English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background Fragmented communication of patients’ infectious status across healthcare networks impact regional spread of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO). This study aimed to quantify gaps in communication of patient MDRO status across Utah healthcare facilities and to identify opportunities to improve. Methods This is a cross-sectional retrospective mixed-methods study of patient transfers from three purposively selected healthcare facilities: an acute care (ACF), long-term acute care (LTAC), and skilled-nursing facility (SNF). Patients with known MDRO transferred out of these facilities over the previous week were identified in bimonthly samples spanning 2 months. Infection preventionists and admission nurses from facilities receiving these patients were interviewed. Results Of 293 patients transferred to another facility, 13% (n = 38) had an active infection or colonization with an MDRO. These 38 patients were transferred to 26 healthcare facilities within the state (4 ACF, 3 LTAC, 19 SNF). Gram-negative organisms with resistance to a carbapenem accounted for 15.8% of those transferred with an MDRO. There was no documentation of the state infection control transfer form (ICTF) at the sending facility for 68.5% of MDRO patient transfers. Of 22 admitting nurses interviewed, 19 (86.4%) did not receive an ICTF, 6 (27.3%) received no communication regarding patients’ infectious status, and 11 (50%) had to contact the sending facility for additional information. Moreover, 18.2% of patients had not been put on appropriate precautions. Several nurses expressed confusion with MDRO definitions and lack of guidance regarding care of MDRO colonized patients. Among infection preventionists asked about general MDRO transfers (n = 26), 26.9% reported that communication on infectious status of MDRO patients was received in under 40% of incoming transfers. When asked about a planned statewide MDRO registry, 80.8% felt that such a system would be actively searched at their facility, and 96.2% felt that a system that pushes out alerts would be useful. Conclusion Given the widespread gaps in communication of infectious status of patients with MDROs transferred across the healthcare facilities sampled, efforts to standardize and improve MDRO communication in the region is warranted. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

2480. Communication During Patient Transfers: Describing Gaps in the Infectious Status Information Pipeline