scholarly journals Transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 to healthcare personnel following unanticipated exposure to aerosol generating procedures: Experience from epidemiologic investigations at an academic medical center

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Sharon Fawcett ◽  
Meghan Madhusudhan ◽  
Emily Gaddam ◽  
Matthew Almario ◽  
Shawna Misah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Infection Rate ◽  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Transmission Risk ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Risk Of Infection ◽  
Eye Protection ◽  
Academic Medical

Abstract Healthcare personnel (HCP) with unprotected exposures to aerosol generating procedures (AGP) on patients with COVID-19 are at risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2. A retrospective review at an academic medical center demonstrated a less than 1% infection rate among HCP involved in AGP without a respirator and/or eye protection.

scholarly journals 154. Antibiotic Use During Three Separate Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic at a Large Academic Medical Center in Detroit, MI

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S188-S189
Author(s):  
Deepika Sivakumar ◽  
Shelbye R Herbin ◽  
Raymond Yost ◽  
Marco R Scipione
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Bacterial Pneumonia ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Percent Change ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Days Of Therapy ◽  
Time Periods ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Inpatient antibiotic use early on in the COVID-19 pandemic may have increased due to the inability to distinguish between bacterial and COVID-19 pneumonia. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of COVID-19 on antimicrobial usage during three separate waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of patients admitted to Detroit Medical Center between 3/10/19 to 4/24/21. Median days of therapy per 1000 adjusted patient days (DOT/1000 pt days) was evaluated for all administered antibiotics included in our pneumonia guidelines during 4 separate time periods: pre-COVID (3/3/19-4/27/19); 1st wave (3/8/20-5/2/20); 2nd wave (12/6/21-1/30/21); and 3rd wave (3/7/21-4/24/21). Antibiotics included in our pneumonia guidelines include: amoxicillin, azithromycin, aztreonam, ceftriaxone, cefepime, ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, linezolid, meropenem, moxifloxacin, piperacillin-tazobactam, tobramycin, and vancomycin. The percent change in antibiotic use between the separate time periods was also evaluated. Results An increase in antibiotics was seen during the 1st wave compared to the pre-COVID period (2639 [IQR 2339-3439] DOT/1000 pt days vs. 2432 [IQR 2291-2499] DOT/1000 pt days, p=0.08). This corresponded to an increase of 8.5% during the 1st wave. This increase did not persist during the 2nd and 3rd waves of the pandemic, and the use decreased by 8% and 16%, respectively, compared to the pre-COVID period. There was an increased use of ceftriaxone (+6.5%, p=0.23), doxycycline (+46%, p=0.13), linezolid (+61%, p=0.014), cefepime (+50%, p=0.001), and meropenem (+29%, p=0.25) during the 1st wave compared to the pre-COVID period. Linezolid (+39%, p=0.013), cefepime (+47%, p=0.08) and tobramycin (+47%, p=0.05) use remained high during the 3rd wave compared to the pre-COVID period, but the use was lower when compared to the 1st and 2nd waves. Figure 1. Antibiotic Use 01/2019 to 04/2019 Conclusion Antibiotics used to treat bacterial pneumonia during the 1st wave of the pandemic increased and there was a shift to broader spectrum agents during that period. The increased use was not sustained during the 2nd and 3rd waves of the pandemic, possibly due to the increased awareness of the differences between patients who present with COVID-19 pneumonia and bacterial pneumonia. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals Healthcare personnel absenteeism, presenteeism, and staffing challenges during epidemics

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Douglas W. Challener ◽  
Laura E. Breeher ◽  
JoEllen Frain ◽  
Melanie D. Swift ◽  
Pritish K. Tosh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Seasonal Influenza ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
The United States ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Linear Regression Models ◽  
Influenza Like Illness ◽  
Healthcare Workforce ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Hourly Employees

Abstract: Objective: Presenteeism is an expensive and challenging problem in the healthcare industry. In anticipation of the staffing challenges expected with the COVID-19 pandemic, we examined a decade of payroll data for a healthcare workforce. We aimed to determine the effect of seasonal influenza-like illness (ILI) on absences to support COVID-19 staffing plans. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Large academic medical center in the United States. Participants: Employees of the academic medical center who were on payroll between the years of 2009 and 2019. Methods: Biweekly institutional payroll data was evaluated for unscheduled absences as a marker for acute illness-related work absences. Linear regression models, stratified by payroll status (salaried vs hourly employees) were developed for unscheduled absences as a function of local ILI. Results: Both hours worked and unscheduled absences were significantly related to the community prevalence of influenza-like illness in our cohort. These effects were stronger in hourly employees. Conclusions: Organizations should target their messaging at encouraging salaried staff to stay home when ill.

Using an at-risk salary model to improve throughput in academic medical center operating rooms

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. 416-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel M. Kacmar ◽  
Brian M. Davidson ◽  
Matthew Victor ◽  
Ken Bullard ◽  
Jose Melendez
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Operating Rooms ◽  
Academic Medical

Implementation of an Enhanced Safety-Engineered Sharp Device Oversight and Bloodborne Pathogen Protection Program at a Large Academic Medical Center

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (11) ◽  
pp. 1383-1390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Talbot ◽  
Deede Wang ◽  
Melanie Swift ◽  
Paul St. Jacques ◽  
Susan Johnson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Program Analysis ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Safety Device ◽  
Bloodborne Pathogens ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Online Submission ◽  
Vanderbilt University ◽  
Safe Practices

Objective.Exposure of healthcare personnel to bloodborne pathogens (BBPs) can be prevented in part by using safety-engineered sharp devices (SESDs) and other safe practices, such as double gloving. In some instances, however, safer devices and practices cannot be utilized because of procedural factors or the lack of a manufactured safety device for the specific clinical use. In these situations, a standardized system to examine requests for waiver from expected practices is necessaryDesign.Before-after program analysis.Setting.Large academic medical center.Interventions.Vanderbilt University Medical Center developed a formalized system for an improved waiver process, including an online submission and tracking site, and standards surrounding implementation of core safe practices. The program’s impact on sharp device injuries and utilization of double gloving and blunt sutures was examined.Results.Following implementation of the enhanced program, there was an increase in the amount of undergloves and blunt sutures purchased for surgical procedures, suggesting larger utilization of these practices. The rate of sharp device injuries of all at-risk employees decreased from 2.32% to 2.12%, but this decline was not statistically significant (P = .14). The proportion of reported injuries that were deemed preventable significantly decreased from 72.7% (386/531) before implementation to 63.9% (334/523; P = .002) after implementation of the enhanced program.Conclusions.An enhanced BBP protection program was successful at providing guidance to increase safe practices and at improving the management of SESD waiver requests and was associated with a reduction in preventable sharp device injuries.

scholarly journals Real-world impact of vaccination on COVID-19 incidence in health care personnel at an academic medical center

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Waldman ◽  
Jason Y. Adams ◽  
Timothy E. Albertson ◽  
Maya M. Juárez ◽  
Sharon L Myers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Vaccination Campaign ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Healthcare Personnel ◽  
Frontline Employees ◽  
Work Location ◽  
Respiratory Therapists ◽  
Academic Medical

Abstract Objective: COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness in healthcare personnel (HCP) has been established, however, questions remain about its performance in high-risk healthcare occupations and work locations. We describe the effect of a COVID-19 HCP vaccination campaign on SARS-CoV-2 infection by timing of vaccination, job type, and work location. Methods: A retrospective review of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance, incidence of post-vaccination COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality among 16,156 faculty, students, and staff at a large academic medical center was conducted. Data were collected 8 weeks prior to the start of Phase 1a vaccination of frontline employees and ended 11 weeks after campaign completion. Results: COVID-19 employee incidence rate at our institution decreased from 3.2% during the 8 weeks prior to the start of vaccinations to 0.38% by four weeks after campaign initiation. SARS-CoV-2 infection risk was reduced among individuals receiving a single vaccination (HR = 0.52 [0.40, 0.68], p<0.0001) and further reduced with 2 doses of vaccine (HR = 0.17 [0.09, 0.32], p<0.0001). By two weeks after the second dose, the observed case positivity rate was 0.04%. Among Phase 1a HCP, we observed a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among physicians and a trend toward higher risk for respiratory therapists independent of vaccination status. Rates of infection were similar in a sub-group of nurses when examined by work location. Conclusions: Our findings show the real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in HCP. Despite these encouraging results, unvaccinated HCP remain at an elevated risk of infection highlighting the need for targeted outreach to combat vaccine hesitancy.

Comparison of two different intravenous serotonin antagonists used for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prophylaxis in patients treated with moderately emetogenic risk regimens: A retrospective analysis from a large academic medical center

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 1964-1969
Author(s):  
Melissa Gamble ◽  
Elisabeth Carroll ◽  
Garth C Wright ◽  
Ashley E Glode
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Emetogenic Chemotherapy ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy ◽  
Prophylactic Regimen ◽  
Nccn Guidelines ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Academic Medical

Introduction Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can be a serious and debilitating adverse effect that is highly feared by cancer patients. For patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens at our institution in the ambulatory infusion center, palonosetron was selected as the preferred serotonin (5-HT3) antagonist for CINV prophylaxis per the 2016 NCCN Guidelines, when a neurokinin1 antagonist was not included in the prophylactic regimen. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone and palonosetron versus granisetron for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens. Methods This study is an Institutional Review Board-approved, single-center retrospective review of electronic health records including patients who received moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens with CINV prophylaxis with dexamethasone and either palonosetron or granisetron. Results A total of 268 eligible patients were included in the study. Eighty-eight patients received palonosetron and 180 patients received granisetron as their 5-HT3 receptor antagonist between October 31, 2014 and October 31, 2016. There were no statistically significant differences between the two antiemetic groups for the primary outcome of presence of any change in day 1 intravenous prophylactic antiemetics. Nine (10.23%) palonosetron patients and 15 (8.33%) granisetron patients required a change in their day 1 intravenous prophylactic antiemetics ( P = 0.610). Conclusions Despite palonosetron’s better efficacy, longer half-life, and higher binding affinity, the results of this retrospective review demonstrates that the choice of serotonin antagonist, palonosetron or granisetron, did not result in a change in day 1 intravenous prophylactic antiemetics or antiemetic outpatient medications for patients undergoing moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document