climate-driven variation in community transmissions and movement-modulated spatial diffusions of COVID-19 into various intervention scenarios. We find that an intensive 8-wk intervention targeting the reduction of local transmissibility and international travel is efficient and effective. Practically, we suggest a tiered implementation of this strategy where interventions are first implemented at locations in what we call the Global Intervention Hub, followed by timely interventions in secondary high-risk locations. We argue that thinking globally, categorizing locations in a hub-and-spoke intervention network, and acting locally, applying interventions at high-risk areas, is a functional strategy to avert the tremendous burden that would otherwise be placed on public health and society.
| S-EPMC7585010 | biostudies-literature