Search

The highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) virus threatens animal and human health globally. Innovative strategies are crucial for mitigating risks associated with airborne transmission and preventing outbreaks. In this study, we sought to investigate the efficacy of microwave inactivation against aerosolized A(H5N1) virus by identifying the optimal frequency band for a 10-min exposure and evaluating the impact of varying exposure times on virus inactivation. A(H5N1) was aerosolized and exposed to various microwave frequencies ranging from 8 to 16 GHz for a duration of 10 min. Viral titers were quantified using TCID50, and inactivation was assessed by comparing irradiated samples to controls. The 11–13 GHz band yielded the highest inactivation, with an average 89% mean reduction in A(H5N1) titer, particularly within the 11–12 GHz range, which exhibited peak efficacy. Based on the overall results, the optimal frequency band (8–12 GHz) was further tested with exposure durations of 1, 3, and 5 min. Inactivation was time-dependent, with a 5-minute exposure resulting in a 94% mean reduction, compared to 58% and 48% for 3- and 1-minute exposures, respectively. We conclude that optimized microwave emitters in high-risk environments like poultry farms and veterinary clinics could offer a novel, non-chemical approach to mitigating avian influenza spread and outbreaks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Transmission of antimicrobial-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (AMR-GNB) amongst hospitalised patients can lead to new cases of carriage, infection and outbreaks, hence the need for early carrier identification. We aim to explore two key elements that may guide control policies for colonisation/infection in hospital settings: screening practices on admission to hospital wards and risk of developing infection from colonisation.Methods: We searched on PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases for studies published from 2010 up to 2021 reporting on adult patients hospitalised in high-income countries.Results: The search retrieved 11,853 articles. After screening, 100 studies were included. Combining target patient groups and setting type, we identified six screening approaches. The most reported approach was all admitted patients to high-risk (HR) wards (49.4%). The overall prevalence of AMR-GNB was 13.8% (95%CI 9.3-19.0) with significant differences across regions and time. Risk of progression to infection amongst colonised patients was 11.0% (95%CI 8.0-14.3) and varied according to setting and pathogens' group (p value<0.0001), with higher values reported for Klebsiella species (18.1%; 95%CI 8.9-29.3).Conclusions: While providing a comprehensive overview of the screening approaches, our study underlines the considerable burden of AMR-GNB colonisation and risk of progression to infection in hospitals by pathogen, setting and time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Reprocessing of endoscopes is key to preventing cross-infection after colonoscopy. Culture-based methods are recommended for monitoring, but alternative and rapid approaches are needed to improve surveillance and reduce turnover times. A molecular strategy based on detection of residual traces from gut microbiota was developed and tested using a multicenter survey. Methods A simplified sampling and DNA extraction protocol using nylon-tipped flocked swabs was optimized. A multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test was developed that targeted 6 bacteria genes that were amplified in 3 mixes. The method was validated by interlaboratory tests involving 5 reference laboratories. Colonoscopy devices (n = 111) were sampled in 10 Italian hospitals. Culture-based microbiology and metagenomic tests were performed to verify PCR data. Results The sampling method was easily applied in all 10 endoscopy units and the optimized DNA extraction and amplification protocol was successfully performed by all of the involved laboratories. This PCR-based method allowed identification of both contaminated (n = 59) and fully reprocessed endoscopes (n = 52) with high sensibility (98%) and specificity (98%), within 3-4 hours, in contrast to the 24-72 hours needed for a classic microbiology test. Results were confirmed by next-generation sequencing and classic microbiology. Conclusions A novel approach for monitoring reprocessing of colonoscopy devices was developed and successfully applied in a multicenter survey. The general principle of tracing biological fluids through microflora DNA amplification was successfully applied and may represent a promising approach for hospital hygiene. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most frequent health care–associated infections. One of the practices to reduce their incidence is preoperative skin antisepsis. Two of the most commonly active components used are chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone iodine. Of 3 reviews conducted between 2010 and 2012 comparing antiseptics, 2 were in favor of chlorhexidine; however, the latest was unable to draw conclusions. Purpose To verify whether recent evidence supports the hypothesis that chlorhexidine in preoperative antisepsis is more efficient than other antiseptics in reducing SSI rates. Procedures We conducted a systematic review from 2000-2014 in all languages. The primary end point was SSI incidence and secondary skin bacterial colonization. Results Nineteen studies were included. Meta-analysis were conducted for comparable studies for both outcomes. The results of the meta-analysis, including all of the studies in which chlorhexidine was compared with iodophor, were in favor of chlorhexidine for both SSI incidence (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-0.92) and bacterial skin colonization (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.36-0.55). Conclusions There is moderate-quality evidence supporting the use of chlorhexidine for preoperative skin antisepsis and high-quality evidence that the use of chlorhexidine is associated with fewer positive skin cultures. Further rigorous trials will be welcomed to attain stronger evidence as to the best antiseptic to be used before surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Giornale Italiano di Medicina del Lavoro ed Ergonomia is the property of Giornale Italiano di Medicina del Lavoro ed Ergonomia Editorial Board and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)