Deverick J Anderson1, Rebekah W Moehring2, David J Weber3, Sarah S Lewis4, Luke F Chen4, J Conrad Schwab5, Paul Becherer6, Michael Blocker7, Patricia F Triplett8, Lauren P Knelson4, Yuliya Lokhnygina9, William A Rutala3, Daniel J Sexton4. 1. Duke Center for Antimicrobial Stewardship and Infection Prevention, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: deverick.anderson@duke.edu. 2. Duke Center for Antimicrobial Stewardship and Infection Prevention, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA; Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 3. Department of Hospital Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Health Care, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 4. Duke Center for Antimicrobial Stewardship and Infection Prevention, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA. 5. Chesapeake Regional Medical Center, Chesapeake, VA, USA. 6. Rex Healthcare, Raleigh, NC, USA. 7. Alamance Regional Medical Center, Burlington, NC, USA; Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA. 8. High Point Regional Hospital, High Point, NC, USA. 9. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The hospital environment is a source of pathogen transmission. The effect of enhanced disinfection strategies on the hospital-wide incidence of infection has not been investigated in a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of four disinfection strategies on hospital-wide incidence of multidrug-resistant organisms and Clostridium difficile in the Benefits of Enhanced Terminal Room (BETR) Disinfection study. METHODS: We did a prespecified secondary analysis of the results from the BETR Disinfection study, a pragmatic, multicentre, crossover cluster-randomised trial that assessed four different strategies for terminal room disinfection in nine hospitals in the southeastern USA. Rooms from which a patient with a specific infection or colonisation (due to the target organisms C difficile, meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), or multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter spp) was discharged were terminally disinfected with one of four strategies: standard disinfection (quaternary ammonium disinfectant, except for C difficile, for which 10% hypochlorite [bleach] was used; reference); standard disinfection and disinfecting ultraviolet light (UV-C), except for C difficile, for which bleach and UV-C was used (UV strategy); 10% hypochlorite (bleach strategy); and bleach and UV-C (bleach and UV strategy). We randomly assigned the sequence of strategies for each hospital (1:1:1:1), and each strategy was used for 7 months, including a 1-month wash-in period and 6 months of data collection. The prespecified secondary outcomes were hospital-wide, hospital-acquired incidence of all target organisms (calculated as number of patients with hospital-acquired infection with a target organism per 10 000 patient days), and hospital-wide, hospital-acquired incidence of each target organism separately. BETR Disinfection is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01579370. FINDINGS:Between April, 2012, and July, 2014, there were 271 740 unique patients with 375 918 admissions. 314 610 admissions met all inclusion criteria (n=73 071 in the reference study period, n=81 621 in the UV study period, n=78 760 in the bleach study period, and n=81 158 in the bleach and UV study period). 2681 incidenct cases of hospital-acquired infection or colonisation occurred during the study. There was no significant difference in the hospital-wide risk of target organism acquisition between standard disinfection and the three enhanced terminal disinfection strategies for all target multidrug-resistant organisms (UV study period relative risk [RR] 0·89, 95% CI 0·79-1·00; p=0·052; bleach study period 0·92, 0·79-1·08; p=0·32; bleach and UV study period 0·99, 0·89-1·11; p=0·89). The decrease in risk in the UV study period was driven by decreases in risk of acquisition of C difficile (RR 0·89, 95% CI 0·80-0·99; p=0·031) and VRE (0·56, 0·31-0·996; p=0·048). INTERPRETATION: Enhanced terminal room disinfection with UV in a targeted subset of high-risk rooms led to a decrease in hospital-wide incidence of C difficile and VRE. Enhanced disinfection overcomes limitations of standard disinfection strategies and is a potential strategy to reduce the risk of acquisition of multidrug-resistant organisms and C difficile. FUNDING: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The hospital environment is a source of pathogen transmission. The effect of enhanced disinfection strategies on the hospital-wide incidence of infection has not been investigated in a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of four disinfection strategies on hospital-wide incidence of multidrug-resistant organisms and Clostridium difficile in the Benefits of Enhanced Terminal Room (BETR) Disinfection study. METHODS: We did a prespecified secondary analysis of the results from the BETR Disinfection study, a pragmatic, multicentre, crossover cluster-randomised trial that assessed four different strategies for terminal room disinfection in nine hospitals in the southeastern USA. Rooms from which a patient with a specific infection or colonisation (due to the target organisms C difficile, meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), or multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter spp) was discharged were terminally disinfected with one of four strategies: standard disinfection (quaternary ammonium disinfectant, except for C difficile, for which 10% hypochlorite [bleach] was used; reference); standard disinfection and disinfecting ultraviolet light (UV-C), except for C difficile, for which bleach and UV-C was used (UV strategy); 10% hypochlorite (bleach strategy); and bleach and UV-C (bleach and UV strategy). We randomly assigned the sequence of strategies for each hospital (1:1:1:1), and each strategy was used for 7 months, including a 1-month wash-in period and 6 months of data collection. The prespecified secondary outcomes were hospital-wide, hospital-acquired incidence of all target organisms (calculated as number of patients with hospital-acquired infection with a target organism per 10 000 patient days), and hospital-wide, hospital-acquired incidence of each target organism separately. BETR Disinfection is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01579370. FINDINGS: Between April, 2012, and July, 2014, there were 271 740 unique patients with 375 918 admissions. 314 610 admissions met all inclusion criteria (n=73 071 in the reference study period, n=81 621 in the UV study period, n=78 760 in the bleach study period, and n=81 158 in the bleach and UV study period). 2681 incidenct cases of hospital-acquired infection or colonisation occurred during the study. There was no significant difference in the hospital-wide risk of target organism acquisition between standard disinfection and the three enhanced terminal disinfection strategies for all target multidrug-resistant organisms (UV study period relative risk [RR] 0·89, 95% CI 0·79-1·00; p=0·052; bleach study period 0·92, 0·79-1·08; p=0·32; bleach and UV study period 0·99, 0·89-1·11; p=0·89). The decrease in risk in the UV study period was driven by decreases in risk of acquisition of C difficile (RR 0·89, 95% CI 0·80-0·99; p=0·031) and VRE (0·56, 0·31-0·996; p=0·048). INTERPRETATION: Enhanced terminal room disinfection with UV in a targeted subset of high-risk rooms led to a decrease in hospital-wide incidence of C difficile and VRE. Enhanced disinfection overcomes limitations of standard disinfection strategies and is a potential strategy to reduce the risk of acquisition of multidrug-resistant organisms and C difficile. FUNDING: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Authors: Katherine Schultz; Emily Sickbert-Bennett; Ashley Marx; David J Weber; Lauren M DiBiase; Stacy Campbell-Bright; Lauren E Bode; Mike Baker; Tom Belhorn; Mark Buchanan; Sherie Goldbach; Jacci Harden; Emily Hoke; Beth Huenniger; Jonathan J Juliano; Michael Langston; Heather Ritchie; William A Rutala; Jason Smith; Shelley Summerlin-Long; Lisa Teal; Peter Gilligan Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2018-08-27 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: F Chiappa; B Frascella; G P Vigezzi; M Moro; L Diamanti; L Gentile; P Lago; N Clementi; C Signorelli; N Mancini; A Odone Journal: J Hosp Infect Date: 2021-05-21 Impact factor: 3.926
Authors: Piyali Chatterjee; Marjory D Williams; John D Coppin; Yonhui Allton; Hosoon Choi; Julie Ann D Martel; John E Zeber; Richard E Nelson; Curtis J Donskey; Chetan Jinadatha Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2020-06-19 Impact factor: 3.835