577. The Role of Healthcare Worker-Mediated Contact Networks in the Transmission of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci
Author(s) -
Eili Klein,
Jeremiah S. Hinson,
Katie K Tseng,
Aria Smith,
Matthew Toerper,
Joe Amoah,
Scott Levin,
Aaron M. Milstone
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
open forum infectious diseases
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.546
H-Index - 35
ISSN - 2328-8957
DOI - 10.1093/ofid/ofz360.646
Subject(s) - medicine , transmission (telecommunications) , intensive care unit , vancomycin resistant enterococci , logistic regression , infection control , emergency medicine , health care , colonization , incidence (geometry) , medical record , electronic medical record , vancomycin , intensive care medicine , staphylococcus aureus , physics , microbiology and biotechnology , optics , biology , bacteria , economic growth , electrical engineering , economics , genetics , engineering
Background Healthcare workers (HCWs) commonly contact multiple patients daily and serve as an important vector for transmission of pathogens such as vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE). Characterizing the HCW-patient network is difficult, which limits understanding of the role of HCWs in the horizontal transmission of pathogens. Electronic health records (EHR) present an opportunity to generate HCW-mediated contact networks and evaluate their impact on transmission. Methods Retrospective analysis of patients (PT) admitted to a medical intensive care unit and solid-organ transplant unit between July 2016 and June 2017. Clinical and demographic information, including VRE surveillance swab outcomes, were extracted from the hospital EHR system. PT-HCW-PT connections were defined as HCW contacts with a patient within an hour of another patient. Multi-variable logistic regression was used to analyze factors associated with unit-acquired VRE colonization incidence. Results A total of 2,336 patients had a recorded interaction with 4,956 unique HCWs. 146 patients were colonized with VRE on unit-admission, and 29 patients had unit-acquired VRE colonization. HCWs had contact with ~2 (range: 1–23) patients a day and ~6 (range: 1–58) contacts with patients per day (Figure 1), though rates varied by HCW-type. Patients were contacted by ~7 different HCWs resulting in ~28 contacts per day, with nurses being the most common (Figure 2). This resulted in approximately 10 PT-HCW-PT connections per day (range: 1–33) to an average of 3 other patients. After adjusting for known VRE acquisition risk factors, HCW connections to other patients with VRE significantly increased the risk of VRE acquisition (odds ratio = 1.32; 95% CI: 1.20–1.44; Table 1). Conclusion Understanding how HCWs connect patients can elucidate how pathogens, such as VRE, spread in the hospital. We demonstrated how EHR data can inform how HCWs connect patients to spread HAIs and the impact of those connections on the spread of VRE. Though EHR data have limitations, as certain activities and contacts are not logged into the system, they provide a scalable and generalizable source for understanding how patients are connected and can be utilized to reduce the spread of nosocomial infections. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom