To determine the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on healthcare-associated infection (HAI) incidence in US hospitals, national- and state-level standardized infection ratios (SIRs) were calculated for each quarter in 2020 and compared to those from 2019.

Central–line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs), ventilator-associated events (VAEs), select surgical site infections, and Clostridioides difficile and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia laboratory-identified events reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network for 2019 and 2020 by acute-care hospitals were analyzed. SIRs were calculated for each HAI and quarter by dividing the number of reported infections by the number of predicted infections, calculated using 2015 national baseline data. Percentage changes between 2019 and 2020 SIRs were calculated. Supporting analyses, such as an assessment of device utilization in 2020 compared to 2019, were also performed.

Significant increases in the national SIRs for CLABSI, CAUTI, VAE, and MRSA bacteremia were observed in 2020. Changes in the SIR varied by quarter and state. The largest increase was observed for CLABSI, and significant increases in VAE incidence and ventilator utilization were seen across all 4 quarters of 2020.

This report provides a national view of the increases in HAI incidence in 2020. These data highlight the need to return to conventional infection prevention and control practices and build resiliency in these programs to withstand future pandemics.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a considerable impact on US hospitalizations, affecting processes and patient population.

To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on central-line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and catheter associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) in hospitals.

We performed a retrospective study of CLABSIs and CAUTIs in 78 US 12 months before COVID-19 and 6 months during COVID-19 pandemic.

During the 2 study periods, there were 795,022 central-line days and 817,267 urinary catheter days. Compared to the period before the COVID-19 pandemic, CLABSI rates increased by 51.0% during the pandemic period from 0.56 to 0.85 per 1,000 line days (P < .001) and by 62.9% from 1.00 to 1.64 per 10,000 patient days (P < .001). Hospitals with monthly COVID-19 patients representing >10% of admissions had a National Health Safety Network (NHSN) device standardized infection ratio for CLABSI that was 2.38 times higher than hospitals with <5% prevalence during the pandemic period (P = .004). Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus CLABSIs increased by 130% from 0.07 to 0.17 events per 1,000 line days (P < .001), and Candida spp by 56.9% from 0.14 to 0.21 per 1,000 line days (P = .01). In contrast, no significant changes were identified for CAUTI (0.86 vs 0.77 per 1,000 catheter days; P = .19).

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with substantial increases in CLABSIs but not CAUTIs. Our findings underscore the importance of hardwiring processes for optimal line care and regular feedback on performance to maintain a safe environment.

Current COVID-19 guidelines recommend symptom-based screening and regular nasopharyngeal (NP) testing for healthcare personnel in high-risk settings. We sought to estimate case detection percentages with various routine NP and saliva testing frequencies.

Simulation modeling study.

We constructed a sensitivity function based on the average infectiousness profile of symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases to determine the probability of being identified at the time of testing. This function was fitted to reported data on the percent positivity of symptomatic COVID-19 patients using NP testing. We then simulated a routine testing program with different NP and saliva testing frequencies to determine case detection percentages during the infectious period, as well as the presymptomatic stage.

Routine biweekly NP testing, once every 2 weeks, identified an average of 90.7% (SD, 0.18) of cases during the infectious period and 19.7% (SD, 0.98) during the presymptomatic stage. With a weekly NP testing frequency, the corresponding case detection percentages were 95.9% (SD, 0.18) and 32.9% (SD, 1.23), respectively. A 5-day saliva testing schedule had a similar case detection percentage as weekly NP testing during the infectious period, but identified ~10% more cases (mean, 42.5%; SD, 1.10) during the presymptomatic stage.

Our findings highlight the utility of routine noninvasive saliva testing for frontline healthcare workers to protect vulnerable patient populations. A 5-day saliva testing schedule should be considered to help identify silent infections and prevent outbreaks in nursing homes and healthcare facilities.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has significant implications for hospital infection prevention and control, discharge management, and public health. We reviewed available literature to reach an evidenced-based consensus on the expected duration of viral shedding.

We queried 4 scholarly repositories and search engines for studies reporting SARS-CoV-2 viral shedding dynamics by PCR and/or culture available through September 8, 2020. We calculated the pooled median duration of viral RNA shedding from respiratory and fecal sources.

The review included 77 studies on SARS-CoV-2. All studies reported PCR-based testing and 12 also included viral culture data. Among 28 studies, the overall pooled median duration of RNA shedding from respiratory sources was 18.4 days (95% CI, 15.5–21.3; I2 = 98.87%; P < .01). When stratified by disease severity, the pooled median duration of viral RNA shedding from respiratory sources was 19.8 days (95% CI, 16.2–23.5; I2 = 96.42%; P < .01) among severely ill patients and 17.2 days (95% CI, 14.0–20.5; I2 = 95.64%; P < .01) in mild-to-moderate illness. Viral RNA was detected up to 92 days after symptom onset. Viable virus was isolated by culture from −6 to 20 days relative to symptom onset.

SARS-COV-2 RNA shedding can be prolonged, yet high heterogeneity exists. Detection of viral RNA may not correlate with infectivity since available viral culture data suggests shorter durations of shedding of viable virus. Additional data are needed to determine the duration of shedding of viable virus and the implications for risk of transmission.

To characterize associations between exposures within and outside the medical workplace with healthcare personnel (HCP) SARS-CoV-2 infection, including the effect of various forms of respiratory protection.

Case–control study.

We collected data from international participants via an online survey.

In total, 1,130 HCP (244 cases with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, and 886 controls healthy throughout the pandemic) from 67 countries not meeting prespecified exclusion (ie, healthy but not working, missing workplace exposure data, COVID symptoms without lab confirmation) were included in this study.

Respondents were queried regarding workplace exposures, respiratory protection, and extra-occupational activities. Odds ratios for HCP infection were calculated using multivariable logistic regression and sensitivity analyses controlling for confounders and known biases.

HCP infection was associated with non–aerosol-generating contact with COVID-19 patients (adjusted OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.04–1.9; P = .03) and extra-occupational exposures including gatherings of ≥10 people, patronizing restaurants or bars, and public transportation (adjusted OR range, 3.1–16.2). Respirator use during aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) was associated with lower odds of HCP infection (adjusted OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2–0.8, P = .005), as was exposure to intensive care and dedicated COVID units, negative pressure rooms, and personal protective equipment (PPE) observers (adjusted OR range, 0.4–0.7).

COVID-19 transmission to HCP was associated with medical exposures currently considered lower-risk and multiple extra-occupational exposures, and exposures associated with proper use of appropriate PPE were protective. Closer scrutiny of infection control measures surrounding healthcare activities and medical settings considered lower risk, and continued awareness of the risks of public congregation, may reduce the incidence of HCP infection.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has induced a reinforcement of infection control measures in the hospital setting. Here, we assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence of nosocomial Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI).

We retrospectively compared the incidence density (cases per 10,000 patient days) of healthcare-facility–associated (HCFA) CDI in a tertiary-care hospital in Madrid, Spain, during the maximum incidence of COVID-19 (March 11 to May 11, 2020) with the same period of the previous year (control period). We also assessed the aggregate in-hospital antibiotic use (ie, defined daily doses [DDD] per 100 occupied bed days [BD]) and incidence density (ie, movements per 1,000 patient days) of patient mobility during both periods.

In total, 2,337 patients with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction–confirmed COVID-19 were admitted to the hospital during the COVID-19 period. Also, 12 HCFA CDI cases were reported at this time (incidence density, 2.68 per 10,000 patient days), whereas 34 HCFA CDI cases were identified during the control period (incidence density, 8.54 per 10,000 patient days) (P = .000257). Antibiotic consumption was slightly higher during the COVID-19 period (89.73 DDD per 100 BD) than during the control period (79.16 DDD per 100 BD). The incidence density of patient movements was 587.61 per 1,000 patient days during the control period and was significantly lower during the COVID-19 period (300.86 per 1,000 patient days) (P < .0001).

The observed reduction of ~70% in the incidence density of HCFA CDI in a context of no reduction in antibiotic use supports the importance of reducing nosocomial transmission by healthcare workers and asymptomatic colonized patients, reinforcing cleaning procedures and reducing patient mobility in the epidemiological control of CDI.

Social distancing policies are key in curtailing severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spread, but their effectiveness is heavily contingent on public understanding and collective adherence. We studied public perception of social distancing through organic, large-scale discussion on Twitter.

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

Between March 27 and April 10, 2020, we retrieved English-only tweets matching two trending social distancing hashtags, #socialdistancing and #stayathome. We analyzed the tweets using natural language processing and machine-learning models, and we conducted a sentiment analysis to identify emotions and polarity. We evaluated the subjectivity of tweets and estimated the frequency of discussion of social distancing rules. We then identified clusters of discussion using topic modeling and associated sentiments.

We studied a sample of 574,903 tweets. For both hashtags, polarity was positive (mean, 0.148; SD, 0.290); only 15% of tweets had negative polarity. Tweets were more likely to be objective (median, 0.40; IQR, 0–0.6) with ~30% of tweets labeled as completely objective (labeled as 0 in range from 0 to 1). Approximately half of tweets (50.4%) primarily expressed joy and one-fifth expressed fear and surprise. Each correlated well with topic clusters identified by frequency including leisure and community support (ie, joy), concerns about food insecurity and quarantine effects (ie, fear), and unpredictability of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its implications (ie, surprise).

Considering the positive sentiment, preponderance of objective tweets, and topics supporting coping mechanisms, we concluded that Twitter users generally supported social distancing in the early stages of their implementation.

Prolonged survival of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on environmental surfaces and personal protective equipment may lead to these surfaces transmitting this pathogen to others. We sought to determine the effectiveness of a pulsed-xenon ultraviolet (PX-UV) disinfection system in reducing the load of SARS-CoV-2 on hard surfaces and N95 respirators.

Chamber slides and N95 respirator material were directly inoculated with SARS-CoV-2 and were exposed to different durations of PX-UV.

For hard surfaces, disinfection for 1, 2, and 5 minutes resulted in 3.53 log10, >4.54 log10, and >4.12 log10 reductions in viral load, respectively. For N95 respirators, disinfection for 5 minutes resulted in >4.79 log10 reduction in viral load. PX-UV significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2 on hard surfaces and N95 respirators.

With the potential to rapidly disinfectant environmental surfaces and N95 respirators, PX-UV devices are a promising technology to reduce environmental and personal protective equipment bioburden and to enhance both healthcare worker and patient safety by reducing the risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2.

Surgical masks and N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) prevent the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and protect medical personnel. Increased demands for surgical masks and N95 FFRs during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in the shortage crisis. However, there is no standard protocol for safe reuse of the N95 FFRs. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of existing decontamination methods of surgical masks and N95 FFRs and provide evidence-based recommendations for selecting an appropriate decontamination method.

We performed systematic searches of Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE electronic databases. The last search was performed April 11, 2020. Any trials studying surgical masks and/or N95 FFRs decontamination were included. Outcomes were disinfections of virus and bacteria, restoration of the filtration efficiency, and maintenance of the physical structure of the mask.

Overall, 15 studies and 14 decontamination methods were identified. A low level of evidence supported 4 decontamination methods: ultraviolet (UV) germicidal irradiation (9 studies), moist heat (5 studies), microwave-generated steam (4 studies), and hydrogen peroxide vapor (4 studies). Therefore, we recommended these 4 methods, and we recommended against use were given for the other 10 methods.

A low level of evidence supported the use of UV germicidal irradiation, moist heat, microwave-generated steam, and hydrogen peroxide vapor for decontamination and reuse of N95 FFRs. These decontamination methods were effective for viral and bacterial disinfection as well as restoration of the filtration efficiency, and the physical structure of the FFRs.