Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Series Title
      Series Title
      Clear All
      Series Title
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Country Of Publication
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Target Audience
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
100 result(s) for "Babcock, Hilary"
Sort by:
Promoting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination among healthcare personnel: A multifaceted intervention at a tertiary-care center in Japan
Objective:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine may hold the key to ending the pandemic, but vaccine hesitancy is hindering the vaccination of healthcare personnel (HCP). We examined their perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and implemented an intervention to increase vaccination uptake.Design:Before-and-after trial.Participants and setting:Healthcare personnel at a 790-bed tertiary-care center in Tokyo, Japan.Interventions:A prevaccination questionnaire was administered to HCP to examine their perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine. A multifaceted intervention was then implemented involving (1) distribution of informational leaflets to all HCP, (2) hospital-wide announcements encouraging vaccination, (3) a mandatory lecture, (4) an educational session about the vaccine for pregnant or breastfeeding HCP, and (5) allergy testing for HCP at risk of allergic reactions to the vaccine. A postvaccination survey was also performed.Results:Of 1,575 HCP eligible for enrollment, 1,224 (77.7%) responded to the questionnaire, 533 (43.5%) expressed willingness to be vaccinated, 593 (48.4%) were uncertain, and 98 (8.0%) expressed unwillingness to be vaccinated. The latter 2 groups were concerned about the vaccine’s safety rather than its efficacy. After the intervention, the overall vaccination rate reached 89.7% (1,413 of 1,575), and 88.9% (614 of 691) of the prevaccination survey respondents answered “unwilling” to or “unsure” about eventually receiving a vaccination. In the postvaccination questionnaire, factors contributing to increased COVID-19 vaccination included information and endorsement of vaccination at the medical center (274 of 1,037, 26.4%).Conclusions:This multifaceted intervention increased COVID-19 vaccinations among HCP at a Japanese hospital. Frequent support and provision of information were crucial for increasing the vaccination rate and may be applicable to the general population as well.
Clinical severity of, and effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against, covid-19 from omicron, delta, and alpha SARS-CoV-2 variants in the United States: prospective observational study
AbstractObjectivesTo characterize the clinical severity of covid-19 associated with the alpha, delta, and omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants among adults admitted to hospital and to compare the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines to prevent hospital admissions related to each variant.DesignCase-control study.Setting21 hospitals across the United States.Participants11 690 adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital: 5728 with covid-19 (cases) and 5962 without covid-19 (controls). Patients were classified into SARS-CoV-2 variant groups based on viral whole genome sequencing, and, if sequencing did not reveal a lineage, by the predominant circulating variant at the time of hospital admission: alpha (11 March to 3 July 2021), delta (4 July to 25 December 2021), and omicron (26 December 2021 to 14 January 2022).Main outcome measuresVaccine effectiveness calculated using a test negative design for mRNA vaccines to prevent covid-19 related hospital admissions by each variant (alpha, delta, omicron). Among patients admitted to hospital with covid-19, disease severity on the World Health Organization’s clinical progression scale was compared among variants using proportional odds regression.ResultsEffectiveness of the mRNA vaccines to prevent covid-19 associated hospital admissions was 85% (95% confidence interval 82% to 88%) for two vaccine doses against the alpha variant, 85% (83% to 87%) for two doses against the delta variant, 94% (92% to 95%) for three doses against the delta variant, 65% (51% to 75%) for two doses against the omicron variant; and 86% (77% to 91%) for three doses against the omicron variant. In-hospital mortality was 7.6% (81/1060) for alpha, 12.2% (461/3788) for delta, and 7.1% (40/565) for omicron. Among unvaccinated patients with covid-19 admitted to hospital, severity on the WHO clinical progression scale was higher for the delta versus alpha variant (adjusted proportional odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 1.46), and lower for the omicron versus delta variant (0.61, 0.49 to 0.77). Compared with unvaccinated patients, severity was lower for vaccinated patients for each variant, including alpha (adjusted proportional odds ratio 0.33, 0.23 to 0.49), delta (0.44, 0.37 to 0.51), and omicron (0.61, 0.44 to 0.85).ConclusionsmRNA vaccines were found to be highly effective in preventing covid-19 associated hospital admissions related to the alpha, delta, and omicron variants, but three vaccine doses were required to achieve protection against omicron similar to the protection that two doses provided against the delta and alpha variants. Among adults admitted to hospital with covid-19, the omicron variant was associated with less severe disease than the delta variant but still resulted in substantial morbidity and mortality. Vaccinated patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 had significantly lower disease severity than unvaccinated patients for all the variants.
Characterization of Aerosols Generated During Patient Care Activities
Background. Questions remain about the degree to which aerosols are generated during routine patient care activities and whether such aerosols could transmit viable pathogens to healthcare personnel (HCP). The objective of this study was to measure aerosol production during multiple patient care activities and to examine the samples for bacterial pathogens. Methods. Five aerosol characterization instruments were used to measure aerosols during 7 patient care activities: patient bathing, changing bed linens, pouring and flushing liquid waste, bronchoscopy, noninvasive ventilation, and nebulized medication administration (NMA). Each procedure was sampled 5 times. An SKC BioSampler was used for pathogen recovery. Bacterial cultures were performed on the sampling solution. Patients on contact precautions for drug-resistant organisms were selected for most activity sampling. Any patient undergoing bronchoscopy was eligible. Results. Of 35 sampling episodes, only 2 procedures showed a significant increase in particle concentrations over baseline: NMA and bronchoscopy with NMA. Bronchoscopy without NMA and noninvasive ventilation did not generate significant aerosols. Of 78 cultures from the impinger samples, 6 of 28 baseline samples (21.4%) and 14 of 50 procedure samples (28.0%) were positive. Conclusions. In this study, significant aerosol generation was only observed during NMA, both alone and during bronchoscopy. Minimal viable bacteria were recovered, mostly common environmental organisms. Although more research is needed, these data suggest that some of the procedures considered to be aerosol-generating may pose little infection risk to HCP.
Mandatory Influenza Vaccination of Health Care Workers: Translating Policy to Practice
Background. Influenza vaccination of health care workers has been recommended since 1984. Multiple strategies to enhance vaccination rates have been suggested, but national rates have remained low. Methods. BJC HealthCare is a large Midwestern health care organization with ∼26,000 employees. Because organizational vaccination rates remained below target levels, influenza vaccination was made a condition of employment for all employees in 2008. Medical or religious exemptions could be requested. Predetermined medical contraindications include hypersensitivity to eggs, prior hypersensitivity reaction to influenza vaccine, and history of Guillan-Barré syndrome. Medical exemption requests were reviewed by occupational health nurses and their medical directors. Employees who were neither vaccinated nor exempted by 15 December 2008 were not scheduled for work. Employees still not vaccinated or exempt by 15 January 2009 were terminated. Results. Overall, 25,561 (98.4%) of 25,980 active employees were vaccinated. Ninety employees (0.3%) received religious exemptions, and 321 (1.2%) received medical exemptions. Eight employees (0.03%) were not vaccinated or exempted. Reasons for medical exemption included allergy to eggs (107 [33%]), prior allergic reaction or allergy to other vaccine component (83 [26%]), history of Guillan-Barré syndrome (15 [5%]), and other (116 [36%]), including 14 because of pregnancy. Many requests reflected misinformation about the vaccine. Conclusions. A mandatory influenza vaccination campaign successfully increased vaccination rates. Fewer employees sought medical or religious exemptions than had signed declination statements during the previous year. A standardized medical exemption request form would simplify the request and review process for employees, their physicians, and occupational health and will be used next year.
Knowledge, beliefs, and practices related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and vaccination in healthcare personnel working at nonacute care facilities
To characterize experiences, beliefs, and perceptions of risk related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), infection prevention practices, and COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare personnel (HCP) at nonacute care facilities. Anonymous survey. Three non-acute-care facilities in St. Louis, Missouri. In total, 156 HCP responded to the survey, for a 25.6% participation rate). Among them, 32% had direct patient-care roles. Anonymous surveys were distributed between April-May 2021. Data were collected on demographics, work experience, COVID-19 exposure, knowledge, and beliefs about infection prevention, personal protective equipment (PPE) use, COVID-19 vaccination, and the impact of COVID-19. Nearly all respondents reported adequate knowledge of how to protect oneself from COVID-19 at work (97%) and had access to adequate PPE supplies (95%). Many HCP reported that wearing a mask or face shield made communication difficult (59%), that they had taken on additional responsibilities due to staff shortages (56%), and that their job became more stressful because of COVID-19 (53%). Moreover, 28% had considered quitting their job. Most respondents (78%) had received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Common reasons for vaccination were a desire to protect family and friends (84%) and a desire to stop the spread of COVID-19 (82%). Potential side effects and/or inadequate vaccine testing were cited as the most common concerns by unvaccinated HCP. A significant proportion of HCP reported increased stress and responsibilities at work due to COVID-19. The majority were vaccinated. Improving workplace policies related to mental health resources and sick leave, maintaining access to PPE, and ensuring clear communication of PPE requirements may improve workplace stress and burnout.
Healthcare facilities should publicly report the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination coverage of healthcare personnel
Among healthcare personnel (HCP), hesitancy has been linked to concerns about adverse effects, a desire to hear the experiences of others, and distrust of the rapid approval process.1,2 Willingness to undergo vaccination appears associated with identity, with differences based on gender, race, and political beliefs.1 For these reasons and others, as of early March, approximately half of HCP were unvaccinated.3 Unvaccinated HCP present a threat to patient safety because they are more likely than vaccinated HCP to expose patients to severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) recently proposed changes to the Hospital Inpatient Quality-Reporting Program that include an important new measure for COVID-19 vaccination coverage among HCP.4 We applaud the CMS for moving quickly to add this measure. Coworkers and patients bear the consequences alongside the unvaccinated individual. [...]improving vaccination coverage is ultimately the responsibility of the healthcare facility.
Approaches to healthcare personnel exemption requests from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination: Results of a national survey
Although a growing number of healthcare facilities are implementing healthcare personnel (HCP) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination requirements, vaccine exemption request management as a part of such programs is not well described. Cross-sectional survey. Infectious disease (ID) physician members of the Emerging Infections Network with infection prevention or hospital epidemiology responsibilities. Eligible persons were sent a web-based survey focused on hospital plans and practices around exemption allowances from HCP COVID-19 vaccine requirements. Of the 695 ID physicians surveyed, 263 (38%) responded. Overall, 160 respondent institutions (92%) allowed medical exemptions, whereas 132 (76%) allowed religious exemptions. In contrast, only 14% (n = 24) allowed deeply held personal belief exemptions. The types of medical exemptions allowed varied considerably across facilities, with allergic reactions to the vaccine or its components accepted by 145 facilities (84%). For selected scenarios commonly used as the basis for religious and deeply held personal belief exemption requests, 144 institutions (83%) would not approve exemptions focused on concerns regarding right of consent or violations of freedom of personal choice, and 140 institutions (81%) would not approve exemptions focused on introducing foreign substances into one's body or the sanctity of the body. Most respondents noted plans for additional infection prevention interventions for HCP who received an exemption for COVID-19 vaccination. Although many respondent institutions allowed exemptions from HCP COVID-19 vaccination requirements, the types of exemptions allowed and how the exemption programs were structured varied widely.
Infectious Diseases Consultation Reduces 30-Day and 1-Year All-Cause Mortality for Multidrug-Resistant Organism Infections
Abstract Background Multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) infections are associated with high mortality and readmission rates. Infectious diseases (ID) consultation improves clinical outcomes for drug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections. Our goal was to determine the association between ID consultation and mortality following various MDRO infections. Methods This study was conducted with a retrospective cohort (January 1, 2006–October 1, 2015) at an academic tertiary referral center. We identified patients with MDROs in a sterile site or bronchoalveolar lavage/bronchial wash culture. Mortality and readmissions within 1 year of index culture were identified, and the association of ID consultation with these outcomes was determined using Cox proportional hazards models with inverse weighting by the propensity score for ID consultation. Results A total of 4214 patients with MDRO infections were identified. ID consultation was significantly associated with reductions in 30-day and 1-year mortality for resistant S. aureus (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36–0.63; and HR, 0.73, 95% CI, 0.61–0.86) and Enterobacteriaceae (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27–0.64; and HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59–0.94), and 30-day mortality for polymicrobial infections (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31–0.86) but not Acinetobacter or Pseudomonas. For resistant Enterococcus, ID consultation was marginally associated with decreased 30-day mortality (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.62–1.06). ID consultation was associated with reduced 30-day readmission for resistant Enterobacteriaceae. Conclusions ID consultation was associated with significant reductions in 30-day and 1-year mortality for resistant S. aureus and Enterobacteriaceae, and 30-day mortality for polymicrobial infections. There was no association between ID consultation and mortality for patients with resistant Pseudomonas, Acinetobacter, or Enterococcus, possibly due to small sample sizes. Our results suggest that ID consultation may be beneficial for patients with some MDRO infections.