Search

BackgroundIn many European hospitals, ampicillin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (ARE) is endemic, while outbreaks of vancomycin-resistant E. faecium (VRE), belonging to the same genetic lineage, are increasingly reported. We studied the attributable mortality due to vancomycin resistance in patients with E. faecium bacteremia and evaluated whether this is mediated by a delay in appropriate antibiotic therapy.MethodsIn a retrospective matched cohort study, patients with VRE bacteremia occurring between 2009 and 2014 in 20 Dutch and Danish hospitals were matched to patients with ARE bacteremia, on hospital, ward, length of hospital stay prior to bacteremia, and age. The risk ratio (RR) for 30-day mortality contrasting VRE with ARE was estimated with further analytic control for confounding factors.ResultsIn all, 63 VRE and 234 ARE episodes were matched (36 and 130 for the Netherlands and 27 and 104 for Denmark). Crude 30-day mortality was 27% and 38% for ARE in the Netherlands and Denmark, respectively, and 33% and 48% for VRE in the respective countries. The adjusted RR for 30-day mortality for VRE was 1.54 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06-2.25). Although appropriate therapy was initiated later for VRE than for ARE bacteremia, this did not appear to mediate the increased mortality risk.ConclusionsCompared to ARE bacteremia, VRE bacteremia was associated with higher 30-day mortality. One explanation for this association would be increased virulence of VRE, although both phenotypes belong to the same well-characterized core genomic lineage. Alternatively, it may be the result of unmeasured confounding.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and severity of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) in children hospitalized for bronchiolitis when patients share a room, irrespective of the causative virus. METHODS: A prospective cohort study during 4 winter seasons (2012–2016) was conducted in a Dutch general pediatric ward including otherwise healthy children RESULTS: HAIs occurred in 28 of 218 included patients (12.8%), most frequently with rhinovirus (17 of 28; 60.7%). In 3 (10.7%) of 28 HAIs, the same virus was identified in roommates. Only 1 patient became cross-infected with respiratory syncytial virus, although this patient never shared a room with a patient infected with respiratory syncytial virus. HAI was not associated with more severe disease. The median length of hospitalization was 3.5 days (interquartile range [IQR] 1–6) compared with 3 days (IQR 2–6; P = .86); the number of PICU admissions was 0% versus 5.3% (P = .21); the median days of oxygen supplementation was 2.5 (IQR 1–4) versus 2 (IQR 1–4; P = .58); the median days of tube feeding was 2 (IQR 0–5) versus 2 (interquartile range: 0–5; P = .77); and the readmission rate was 0% versus 5.8% (P = .19) in patients with and without HAI, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HAIs among patients with bronchiolitis are common but not associated with more severe disease. Room sharing with appropriate hygiene does not play a relevant role in the transmission of viruses between patients with bronchiolitis, regardless of the viruses involved. On the basis of these findings, we suggest that room sharing of patients with bronchiolitis is safe.

Background: Bronchiolitis is a major cause for hospitalisation in young children during the winter season, with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) as the main causative virus. Apart from standard hygiene measures, cohorting of RSV-infected patients separately from RSV-negative patients is frequently applied to prevent crossinfection, although evidence to support this practice is lacking. The objective is to evaluate the risk of room sharing between RSV-positive and RSV-negative patients. Methods: We performed a prospective observational cohort study in children < 2 years hospitalised with acute bronchiolitis. During the first day of admission, patients shared one room, pending results of virological diagnosis (PCR). When diagnostic results were available, RSV-positive and RSV-negative patients were separated. Standard hygienic measures (gowns, gloves, masks, hand washing) were used in all patients. Results: We included 48 patients (83% RSV-positive). Co-infection was found in nine patients at admission, and two during hospitalisation (23%). The two patients with acquired co-infection had been nursed in a single room during the entire admission. None of 37 patients sharing a room with other bronchiolitis patients (20 with patients with a different virus) were co-infected during admission. Disease severity in co-infection was not worse than in monoinfection. Conclusion: One in five patients with bronchiolitis was co-infect ed, but co-infection acquired during admission was rare and was not associated with more severe disease. Room sharing between RSV-positive and RSV-negative patients (on the first day of admission) did not influence the risk of co-infection, suggesting that cohorting of RSV-infected patients separate from non-RSV-infected patients may not be indicated.