scholarly journals Superspreading events in the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2: Opportunities for interventions and control

PLoS Biology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. e3000897 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin M. Althouse ◽  
Edward A. Wenger ◽  
Joel C. Miller ◽  
Samuel V. Scarpino ◽  
Antoine Allard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Transmission Dynamics ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Targeted Interventions ◽  
Cruise Ships ◽  
Meat Packing ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
Low Prevalence ◽  
And Control ◽  
Number Of Individuals

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiological agent of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease, has moved rapidly around the globe, infecting millions and killing hundreds of thousands. The basic reproduction number, which has been widely used—appropriately and less appropriately—to characterize the transmissibility of the virus, hides the fact that transmission is stochastic, often dominated by a small number of individuals, and heavily influenced by superspreading events (SSEs). The distinct transmission features of SARS-CoV-2, e.g., high stochasticity under low prevalence (as compared to other pathogens, such as influenza), and the central role played by SSEs on transmission dynamics cannot be overlooked. Many explosive SSEs have occurred in indoor settings, stoking the pandemic and shaping its spread, such as long-term care facilities, prisons, meat-packing plants, produce processing facilities, fish factories, cruise ships, family gatherings, parties, and nightclubs. These SSEs demonstrate the urgent need to understand routes of transmission, while posing an opportunity to effectively contain outbreaks with targeted interventions to eliminate SSEs. Here, we describe the different types of SSEs, how they influence transmission, empirical evidence for their role in the COVID-19 pandemic, and give recommendations for control of SARS-CoV-2.

Low prevalence of colonization with multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria in long-term care facilities in Graz, Austria

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Leitner ◽  
Elisabeth Zechner ◽  
Elisabeth Ullrich ◽  
Gernot Zarfel ◽  
Josefa Luxner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Long Term Care ◽  
Multidrug Resistant ◽  
Gram Negative Bacteria ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Gram Negative ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
Low Prevalence

scholarly journals Frequently Identified Infection Control Gaps Related to Hand Hygiene in Long-Term Care Facilities

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S407-S407
Author(s):  
Kate Tyner ◽  
Regina Nailon ◽  
Sue Beach ◽  
Margaret Drake ◽  
Teresa Fitzgerald ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Prevention And Control ◽  
Infection Prevention ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
And Control

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.

Suspected transmission of norovirus in eight long-term care facilities attributed to staff working at multiple institutions

2011 ◽  
Vol 140 (9) ◽  
pp. 1702-1709 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. M. NGUYEN ◽  
J. P. MIDDAUGH
Keyword(s):  
Long Term Care ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Regulatory Agencies ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Staff Members ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
Stool Specimens ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
And Control

SUMMARYThis study reports on gastroenteritis outbreaks suspected of being norovirus infections in eight long-term care facilities. A descriptive epidemiological investigation was used to depict sources of infections and control measures. Outbreaks affected 299 (31%) of 954 residents and 95 (11%) of 843 staff. Attack rates were higher in residents (range 17–55%) than staff (range 3–35%). Person-to-person spread was suspected. The case-hospitalization rate was 2·5%, and no death occurred. Eight staff members were employed at multiple affected facilities and may have introduced disease into three facilities. Thirty-two stool specimens were positive for norovirus by real-time reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction or enzyme immunoassay. Sequenced specimens were closely related to GII.4 New Orleans. A concurrent Clostridium difficile outbreak was also detected at one facility. Staff members who work at multiple facilities may transmit norovirus between them. Regulatory agencies should consider precluding ill staff from working in multiple facilities during outbreaks. Guidelines to control norovirus must be applied promptly and meticulously by facilities.

Low prevalence of Clostridium difficile colonization in patients in long-term care facilities in Graz, Austria: A point-prevalence study

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (10) ◽  
pp. 1144-1147
Author(s):  
Eva Leitner ◽  
Elisabeth Schreiner ◽  
Maria Neuhold ◽  
Michael Bozic ◽  
Christian Pux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clostridium Difficile ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Point Prevalence ◽  
Prevalence Study ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Point Prevalence Study ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
Low Prevalence

Prevention and Control of Influenza a Outbreaks in Long-Term Care Facilities

1992 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Gravenstein ◽  
Barbara A. Miller ◽  
Paul Drinka
Keyword(s):  
Prevention And Control ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
And Control

Implementation of antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention and control practices in long-term care facilities—Pennsylvania, 2017

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 713-716
Author(s):  
Nkuchia M. M’ikanatha ◽  
Sameh W. Boktor ◽  
Arlene Seid ◽  
Allen R Kunselman ◽  
Jennifer H. Han
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Program Implementation ◽  
Prevention And Control ◽  
Infection Prevention ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
And Control

AbstractIn 2017, we surveyed long-term care facilities in Pennsylvania regarding antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention and control (IPC) practices. Among 244 responding facilities, 93% had IPC programs and 47% had antimicrobial stewardship programs. There was significant variation in practices across facilities, and a number of program implementation challenges were identified.

scholarly journals August 2020 Interim EuGMS guidance to prepare European Long-Term Care Facilities for COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 899-913 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hubert Blain ◽  
Yves Rolland ◽  
Jos M. G. A. Schols ◽  
Antonio Cherubini ◽  
Stéphanie Miot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prevention And Control ◽  
Infection Prevention ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Staff Members ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
And Control

Abstract Purpose The European Geriatric Medicine Society (EuGMS) is launching a second interim guidance whose aim is to prevent the entrance and spread of COVID-19 into long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Methods The EuGMS gathered experts to propose a guide of measures to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks in LTCFs. It is based on the specific features of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in LTCFs, residents’ needs, and on experiences conducted in the field. Results Asymptomatic COVID-19 residents and staff members contribute substantially to the dissemination of COVID-19 infection in LTCFs. An infection prevention and control focal point should be set up in every LTCF for (1) supervising infection prevention and control measures aimed at keeping COVID-19 out of LTCFs, (2) RT-PCR testing of residents, staff members, and visitors with COVID-19 symptoms, even atypical, and (3) isolating subjects either infected or in contact with infected subjects. When a first LCTF resident or staff member is infected, a facility-wide RT-PCR test–retest strategy should be implemented for detecting all SARS-CoV-2 carriers. Testing should continue until no new COVID-19 cases are identified. The isolation of residents should be limited as much as possible and associated with measures aiming at limiting its negative effects on their mental and somatic health status. Conclusions An early recognition of symptoms compatible with COVID-19 may help to diagnose COVID-19 residents and staff more promptly. Subsequently, an earlier testing for SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic and asymptomatic LTCF staff and residents will enable the implementation of appropriate infection prevention and control. The negative effects of social isolation in residents should be limited as much as possible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document