scholarly journals Does Seasonal Influenza Related Hospital Occupancy Surge Impact Hospital Staff Sickness Presenteeism and Productivity Costs?

2022 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 769
Author(s):  
Juliana Nga Man Lui ◽  
Ellie Bostwick Andres ◽  
Janice Mary Johnston
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Seasonal Influenza ◽  
Productivity Loss ◽  
Hospital Staff ◽  
Hospital Inpatient ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Productivity Costs ◽  
Sickness Presenteeism ◽  
Hospital Occupancy

Background—The workload of public hospital staff is heightened during seasonal influenza surges in hospitals serving densely populated cities. Such work environments may subject staff to increased risk of sickness presenteeism. Presenteeism is detrimental to nurses’ health and may lead to downstream productivity loss, resulting in financial costs for hospital organizations. Aims—This study aims to quantify how seasonal influenza hospital occupancy surge impacts nurses’ sickness presenteeism and related productivity costs in high-intensity inpatient metropolitan hospitals. Methods—Full-time nurses in three Hong Kong acute-care hospitals were surveyed. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) was applied to account for clustering in small number of hospitals. Results—A total of 71.3% of nurses reported two or more presenteeism events last year. A 6.8% increase in hospital inpatient occupancy rate was associated with an increase of 19% (1.19, 95% CI: 1.06–1.34) in nurse presenteeism. Presenteeism productivity loss costs between nurses working healthy (USD1983) and worked sick (USD 2008) were not significantly different, while sick leave costs were highest (USD 2703). Conclusion—Presenteeism prevalence is high amongst acute-care hospital nurses and workload increase during influenza flu surge significantly heightened nurse sickness presenteeism. Annual presenteeism productivity loss costs in this study of USD 24,096 were one of the highest reported worldwide. Productivity loss was also considerably high regardless of nurses’ health states, pointing towards other potential risk factors at play. When scheduling nurses to tackle flu surge, managers may want to consider impaired productivity due to staff presenteeism. Further longitudinal research is essential in identifying management modifiable risk factors that impact nurse presenteeism and impairing downstream productivity loss.

Hunger: A Missed Opportunity for Screening in the Pediatric Emergency Department

2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (11) ◽  
pp. 1318-1325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamar Robinson ◽  
Leah Bryan ◽  
Veda Johnson ◽  
Terri McFadden ◽  
Sarah Lazarus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Hospital Staff ◽  
Social Needs ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Social Risk Factors ◽  
Primary Care Hospital

Background. The American Academy of Pediatrics and pediatric community recognize the importance of addressing social determinants of health. There are limited data on the prevalence of food insecurity or literature establishing protocols assessing food insecurity in the emergency department (ED). Methods. Two anonymous surveys were administered, one to families during their ED visit and another to ED staff to assess perceptions on the ED’s role in providing social support. Results. Thirty-three of 214 respondents (15.4%) reported food insecurity and are associated with economic risk factors ( P < .0001) and a lack of primary care ( P = .008). Overall, 83.2% of the ED staff believed knowing information about families’ social risk factors would help patient care and 77.6% believed that the ED staff should address families’ social needs. Conclusions. Food insecurity affects a significant portion of ED families across income ranges. Screening for food insecurity in the ED is important given association with lack of primary care. Hospital staff supports screening and intervention.

scholarly journals 161. Prevalence and Risk Factors for Candida auris Colonization Among Patients in a Long-term Acute Care Hospital—New Jersey, 2017

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S14-S14
Author(s):  
Faye Rozwadowski ◽  
Jarred McAteer ◽  
Nancy A Chow ◽  
Kimberly Skrobarcek ◽  
Kaitlin Forsberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Acute Care Hospital ◽  
Clinical Information ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Resistant Organism ◽  
Invasive Infection ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Candida Auris

Abstract Background Candida auris can be transmitted in healthcare settings, and patients can become asymptomatically colonized, increasing risk for invasive infection and transmission. We investigated an ongoing C. auris outbreak at a 30-bed long-term acute care hospital to identify colonization for C. auris prevalence and risk factors. Methods During February–June 2017, we conducted point prevalence surveys every 2 weeks among admitted patients. We abstracted clinical information from medical records and collected axillary and groin swabs. Swabs were tested for C. auris. Data were analyzed to identify risk factors for colonization with C. auris by evaluating differences between colonized and noncolonized patients. Results All 101 hospitalized patients were surveyed, and 33 (33%) were colonized with C. auris. Prevalence of colonization ranged from 8% to 38%; incidence ranged from 5% to 20% (figure). Among colonized patients with available data, 19/27 (70%) had a tracheostomy, 20/31 (65%) had gastrostomy tubes, 24/33 (73%) ventilator use, and 12/27 (44%) had hemodialysis. Also, 31/33 (94%) had antibiotics and 13/33 (34%) antifungals during hospitalization. BMI for colonized patients (mean = 30.3, standard deviation (SD) = 10) was higher than for noncolonized patients (mean = 26.5, SD = 7.9); t = −2.1; P = 0.04). Odds of colonization were higher among Black patients (33%) vs. White patients (16%) (odds ratio [OR] 3.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3–9.8), and those colonized with other multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) (72%) vs. noncolonized (44%) (OR 3.2; CI 1.3–8.0). Odds of death were higher among colonized patients (OR 4.6; CI 1.6—13.6). Conclusion Patients in long-term acute care facilities and having high prevalences of MDROs might be at risk for C. auris. Such patients with these risk factors could be targeted for enhanced surveillance to facilitate early detection of C. auris. Infection control measures to reduce MDROs’ spread, including hand hygiene, contact precautions, and judicious use of antimicrobials, could prevent further C. auris transmission. Acknowledgements The authors thank Janet Glowicz and Kathleen Ross. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Risk Factors for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Acquisition in Roommate Contacts of Patients Colonized or Infected With MRSA in an Acute-Care Hospital

2008 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 600-606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Moore ◽  
Jastej Dhaliwal ◽  
Agnes Tong ◽  
Sarah Eden ◽  
Cindi Wigston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Acute Care Hospital ◽  
Skin Lesions ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Methicillin Resistant ◽  
The Impact

Objective.To identify risk factors for acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in patients exposed to an MRSA-colonized roommate.Design.Retrospective cohort study.Setting.A 472-bed acute-care teaching hospital in Toronto, Canada.Patients.Inpatients who shared a room between 1996 and 2004 with a patient who had unrecognized MRSA colonization.Methods.Exposed roommates were identified from infection-control logs and from results of screening for MRSA in the microbiology database. Completed follow-up was defined as completion of at least 2 sets of screening cultures (swab samples from the nares, the rectum, and skin lesions), with at least 1 set of samples obtained 7–10 days after the last exposure. Chart reviews were performed to compare those who did and did not become colonized with MRSA.Results.Of 326 roommates, 198 (61.7%) had completed follow-up, and 25 (12.6%) acquired MRSA by day 7–10 after exposure was recognized, all with strains indistinguishable by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis from those of their roommate. Two (2%) of 101 patients were not colonized at day 7–10 but, with subsequent testing, were identified as being colonized with the same strain as their roommate (one at day 16 and one at day 18 after exposure). A history of alcohol abuse (odds ratio [OR], 9.8 [95% confidence limits {CLs}, 1.8, 53]), exposure to a patient with nosocomially acquired MRSA (OR, 20 [95% CLs, 2.4,171]), increasing care dependency (OR per activity of daily living, 1.7 [95% CLs, 1.1, 2.7]), and having received levofloxacin (OR, 3.6 [95% CLs, 1.1,12]) were associated with MRSA acquisition.Conclusions.Roommates of patients with MRSA are at significant risk for becoming colonized. Further study is needed of the impact of hospital antimicrobial formulary decisions on the risk of acquisition of MRSA.

scholarly journals Modifiable Risk Factors for the Spread of Klebsiella pneumoniae Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae Among Long-Term Acute-Care Hospital Patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (06) ◽  
pp. 670-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koh Okamoto ◽  
Michael Y. Lin ◽  
Manon Haverkate ◽  
Karen Lolans ◽  
Nicholas M. Moore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Klebsiella Pneumoniae ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Acute Care Hospital ◽  
Modifiable Risk Factors ◽  
Surveillance Culture ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Colonization Pressure ◽  
Comorbidity Index

OBJECTIVETo identify modifiable risk factors for acquisition ofKlebsiella pneumoniaecarbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (KPC) colonization among long-term acute-care hospital (LTACH) patients.DESIGNMulticenter, matched case-control study.SETTINGFour LTACHs in Chicago, Illinois.PARTICIPANTSEach case patient included in this study had a KPC-negative rectal surveillance culture on admission followed by a KPC-positive surveillance culture later in the hospital stay. Each matched control patient had a KPC-negative rectal surveillance culture on admission and no KPC isolated during the hospital stay.RESULTSFrom June 2012 to June 2013, 2,575 patients were admitted to 4 LTACHs; 217 of 2,144 KPC-negative patients (10.1%) acquired KPC. In total, 100 of these patients were selected at random and matched to 100 controls by LTACH facility, admission date, and censored length of stay. Acquisitions occurred a median of 16.5 days after admission. On multivariate analysis, we found that exposure to higher colonization pressure (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01–1.04;P=.002), exposure to a carbapenem (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.06–4.77;P=.04), and higher Charlson comorbidity index (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01–1.29;P=.04) were independent risk factors for KPC acquisition; the odds of KPC acquisition increased by 2% for each 1% increase in colonization pressure.CONCLUSIONSHigher colonization pressure, exposure to carbapenems, and a higher Charlson comorbidity index independently increased the odds of KPC acquisition among LTACH patients. Reducing colonization pressure (through separation of KPC-positive patients from KPC-negative patients using strict cohorts or private rooms) and reducing carbapenem exposure may prevent KPC cross transmission in this high-risk patient population.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol2017;38:670–677

scholarly journals The Epidemiology of Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Colonization and Infection among Long-Term Acute Care Hospital Residents

2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P Mills ◽  
Naasha J Talati ◽  
Kevin Alby ◽  
Jennifer H Han
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Klebsiella Pneumoniae ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Acute Care Hospital ◽  
Carbapenem Resistance ◽  
Solid Organ ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Carbapenem Resistant

OBJECTIVEAn improved understanding of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) in long-term acute care hospitals (LTACHs) is needed. The objective of this study was to assess risk factors for colonization or infection with CRKP in LTACH residents.METHODSA case-control study was performed at a university-affiliated LTACH from 2008 to 2013. Cases were defined as all patients with clinical cultures positive for CRKP and controls were those with clinical cultures positive for carbapenem-susceptible K. pneumoniae (CSKP). A multivariate model was developed to identify risk factors for CRKP infection or colonization.RESULTSA total of 222 patients were identified with K. pneumoniae clinical cultures during the study period; 99 (45%) were case patients and 123 (55%) were control patients. Our multivariate analysis identified factors associated with a significant risk for CRKP colonization or infection: solid organ or stem cell transplantation (OR, 5.05; 95% CI, 1.23–20.8; P=.03), mechanical ventilation (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.24–5.28; P=.01), fecal incontinence (OR, 5.78; 95% CI, 1.52–22.0; P=.01), and exposure in the prior 30 days to meropenem (OR, 3.55; 95% CI, 1.04–12.1; P=.04), vancomycin (OR, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.18–7.32; P=.02), and metronidazole (OR, 4.22; 95% CI, 1.28–14.0; P=.02).CONCLUSIONSRates of colonization and infection with CRKP were high in the LTACH setting, with nearly half of K. pneumoniae cultures demonstrating carbapenem resistance. Further studies are needed on interventions to limit the emergence of CRKP in LTACHs, including targeted surveillance screening of high-risk patients and effective antibiotic stewardship measures.Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2015;37(1):55–60

scholarly journals Incidence and Risk Factors for Inpatient Falls in an Academic Acute-care Hospital

2006 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. 265-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akihito Nakai ◽  
Masami Akeda ◽  
Ikuno Kawabata
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Acute Care Hospital ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Inpatient Falls

Sharp-Device Injuries to Hospital Staff Nurses in 4 Countries

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 473-478 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean P. Clarke ◽  
Maria Schubert ◽  
Thorsten Körner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Acute Care Hospital ◽  
Hospital Staff ◽  
The United States ◽  
Staff Nurses ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Injury Rates ◽  
The Past ◽  
Hospital Staff Nurses

Objective.To compare sharp-device injury rates among hospital staff nurses in 4 Western countries.Design.Cross-sectional survey.Setting.Acute-care hospital nurses in the United States (Pennsylvania), Canada (Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario), the United Kingdom (England and Scotland), and Germany.Participants.A total of 34,318 acute-care hospital staff nurses in 1998-1999.Results.Survey-based rates of retrospectively-reported needlestick injuries in the previous year for medical-surgical unit nurses ranged from 146 injuries per 1,000 full-time equivalent positions (FTEs) in the US sample to 488 injuries per 1,000 FTEs in Germany. In the United States and Canada, very high rates of sharp-device injury among nurses working in the operating room and/or perioperative care were observed (255 and 569 injuries per 1,000 FTEs per year, respectively). Reported use of safety-engineered sharp devices was considerably lower in Germany and Canada than it was in the United States. Some variation in injury rates was seen across nursing specialties among North American nurses, mostly in line with the frequency of risky procedures in the nurses' work.Conclusions.Studies conducted in the United States over the past 15 years suggest that the rates of sharp-device injuries to front-line nurses have fallen over the past decade, probably at least in part because of increased awareness and adoption of safer technologies, suggesting that regulatory strategies have improved nurse safety. The much higher injury rate in Germany may be due to slow adoption of safety devices. Wider diffusion of safer technologies, as well as introduction and stronger enforcement of occupational safety and health regulations, are likely to decrease sharp-device injury rates in various countries even further.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document