scholarly journals 1207. Coronavirus Disease, 2019 (COVID-19) in Long-Term Care Facilities (LTCF): One Large County’s Response, California 2020-2021

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S694-S694
Author(s):  
Raymond Y Chinn ◽  
Sayone Thihalolipavan ◽  
Jennifer Wheeler ◽  
Grace Kang ◽  
John D Malone ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) outbreak has had a particularly devasting effect on skilled nursing facility (SNF) residents and healthcare workers (HCWs). While representing only 11% of COVID-19 cases, the residents accounted for 43% of deaths in the United States. Methods We report a retrospective review of the support provided by our local health department (LHD) to long-term care facilities in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This group comprised of staff from healthcare-associated infections (HAI); the Medical Operations Center (MOC); Testing, Tracing, and Treatment (T3); and the Healthcare Provider Status Taskforce (Table 1 outlines their functions). The HAI team with the State Public Health Department provided infection prevention and control (IPC) outbreak investigation, education, recommendations, and ongoing access to technical assistance. The T3 team focused on rapid response testing and tracing; the HPSTF team collected data and issued questionnaires; the MOC responded to staffing and PPE requests; and the Long-Term Care Facility sector presented routine telebriefings to update the facilities on public health guidance, share resources, and answer questions during and in between briefings. Table 1. Sectors and Function of Response Teams to COVID-19 Results From March 2020 through May 2021, there were 504 outbreaks in LTCFs; the HAI team performed 281 outbreak investigations (Figure 1). In the same period, 308,264 molecular tests were performed using various platforms; laboratory services were outsourced during peak testing requests (Figure 2); “strike teams were deployed to facilitate testing on 404 occasions. Self-reported fully vaccination rate for SNF staff was 73% (March 2021) and 76% for residents (April 2021). There were 568 staff requested; total orders for PPE were 4,839 and 16,892,823 PPE items were fulfilled (Figure 3). In addition to knowledge gaps in IPC, other challenges included shifting IPC guidance, PPE shortages, timeliness of test results that impacted cohorting, community acquisition of disease with transmission to residents, interfacility spread among staff, staffing shortages, and vaccine hesitancy issues. Figure 1. Number of Outbreaks and Number of Outbreak Investigations Figure 2. Number of Tests Performed by the Public Health Laboratory and the Number of Visits by “Strike Teams” Figure 3. Personal Protective Equipment Fulfillment during COVID-19 Pandemic Conclusion The management of the recent COVID-19 outbreaks required a multi-pronged approach. Lessons learned are applicable to other highly transmissible infectious diseases. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

2021 ◽  
pp. e1-e3
Author(s):  
R. Tamara Konetzka

Approximately 40% of all COVID-19 deaths in the United States have been linked to long-term care facilities.1 Early in the pandemic, as the scope of the problem became apparent, the nursing home sector generated significant media attention and public alarm. A New York Times article in mid-April referred to nursing homes as “death pits”2 because of the seemingly uncontrollable spread of the virus through these facilities. This devastation continued during subsequent surges,3 but there is a role for policy to change this trajectory. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print January 28, 2021: e1–e3. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.306107 )


Author(s):  
Sara Carazo ◽  
Denis Laliberté ◽  
Jasmin Villeneuve ◽  
Richard Martin ◽  
Pierre Deshaies ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objectives: To estimate the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate and the secondary attack rate among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Quebec, the most affected province of Canada during the first wave; to describe the evolution of work-related exposures and infection prevention and control (IPC) practices in infected HCWs; and to compare the exposures and practices between acute care hospitals (ACHs) and long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Design: Survey of cases Participants: Quebec HCWs from private and public institutions with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosed between 1st March and 14th June 2020. HCWs ≥18 years old, having worked during the exposure period and survived their illness were eligible for the survey. Methods: After obtaining consent, 4542 HCWs completed a standardized questionnaire. COVID-19 rates and proportions of exposures and practices were estimated and compared between ACHs and LTCFs. Results: HCWs represented 25% (13,726/54,005) of all reported COVID-19 cases in Quebec and had an 11-times greater rate than non-HCWs. Their secondary household attack rate was 30%. Most affected occupations were healthcare support workers, nurses and nurse assistants, working in LTCFs (45%) and ACHs (30%). Compared to ACHs, HCWs of LTCFs had less training, higher staff mobility between working sites, similar PPE use but better self-reported compliance with at-work physical distancing. Sub-optimal IPC practices declined over time but were still present at the end of the first wave. Conclusion: Quebec HCWs and their families were severely affected during the first wave of COVID-19. Insufficient pandemic preparedness and suboptimal IPC practices likely contributed to high transmission in both LTCFs and ACHs.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S161-S161
Author(s):  
Rebecca L Mauldin ◽  
Kathy Lee ◽  
Antwan Williams

Abstract Older adults from racial and ethnic minority groups face health inequities in long-term care facilities such as nursing homes and assisted living facilities just as they do in the United States as a whole. In spite of federal policy to support minority health and ensure the well-being of long-term care facility residents, disparities persist in residents’ quality of care and quality of life. This poster presents current federal policy in the United States to reduce racial and ethnic health disparities and to support long-term care facility residents’ health and well-being. It includes legislation enacted by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA), regulations of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) for health care facilities receiving Medicare or Medicare funds, and policies of the Long-term Care Ombudsman Program. Recommendations to address threats to or gaps in these policies include monitoring congressional efforts to revise portions of the ACA, revising DHHS requirements for long-term care facilities staff training and oversight, and amending requirements for the Long-term Care Ombudsman Program to mandate collection, analysis, and reporting of resident complaint data by race and ethnicity.


2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (7) ◽  
pp. 1676-1683 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J Morgan ◽  
Min Zhan ◽  
Michihiko Goto ◽  
Carrie Franciscus ◽  
Bruce Alexander ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a common cause of health care–associated infections in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends contact precautions for the prevention of MRSA within acute care facilities, which are being used within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for LTCFs in a modified fashion. The impact of contact precautions in long-term care is unknown. Methods To evaluate whether contact precautions decreased MRSA acquisition in LTCFs, compared to standard precautions, we performed a retrospective effectiveness study (pre-post, with concurrent controls) using data from the VA health-care system from 1 January 2011 until 31 December 2015, 2 years before and after a 2013 policy recommending a more aggressive form of contact precautions. Results Across 75 414 patient admissions from 74 long-term care facilities in the United States, the overall unadjusted rate of MRSA acquisition was 2.6/1000 patient days. Patients were no more likely to acquire MRSA if they were cared for using standard precautions versus contact precautions in a multivariable, discrete time survival analysis, controlling for patient demographics, risk factors, and year of admission (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, .85–1.12; P = .71). Conclusions MRSA acquisition and infections were not impacted by the use of active surveillance and contact precautions in LTCFs in the VA.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s527-s527
Author(s):  
Gabriela Andujar-Vazquez ◽  
Kirthana Beaulac ◽  
Shira Doron ◽  
David R Snydman

Background: The Tufts Medical Center Antimicrobial Stewardship (ASP) Team has partnered with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) to provide broad-based educational programs (BBEP) to long-term care facilities (LTCFs) in an effort to improve ASP and infection control practices. LTCFs have consistently expressed interest in individualized and hands-on involvement by ASP experts, yet they lack resources. The goal of this study was to determine whether “enhanced” individualized guidance provided by an ASP expert would lead to antibiotic start decreases in LTCFs participating in our pilot study. Methods: A pilot study was conducted to test the feasibility and efficacy of providing enhanced ASP and infection control practices to LTCFs. In total, 10 facilities already participating in MDPH BBEP and submitting monthly antibiotic start data were enrolled, were stratified by bed size and presence of dementia unit, and were randomized 1:1 to the “enhanced” group (defined as reviewing protocols and antibiotic start cases, providing lectures and feedback to staff and answering questions) versus the “nonenhanced” group. Antibiotic start data were validated and collected prospectively from January 2018 to July 2019, and the interventions began in April 2019. Due to staff turnover and lack of engagement, intervention was not possible in 2 of the 5 LTCFs randomized to the enhanced group, which were therefore analyzed as a nonenhanced group. An incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% CIs were calculated comparing the antibiotic start rate per 1,000 resident days between periods in the pilot groups. Results: The average bed sizes for enhanced groups versus nonenhanced groups were 121 (±71.0) versus 108 (±32.8); the average resident days per facility per month were 3,415.7 (±2,131.2) versus 2,911.4 (±964.3). Comparatively, 3 facilities in the enhanced group had dementia unit versus 4 in the nonenhanced group. In the per protocol analysis, the antibiotic start rate in the enhanced group before versus after the intervention was 11.35 versus 9.41 starts per 1,000 resident days (IRR, 0.829; 95% CI, 0.794–0.865). The antibiotic start rate in the nonenhanced group before versus after the intervention was 7.90 versus 8.23 antibiotic starts per 1,000 resident days (IRR, 1.048; 95% CI, 1.007–1.089). Physician hours required for ASP for the enhanced group totaled 8.9 (±2.2) per facility per month. Conclusions: Although the number of hours required for intervention by an expert was not onerous, maintaining engagement proved difficult and in 2 facilities could not be achieved. A statistically significant 20% decrease in the antibiotic start rate was achieved in the enhanced group after interventions, potentially reflecting the benefit of enhanced ASP support by an expert.Funding: This study was funded by the Leadership in Epidemiology, Antimicrobial Stewardship, and Public Health (LEAP) fellowship training grant award from the CDC.Disclosures: None


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-178
Author(s):  
Ateequr Rahman ◽  
Druti Shukla ◽  
Lejla Cukovic ◽  
Kirstin Krzyzewski ◽  
Noopur Walia ◽  
...  

Advanced directives, such as Living Wills and Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders, provide the ability to identify, respect, and implement an individual's wishes for medical care during serious illness or end-of-life care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of advanced directives amongst the residents of long-term care facilities in the United States. A total of 527 cases were extracted from 2018 National Study of Long-Term Care Providers, which was collected by the National Center for Health Statistics through the surveys of residential care communities and adult day services centers. Advanced directive rates were higher in patients 90 years of age and above as compared to other age groups. Nursing home residents were more likely to have advanced directives than other long term care facilities. There was no significant difference among males and females in the rate of advanced directives. Nursing home and Hospice residents had more advanced directives compared to other facilities. The Black population had the highest rate of advanced directive preparedness. Overall, the finding of this study revealed that there was a significant difference in the preparedness of DNR orders and Living Wills by patient demographics and the type of long-term care facility. Offering advanced directive services at public health/social services facilities can enhance the rate of advanced directive preparedness. Advanced directives ease the stress and anxiety of patients, family, and friends during difficult times.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e052282
Author(s):  
Bonita E Lee ◽  
Christopher Sikora ◽  
Douglas Faulder ◽  
Eleanor Risling ◽  
Lorie A Little ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has an excessive impact on residents in long-term care facilities (LTCF), causing high morbidity and mortality. Early detection of presymptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 cases supports the timely implementation of effective outbreak control measures but repetitive screening of residents and staff incurs costs and discomfort. Administration of vaccines is key to controlling the pandemic but the robustness and longevity of the antibody response, correlation of neutralising antibodies with commercial antibody assays, and the efficacy of current vaccines for emerging COVID-19 variants require further study. We propose to monitor SARS-CoV-2 in site-specific sewage as an early warning system for COVID-19 in LTCF and to study the immune response of the staff and residents in LTCF to COVID-19 vaccines.Methods and analysisThe study includes two parts: (1) detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in LTCF site-specific sewage samples using a molecular assay followed by notification of Public Health within 24 hours as an early warning system for appropriate outbreak investigation and control measures and cost–benefit analyses of the system and (2) testing for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among staff and residents in LTCF at various time points before and after COVID-19 vaccination using commercial assays and neutralising antibody testing performed at a reference laboratory.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the University of Alberta Health Research Ethics Board with considerations to minimise risk and discomforts for the participants. Early recognition of a COVID-19 case in an LTCF might prevent further transmission in residents and staff. There was no direct benefit identified to the participants of the immunity study. Anticipated dissemination of information includes a summary report to the immunity study participants, sharing of study data with the scientific community through the Canadian COVID-19 Immunity Task Force, and prompt dissemination of study results in meeting abstracts and manuscripts in peer-reviewed journals.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S407-S407
Author(s):  
Kate Tyner ◽  
Regina Nailon ◽  
Sue Beach ◽  
Margaret Drake ◽  
Teresa Fitzgerald ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Little is known about hand hygiene (HH) policies and practices in long-term care facilities (LTCF). Hence, we decided to study the frequency of HH-related infection control (IC) gaps and the factors associated with it. Methods The Nebraska (NE) Infection Control Assessment and Promotion Program (ICAP) in collaboration with NE Department of Health and Human Services conducted in-person surveys and on-site observations to assess infection prevention and control programs (IPCP) in 30 LTCF from 11/2015 to 3/2017. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Infection Prevention and Control Assessment tool for LTCF was used for on-site interviews and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) Hospital IC Worksheet was used for observations. Gap frequencies were calculated for questions (6 on CDC survey and 8 on CMS worksheet) representing best practice recommendations (BPR). The factors studied for the association with the gaps included LTCF bed size (BS), hospital affiliation (HA), having trained infection preventionists (IP), and weekly hours (WH)/ 100 bed spent by IP on IPCP. Fisher’s exact test and Mann Whitney test were used for statistical analyses. Results HH-related IC gap frequencies from on-site interviews are displayed in Figure 1. Only 6 (20%) LTCF reported having all 6 BPR in place and 10 (33%) having 5 BPR. LTCF with fewer gaps (5 to 6 BPR in place) appear more likely to have HA as compared with the LTCF with more gaps but the difference didn’t reach statistical significance (37.5% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.09). When analyzed separately for each gap, it was found that LTCF with HA are more likely to have a policy on preferential use of alcohol based hand rubs than the ones without HA. (85.7%, vs. 26.1% P = 0.008). Several IC gaps were also identified during observations (Figure 2) with one of them being overall HH compliance of <80%. LTCF that have over 90% HH compliance are more likely to have higher median IP WH/100 beds dedicated towards IPCP as compared with the LTCFs with less than 90% compliance (16.4 vs. 4.4, P < 0.05). Conclusion Many HH-related IC gaps still exist in LTCF and require mitigation. Mitigation strategies may include encouraging LTCF to collaborate with IP at local acute care hospitals for guidance on IC activities and to increase dedicated IP times towards IPCP in LTCF. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document