Search

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.

BackgroundHospitalized patients who are colonized with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are at high risk for infection after discharge.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of postdischarge hygiene education, as compared with education plus decolonization, in patients colonized with MRSA (carriers). Decolonization involved chlorhexidine mouthwash, baths or showers with chlorhexidine, and nasal mupirocin for 5 days twice per month for 6 months. Participants were followed for 1 year. The primary outcome was MRSA infection as defined according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria. Secondary outcomes included MRSA infection determined on the basis of clinical judgment, infection from any cause, and infection-related hospitalization. All analyses were performed with the use of proportional-hazards models in the per-protocol population (all participants who underwent randomization, met the inclusion criteria, and survived beyond the recruitment hospitalization) and as-treated population (participants stratified according to adherence).ResultsIn the per-protocol population, MRSA infection occurred in 98 of 1063 participants (9.2%) in the education group and in 67 of 1058 (6.3%) in the decolonization group; 84.8% of the MRSA infections led to hospitalization. Infection from any cause occurred in 23.7% of the participants in the education group and 19.6% of those in the decolonization group; 85.8% of the infections led to hospitalization. The hazard of MRSA infection was significantly lower in the decolonization group than in the education group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.96; P=0.03; number needed to treat to prevent one infection, 30; 95% CI, 18 to 230); this lower hazard led to a lower risk of hospitalization due to MRSA infection (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.99). The decolonization group had lower likelihoods of clinically judged infection from any cause (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.99) and infection-related hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.93); treatment effects for secondary outcomes should be interpreted with caution owing to a lack of prespecified adjustment for multiple comparisons. In as-treated analyses, participants in the decolonization group who adhered fully to the regimen had 44% fewer MRSA infections than the education group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.86) and had 40% fewer infections from any cause (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.78). Side effects (all mild) occurred in 4.2% of the participants.ConclusionsPostdischarge MRSA decolonization with chlorhexidine and mupirocin led to a 30% lower risk of MRSA infection than education alone. (Funded by the AHRQ Healthcare-Associated Infections Program and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01209234 .).

Skin and soft tissue infections are common and frequently recur. Poor adherence to antibiotic therapy may lead to suboptimal clinical outcomes. However, adherence to oral antibiotic therapy for skin and soft tissue infections and its relationship to clinical outcomes have not been examined. We enrolled adult patients hospitalized with uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus who were being discharged with oral antibiotics to complete therapy. We fit the participants' pill bottles with an electronic bottle cap that recorded each pill bottle opening, administered an in-person standardized questionnaire at enrollment, 14 days, and 30 days, and reviewed the participants' medical records to determine outcomes. Our primary outcome was poor clinical response, defined as a change in antibiotic therapy, new incision-and-drainage procedure, or new skin infection within 30 days of hospital discharge. Of our 188 participants, 87 had complete data available for analysis. Among these participants, 40 (46%) had a poor clinical response at 30 days. The mean electronically measured adherence to antibiotic therapy was significantly different than the self-reported adherence (57% versus 96%; P < 0.0001). In a multivariable model, poor clinical response at 30 days was associated with patients having lower adherence, being nondiabetic, and reporting a lack of illicit drug use within the previous 12 months (P < 0.05). In conclusion, we found that patient adherence to oral antibiotic therapy for a skin and soft tissue infection after hospital discharge was low (57%) and associated with poor clinical outcome. Patients commonly overstate their medication adherence, which may make identification of patients at risk for nonadherence and poor outcomes challenging. Further studies are needed to improve postdischarge antibiotic adherence after skin and soft tissue infections.

Introduction: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected >6 million people worldwide since December 2019. Global reports of HIV/SARS-CoV-2 coinfection are limited. To better understand the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on persons with HIV and improve their care, we present an outpatient and inpatient clinical experience of HIV/SARS-CoV-2 coinfection from Rhode Island, US. Methods: We describe outpatient and inpatient preparedness for the COVID-19 pandemic, and present a case series of all known patients with HIV/SARS-CoV-2 coinfection at The Miriam Hospital and Rhode Island Hospital, and The Miriam Hospital Infectious Diseases and Immunology Center, in Providence, Rhode Island, US. Results and discussion: The Infectious Diseases and Immunology Center rapidly prepared for outpatient and inpatient care of persons with HIV and SARS-CoV-2. Between 30 March and 20 May 2020, 27 patients with HIV were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2. Twenty were male, six female and one transgender female; average age was 49 years; 13/27 were Hispanic and 6/27 were African American. All had HIV viral load Conclusions: We highlight challenges of outpatient and inpatient HIV care in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic and present the largest detailed case series to date from the United States on HIV/SARS-CoV-2 coinfection, adding to limited global reports. The aggregated clinical findings suggest that the clinical presentation and outcomes of COVID-19 appear consistent with those without HIV. Whether SARS-CoV-2 infection is more frequent among persons with HIV remains to be determined. More data are needed as we develop our understanding of how HIV and antiretroviral therapy are affected by or have an impact on this pandemic. Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; HIV; COVID-19; coinfection; preparedness, 1 | INTRODUCTION The first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019 [1]. Within [...]

BackgroundThe incidence of community-onset (CO) methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia rose from the late 1990s through the 2000s. However, hospital-onset (HO) MRSA rates have recently declined in the United States and Europe.MethodsData were abstracted from infection prevention databases between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2011 at 5 US academic medical centers to determine the number of single-patient blood cultures positive for MRSA and methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) per calendar year, stratified into CO and HO infections.ResultsAcross the 5 centers, 4171 episodes of bacteremia were identified. Center A (Los Angeles, California) experienced a significant decline in CO-MRSA bacteremia rates (from a peak in 2009 of 0.42 to 0.18 per 1000 patient-days in 2011 [P = .005]), whereas CO-MSSA rates remained stable. Centers B (San Francisco, California), D (Chicago, Illinois), and E (Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina) experienced a stable incidence of CO-MRSA and CO-MSSA bacteremia. In contrast, at center C (New York, New York), the incidence of CO-MRSA increased >3-fold (from 0.11 to 0.34 cases per 1000 patient-days [P < .001]). At most of the sites, HO-MRSA decreased and HO-MSSA rates were stable. USA300 accounted for 52% (104/202) of genotyped MRSA isolates overall, but this varied by center, ranging from 35% to 80%.ConclusionsCO-MRSA rates and the contribution of USA300 MRSA varied dramatically across diverse geographical areas in the United States. Enhanced infection control efforts are unlikely to account for such variation in CO infection rates. Bioecological and clinical explanations for geographical differences in CO-MRSA bacteremia rates merit further study.

In December 2019, a novel coronavirus known as SARS-CoV-2, emerged in Wuhan, China, causing the coronavirus disease 2019 we now refer to as COVID-19. The World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic on 12 March 2020. In the United States, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed preexisting social and health disparities among several historically vulnerable populations, with stark differences in the proportion of minority individuals diagnosed with and dying from COVID-19. In this article we will describe the emerging disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on the Hispanic/Latinx (henceforth: Hispanic or Latinx) community in the United States, discuss potential antecedents, and consider strategies to address the disparate impact of COVID-19 on this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a case study of an 85-year-old male nursing home resident with dementia admitted with altered mental status and decreased oral intake. It mentions his change of recent medication and his dose of quetiapine that to be decrease due to a prolonged QT interval; and also provides a summary of urinary tract infections (UTIs).

The spectrum of inclusion, diversity, access, and equity among the Infectious Diseases (ID) workforce is ever-growing, ever-evolving, and continuously benefiting from the contributions made by the unique differences among our workforce which make us stronger, smarter, and better prepared to respond to whatever emerging ID challenge we will encounter next. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The spectrum of inclusion, diversity, access, and equity among the Infectious Diseases (ID) workforce is ever-growing, ever-evolving, and continuously benefiting from the contributions made by the unique differences among our workforce which make us stronger, smarter, and better prepared to respond to whatever emerging ID challenge we will encounter next., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)