Search

Background: Increasing evidence indicates a role for Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis (MS). EBV-infected autoreactive B cells might accumulate in the central nervous system because of defective cytotoxic CD8+ T cell immunity. We have previously reported results of a phase I clinical trial of autologous EBV-specific T cell therapy in MS 6 months after treatment.Objective: To investigate longer-term outcomes in MS patients who received autologous EBV-specific T cell therapy.Methods: We assessed participants 2 and 3 years after completion of T cell therapy.Results: We collected data from all 10 treated participants at year 2 and from 9 participants at year 3. No serious treatment-related adverse events were observed. Four participants had at least some sustained clinical improvement at year 2, including reduced fatigue in three participants, and reduced Expanded Disability Status Scale score in two participants. Three participants experienced a sustained improvement in at least some symptoms at year 3. More sustained improvement was associated with higher EBV-specific CD8+ T cell reactivity in the administered T cell product.Conclusion: Autologous EBV-specific T cell therapy is well-tolerated, and some degree of clinical improvement can be sustained for up to 3 years after treatment.

Abstract Objective To examine anti-microbial prescribing practices associated with ventilator-associated pneumonia from data gathered during an audit of practice and outcomes in intensive care units (ICUs) in a previously published study. Results The patient sample of 169 was 65% male with an average age of 59.7 years, a mean APACHE II score of 20.6, and a median ICU stay of 11 days. While ventilator-associated pneumonia was identified using a specific 4-item checklist in 29 patients, agreement between the checklist and independent physician diagnosis was only 17%. Sputum microbe culture reporting was sparse. Approximately 75% of the sample was administered an antimicrobial (main indications: lung infection [54%] and prophylaxis [11%]). No clinical justification was documented for 20% of prescriptions. Piperacillin/tazobactam was most frequently prescribed (1/3rd of all antimicrobial prescriptions) with about half of those for prophylaxis. Variations in prescribing practices were identified, including apparent gaps in antimicrobial stewardship; particularly in relation to prescribing for prophylaxis and therapy de-escalation. Sputum microbe culture reports for VAP did not appear to contribute to prescribing decisions but physician suspicion of lung infection and empiric therapy rather than ventilator-associated pneumonia criteria and guideline concordance.

BackgroundNursing home residents are at high risk for infection, hospitalization, and colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms.MethodsWe performed a cluster-randomized trial of universal decolonization as compared with routine-care bathing in nursing homes. The trial included an 18-month baseline period and an 18-month intervention period. Decolonization entailed the use of chlorhexidine for all routine bathing and showering and administration of nasal povidone-iodine twice daily for the first 5 days after admission and then twice daily for 5 days every other week. The primary outcome was transfer to a hospital due to infection. The secondary outcome was transfer to a hospital for any reason. An intention-to-treat (as-assigned) difference-in-differences analysis was performed for each outcome with the use of generalized linear mixed models to compare the intervention period with the baseline period across trial groups.ResultsData were obtained from 28 nursing homes with a total of 28,956 residents. Among the transfers to a hospital in the routine-care group, 62.2% (the mean across facilities) were due to infection during the baseline period and 62.6% were due to infection during the intervention period (risk ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.04). The corresponding values in the decolonization group were 62.9% and 52.2% (risk ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.88), for a difference in risk ratio, as compared with routine care, of 16.6% (95% CI, 11.0 to 21.8; P

ObjectiveTo describe the genomic analysis and epidemiologic response related to a slow and prolonged methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) outbreak.DesignProspective observational study.SettingNeonatal intensive care unit (NICU).MethodsWe conducted an epidemiologic investigation of a NICU MRSA outbreak involving serial baby and staff screening to identify opportunities for decolonization. Whole-genome sequencing was performed on MRSA isolates.ResultsA NICU with excellent hand hygiene compliance and longstanding minimal healthcare-associated infections experienced an MRSA outbreak involving 15 babies and 6 healthcare personnel (HCP). In total, 12 cases occurred slowly over a 1-year period (mean, 30.7 days apart) followed by 3 additional cases 7 months later. Multiple progressive infection prevention interventions were implemented, including contact precautions and cohorting of MRSA-positive babies, hand hygiene observers, enhanced environmental cleaning, screening of babies and staff, and decolonization of carriers. Only decolonization of HCP found to be persistent carriers of MRSA was successful in stopping transmission and ending the outbreak. Genomic analyses identified bidirectional transmission between babies and HCP during the outbreak.ConclusionsIn comparison to fast outbreaks, outbreaks that are "slow and sustained" may be more common to units with strong existing infection prevention practices such that a series of breaches have to align to result in a case. We identified a slow outbreak that persisted among staff and babies and was only stopped by identifying and decolonizing persistent MRSA carriage among staff. A repeated decolonization regimen was successful in allowing previously persistent carriers to safely continue work duties.

BackgroundThe CLEAR Trial demonstrated that a multisite body decolonization regimen reduced post-discharge infection and hospitalization in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriers. Here, we describe decolonization efficacy.MethodsWe performed a large, multicenter, randomized clinical trial of MRSA decolonization among adult patients after hospital discharge with MRSA infection or colonization. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either MRSA prevention education or education plus decolonization with topical chlorhexidine, oral chlorhexidine, and nasal mupirocin. Participants were swabbed in the nares, throat, axilla/groin, and wound (if applicable) at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 9 months after randomization. The primary outcomes of this study are follow-up colonization differences between groups.ResultsAmong 2121 participants, 1058 were randomized to decolonization. By 1 month, MRSA colonization was lower in the decolonization group compared with the education-only group (odds ration [OR] = 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], .36-.54; P ≤ .001). A similar magnitude of reduction was seen in the nares (OR = 0.34; 95% CI, .27-.42; P < .001), throat (OR = 0.55; 95% CI, .42-.73; P < .001), and axilla/groin (OR = 0.57; 95% CI, .43-.75; P < .001). These differences persisted through month 9 except at the wound site, which had a relatively small sample size. Higher regimen adherence was associated with lower MRSA colonization (P ≤ .01).ConclusionsIn a randomized, clinical trial, a repeated post-discharge decolonization regimen for MRSA carriers reduced MRSA colonization overall and at multiple body sites. Higher treatment adherence was associated with greater reductions in MRSA colonization.

In a prospective cohort study, we compared a 2-swabs-per-nostril 5% iodophor regimen with a 1-swab-per-nostril 10% iodophor regimen on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriage in nursing-home residents. Compared with baseline, both single-swab and double-swab regimens resulted in an identical 40% reduction in nasal carriage and 60% reduction in any carriage, skin or nasal.

ObjectiveDetermine the prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE), extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing organisms (ESBLs), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) among residents and in the environment of nursing homes (NHs).DesignPoint prevalence sampling of residents and environmental sampling of high-touch objects in resident rooms and common areas.SettingTwenty-eight NHs in Southern California from 2016 to 2017.ParticipantsNH participants in Project PROTECT, a cluster-randomized trial of enhanced bathing and decolonization vs routine care.MethodsFifty residents were randomly sampled per NH. Twenty objects were sampled, including 5 common room objects plus 5 objects in each of 3 rooms (ambulatory, total care, and dementia care residents).ResultsA total of 2797 swabs were obtained from 1400 residents in 28 NHs. Median prevalence of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) carriage per NH was 50% (range: 24%-70%). Median prevalence of specific MDROs were as follows: MRSA, 36% (range: 20%-54%); ESBL, 16% (range: 2%-34%); VRE, 5% (range: 0%-30%); and CRE, 0% (range: 0%-8%). A median of 45% of residents (range: 24%-67%) harbored an MDRO without a known MDRO history. Environmental MDRO contamination was found in 74% of resident rooms and 93% of common areas.Conclusions and implicationsIn more than half of the NHs, more than 50% of residents were colonized with MDROs of clinical and public health significance, most commonly MRSA and ESBL. Additionally, the vast majority of resident rooms and common areas were MDRO contaminated. The unknown submerged portion of the iceberg of MDRO carriers in NHs may warrant changes to infection prevention and control practices, particularly high-fidelity adoption of universal strategies such as hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and decolonization.

Background: Addressing the high burden of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in nursing homes is a public health priority. High interfacility transmission may be attributed to inadequate infection prevention practices, shared living spaces, and frequent care needs. We assessed the contribution of roommates to the likelihood of MDRO carriage in nursing homes. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of the SHIELD OC (Shared Healthcare Intervention to Eliminate Life-threatening Dissemination of MDROs in Orange County, CA) Project, a CDC-funded regional decolonization intervention to reduce MDROs among 38 regional facilities (18 nursing homes, 3 long-term acute-care hospitals, and 17 hospitals). Decolonization in participating nursing homes involved routine chlorhexidine bathing plus nasal iodophor (Monday through Friday, twice daily every other week) from April 2017 through July 2019. MDRO point-prevalence assessments involving all residents at 16 nursing homes conducted at the end of the intervention period were used to determine whether having a roommate was associated with MDRO carriage. Nares, bilateral axilla/groin, and perirectal swabs were processed for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE), extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)–producing Enterobacteriaceae, and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). Generalized linear mixed models assessed the impact of maximum room occupancy on MDRO prevalence when clustering by room and hallway, and adjusting for the following factors: nursing home facility, age, gender, length-of-stay at time of swabbing, bedbound status, known MDRO history, and presence of urinary or gastrointestinal devices. CRE models were not run due to low counts. Results: During the intervention phase, 1,451 residents were sampled across 16 nursing homes. Overall MDRO prevalence was 49%. In multivariable models, we detected a significant increasing association of maximum room occupants and MDRO carriage for MRSA but not other MDROs. For MRSA, the adjusted odds ratios for quadruple-, triple-, and double-occupancy rooms were 3.5, 3.6, and 2.8, respectively, compared to residents in single rooms (P = .013). For VRE, these adjusted odds ratios were 0.3, 0.3, and 0.4, respectively, compared to residents in single rooms (P = NS). For ESBL, the adjusted odds ratios were 0.9, 1.1, and 1.5, respectively, compared to residents in single rooms (P = nonsignificant). Conclusions: Nursing home residents in shared rooms were more likely to harbor MRSA, suggesting MRSA transmission between roommates. Although decolonization was previously shown to reduce MDRO prevalence by 22% in SHIELD nursing homes, this strategy did not appear to prevent all MRSA transmission between roommates. Additional efforts involving high adherence hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and judicious use of contact precautions are likely needed to reduce transmission between roommates in nursing homes. Funding: None Disclosures: Gabrielle M. Gussin, Stryker (Sage Products): Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Clorox: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Medline: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Xttrium: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes.

Background: More than half of nursing home (NH) residents harbor a multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO), and MDRO contamination of the environment is common. Whether NH decolonization of residents reduces MDRO contamination remains unclear. The PROTECT trial was a cluster-randomized trial of decolonization versus routine care in 28 California NHs from April 2017 through December 2018. Decolonization involved chlorhexidine bathing plus nasal iodophor (Monday–Friday, every other week), and it reduced resident nares and skin MDRO colonization by 36%. Methods: We swabbed high-touch objects in resident rooms and common areas for MDROs before and after the 3-month decolonization phase-in (April–July 2017). Five high-touch objects (bedrail, call button and TV remote, doorknob, light switch, and bathroom handles) were swabbed in 3 resident rooms per NH based on care needs (Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD), ie, total care; ADRD, ambulatory care; and short stay). Five high-touch objects were also swabbed in the common area (nursing station, table, chair, railing, and drinking fountain). Swabs were processed for methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE), extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) producing Enterobacteriaceae, and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). We used generalized linear mixed models to assess the impact of decolonization on MDRO environmental contamination when clustering by NH and room and adjusting for room type and object because unclustered and unadjusted results are likely to be inaccurate. Results: A high proportion of rooms were contaminated with any MDRO in control NHs: 43 of 56 (77%) in the baseline period and 46 of 56 (82%) in the intervention period. In contrast, decolonization NHs had similar baseline contamination (45 of 56, 80%) but lower intervention MDRO contamination (29 of 48, 60%). When evaluating the intervention impact using multivariable models, decolonization was associated with significantly less room contamination for any MDRO (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.06–0.96; P = .04) and MRSA (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05–0.55; P = .004) but nonsignificant reductions in VRE contamination (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.23–3.13) and ESBL contamination (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.01–1.62). CRE was not modeled due to rare counts (2 rooms total). In addition, room type was important, with common areas associated with 5-fold, 9-fold, and 3-fold higher contamination with any MDRO, MRSA, and VRE, respectively, compared with short-stay rooms. Conclusions: The high burden of MDROs in NHs calls for universal prevention strategies that can protect all residents. Although decolonization was associated with an 84% reduction in odds of MRSA contamination of inanimate room objects, significant reductions in VRE or ESBL contamination were not seen, possibly due to the lower proportion of baseline contamination due to these organisms. Multimodal strategies are needed to address high levels of MDRO contamination in NHs.Funding: NoneDisclosures: Gabrielle Gussin: Stryker (Sage Products): Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Clorox: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Medline: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes. Xttrium: Conducting studies in which contributed antiseptic product is provided to participating hospitals and nursing homes.

BackgroundMultidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) spread between hospitals, nursing homes (NHs), and long-term acute care facilities (LTACs) via patient transfers. The Shared Healthcare Intervention to Eliminate Life-threatening Dissemination of MDROs in Orange County is a regional public health collaborative involving decolonization at 38 healthcare facilities selected based on their high degree of patient sharing. We report baseline MDRO prevalence in 21 NHs/LTACs.MethodsA random sample of 50 adults for 21 NHs/LTACs (18 NHs, 3 LTACs) were screened for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE), extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing organisms (ESBL), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) using nares, skin (axilla/groin), and peri-rectal swabs. Facility and resident characteristics associated with MDRO carriage were assessed using multivariable models clustering by person and facility.ResultsPrevalence of MDROs was 65% in NHs and 80% in LTACs. The most common MDROs in NHs were MRSA (42%) and ESBL (34%); in LTACs they were VRE (55%) and ESBL (38%). CRE prevalence was higher in facilities that manage ventilated LTAC patients and NH residents (8% vs

'Diversity' is a heavily freighted and multivalent keyword in the global digital media environment. The recommender systems used by platforms are particularly acute sites of development and debate around the political, cultural and technical issues 'diversity' signifies. Drawing on a review of computer science publications on recommender systems in media and entertainment as well as a survey of recent advances in media and cultural policy scholarship, this short article performs a pragmatic close reading of diversity in these intersecting fields. We note that attention must be paid to the specific challenges and politics of diversity not only in particular cultural fields but also in local cultural contexts, drawing on examples from music and SVOD platforms to flesh out these questions and the practical possibilities that arise from them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background MDROs can spread between hospitals, nursing homes (NH), and long-term acute care facilities (LTACs) via shared patients. SHIELD OC is a regional decolonization collaborative involving 38 of 104 countywide adult facilities identified by their high degree of direct and indirect patient sharing with one another. We report baseline MDRO prevalence in these facilities. Methods Adult patients in 38 facilities (17 hospitals, 18 NHs, 3 LTACs) underwent point-prevalence screening between September 2016–April 2017 for MRSA, VRE, ESBL, and CRE using nares, skin (axilla/groin), and peri-rectal swabs. In NHs and LTACs, residents were randomly selected until 50 sets of swabs were obtained. Swabbing in hospitals involved all patients in contact precautions. An additional set of swabs were also performed for all LTAC admissions from November 2016–February 2017. Results The overall prevalence of any MDRO among patients was 64% (44%–88%) in NHs, 80% (range 72%–86%) in LTACs, and 64% (54–84%) in hospitals (contact precaution patients) (Table 1). Only 25%, 64%, and 81% of patients were already known to harbor an MDRO in NHs, LTACs, and hospitals, respectively. Known MDRO patients also harbored another MDRO 49%, 63%, and 34% of the time for NHs, LTACs, and hospitals, respectively. In LTACs, MDRO point prevalence was 38% higher than the usual admission prevalence (65% higher for MRSA, 34% higher for VRE, 95% higher for ESBL, and 50% higher for CRE). Conclusion MDRO carriage in highly inter-connected NHs and LTACs was widespread, rivaling that found in hospitalized patients on contact precautions. MRSA, VRE, and ESBL carriage far outnumbered CRE carriage. A history of MDRO was insensitive for identifying MDRO carriers, and many patients carried multiple MDROs. The extensive MDRO burden and transmission in long-term care settings suggests that regional MDRO prevention efforts must include MDRO control in long-term care facilities. Disclosures R. D. Singh, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. A. McKinnell, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. G. Miller, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; K. Kleinman, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. Heim, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. D. Dutciuc, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; M. Estevez, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; G. Gussin, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L’Oreal: Consultant, Consulting fee; J. Chang, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; E. M. Peterson, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; B. Y. Lee, GSK: Consultant, Consulting fee; R. A. Weinstein, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; OpGen Company: Study support, Provided services at no charge; M. K. Hayden, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Sage is contributing product to healthcare facilities participating in a regional collaborative on which I am a co-investigator. Neither I nor my hospital receive product.; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Research support; CDC: Grant Investigator and Receipt of contributed product, Research grant; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; OpGen Company: Study support, Provided services at no charge for studies; S. K. Gohil, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Park, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Tam, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. Saavedra, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. Yamaguchi, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; H. Custodio, Xttrium Laboratories: Study coordination, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Study coordination, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Study coordination, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Nguyen, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. Tjoa, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. He, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; M. H. Coady, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. Platt, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; receive research funds from Clorox, but Clorox has no role in the design; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; S. S. Huang, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product

Abstract Background The majority of healthcare-associated infections due to MDROs occur in the post-discharge setting. Understanding MDRO spread and containment in NHs can help identify infection prevention activities needed to care for vulnerable patients in a medical home setting. Methods We conducted a baseline point prevalence study of MDRO colonization in residents of 28 Southern California NHs participating in a decolonization trial. In Fall 2016, residents were randomly sampled to obtain a set of 50 nares and skin (axilla/groin) swabs from each NH. Nasal swabs were processed for MRSA and skin swabs were processed for MRSA, VRE, ESBL, and CRE. In addition, environmental swabs were collected from high touch objects in resident rooms (bedrail, call button/TV remote, door knobs, light switch, bathroom) and common areas (nursing station, table, chair, railing, and drinking fountain). Results A total of 2,797 body swabs were obtained from 1400 residents. Overall, 48.6% (N = 680) of residents harbored MDROs. MRSA was found in 37% of residents (29.5% nares, 24.4% skin), followed by ESBL in 16% (Table 1). Resident MDRO status was only known for 11% of MRSA (59/518), 18% ESBL (40/228), 4% VRE (4/99), and none of the CRE (0/13) carriers. Colonization did not differ between long stay (48.8%, 534/1094) vs. post-acute (47.7%, 146/306) residents (P = NS), but bedbound residents were more likely to be MDRO colonized (58.7%, 182/310) vs. ambulatory residents (45.7%, 497/1088, P

As social media platforms adapt their rules to limit the presence, spread, and amplification of harmful content on their services, users develop strategies to circumvent content moderation policies. To better understand cultures of content moderation circumvention, including the types of rules that Facebook users seek to circumvent, we analysed a sample of YouTube videos and Reddit threads in which users discuss content moderation circumvention. We show how Facebook users turn to others across platforms to obtain information about circumvention methods. We observe that these users often discuss overcoming Facebook's content moderation policies in terms that downplay the significance of their intended actions. We suggest that where Facebook's policies and enforcement measures fail to deter rule violations that may facilitate harm, Facebook should consider new culture-driven approaches to platform governance that foster prosocial environments and engender compliance with platform rules. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nursing home residents are at risk for acquiring and transmitting MDROs. A serial point-prevalence study of 605 residents in 3 facilities using random sampling found MDRO colonization in 45% of residents: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA, 26%); extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL, 17%); vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE, 16%); carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE, 1%). MDRO colonization was associated with history of MDRO, care needs, incontinence, and catheters. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1485-1488.

Joint use libraries in New Zealand are generally found in the form of School and Community Libraries, primarily in rural areas, but there is little information available about their effectiveness or success. Research was undertaken by surveying all identified joint use libraries in New Zealand and then following this with detailed Case Studies of three selected libraries. As these joint use libraries continue to be established in rural and urban areas of New Zealand, this research aimed to establish the Critical Success Factors for School and Community (Joint Use) Libraries in New Zealand. A comparison of these factors with those found in overseas literature on Joint Use Libraries has yielded guidelines to enable present and future manifestations of these libraries in New Zealand to be effective and successful. (Contains 2 figures.)

While a few educators have already started using blogs in the classroom, more have focused on the potential of blogging in teaching and learning (Shachtman 2002; Embrey 2002). For instance, some claim that blogs may further democratize the Internet, addressing some of the concerns under-girding the digital divide (Carroll 2003). This article describes the pedagogy behind blogs. The authors address the reasons why blogs should be used as one of many teaching and learning tools, as well as describe the potential benefits of blogs for educators. Drawing on their own research and teaching they conclude with specific strategies for using blogs in the classroom.

Chlorhexidine and mupirocin are used in health care facilities to eradicate methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriage. The objective of this study was to assess the frequency of chlorhexidine and mupirocin resistance in isolates from nares carriers in multiple nursing homes and to examine characteristics associated with resistance. Nasal swab samples were collected from approximately 100 new admissions and 100 current residents in 26 nursing homes in Orange County, CA, from October 2008 to May 2011. MRSA isolates were tested for susceptibility by using broth microdilution, disk diffusion, and Etest; for genetic relatedness using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis; and for qac gene carriage by PCR. Characteristics of the nursing homes and their residents were collected from the Medicare Minimum Data Set and Long-Term Care Focus. A total of 829 MRSA isolates were obtained from swabbing 3,806 residents in 26 nursing homes. All isolates had a chlorhexidine MIC of ≤4 μg/ml. Five (0.6%) isolates harbored the qacA and/or qacB gene loci. Mupirocin resistance was identified in 101 (12%) isolates, with 78 (9%) isolates exhibiting high-level mupirocin resistance (HLMR). HLMR rates per facility ranged from 0 to 31%. None of the isolates with HLMR displayed qacA or qacB, while two isolates carried qacA and exhibited low-level mupirocin resistance. Detection of HLMR was associated with having a multidrug-resistant MRSA isolate (odds ratio [OR], 2.69; P = 0.004), a history of MRSA (OR, 2.34; P < 0.001), and dependency in activities of daily living (OR, 1.25; P = 0.004). In some facilities, HLMR was found in nearly one-third of MRSA isolates. These findings may have implications for the increasingly widespread practice of MRSA decolonization using intranasal mupirocin.