Dataset Information

Effectiveness of rapid SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing in supporting infection control for hospital-onset COVID-19 infection: Multicentre, prospective study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Viral sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 has been used for outbreak investigation, but there is limited evidence supporting routine use for infection prevention and control (IPC) within hospital settings.

Methods

We conducted a prospective non-randomised trial of sequencing at 14 acute UK hospital trusts. Sites each had a 4-week baseline data collection period, followed by intervention periods comprising 8 weeks of 'rapid' (<48 hr) and 4 weeks of 'longer-turnaround' (5-10 days) sequencing using a sequence reporting tool (SRT). Data were collected on all hospital-onset COVID-19 infections (HOCIs; detected ≥48 hr from admission). The impact of the sequencing intervention on IPC knowledge and actions, and on the incidence of probable/definite hospital-acquired infections (HAIs), was evaluated.

Results

A total of 2170 HOCI cases were recorded from October 2020 to April 2021, corresponding to a period of extreme strain on the health service, with sequence reports returned for 650/1320 (49.2%) during intervention phases. We did not detect a statistically significant change in weekly incidence of HAIs in longer-turnaround (incidence rate ratio 1.60, 95% CI 0.85-3.01; p=0.14) or rapid (0.85, 0.48-1.50; p=0.54) intervention phases compared to baseline phase. However, IPC practice was changed in 7.8 and 7.4% of all HOCI cases in rapid and longer-turnaround phases, respectively, and 17.2 and 11.6% of cases where the report was returned. In a 'per-protocol' sensitivity analysis, there was an impact on IPC actions in 20.7% of HOCI cases when the SRT report was returned within 5 days. Capacity to respond effectively to insights from sequencing was breached in most sites by the volume of cases and limited resources.

Conclusions

While we did not demonstrate a direct impact of sequencing on the incidence of nosocomial transmission, our results suggest that sequencing can inform IPC response to HOCIs, particularly when returned within 5 days.

Funding

COG-UK is supported by funding from the Medical Research Council (MRC) part of UK Research & Innovation (UKRI), the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) (grant code: MC_PC_19027), and Genome Research Limited, operating as the Wellcome Sanger Institute.

Clinical trial number

NCT04405934.

SUBMITTER: Stirrup O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9596156 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of rapid SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing in supporting infection control for hospital-onset COVID-19 infection: Multicentre, prospective study.

Stirrup Oliver O Blackstone James J Mapp Fiona F MacNeil Alyson A Panca Monica M Holmes Alison A Machin Nicholas N Shin Gee Yen GY Mahungu Tabitha T Saeed Kordo K Saluja Tranprit T Taha Yusri Y Mahida Nikunj N Pope Cassie C Chawla Anu A Cutino-Moguel Maria-Teresa MT Tamuri Asif A Williams Rachel R Darby Alistair A Robertson David L DL Flaviani Flavia F Nastouli Eleni E Robson Samuel S Smith Darren D Loose Matthew M Laing Kenneth K Monahan Irene I Kele Beatrix B Haldenby Sam S George Ryan R Bashton Matthew M Witney Adam A AA Byott Matthew M Coll Francesc F Chapman Michael M Peacock Sharon J SJ Hughes Joseph J Nebbia Gaia G Partridge David G DG Parker Matthew M Price James Richard JR Peters Christine C Roy Sunando S Snell Luke B LB de Silva Thushan I TI Thomson Emma E Flowers Paul P Copas Andrew A Breuer Judith J

eLife 20220913

<h4>Background</h4>Viral sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 has been used for outbreak investigation, but there is limited evidence supporting routine use for infection prevention and control (IPC) within hospital settings.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a prospective non-randomised trial of sequencing at 14 acute UK hospital trusts. Sites each had a 4-week baseline data collection period, followed by intervention periods comprising 8 weeks of 'rapid' (<48 hr) and 4 weeks of 'longer-turnaround' (5-10 days) s ...[more]

PMID: 36098502

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesNosocomial transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has been a significant cause of mortality in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. The COG-UK Consortium Hospital-Onset COVID-19 Infections (COG-UK HOCI) study aims to evaluate whether the use of rapid whole-genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2, supported by a novel probabilistic reporting methodology, can inform infection prevention and control (IPC) practice within NHS hospital settings.DesignMulticentre, prospective, interventional, superiority study.Setting14 participating NHS hospitals over winter-spring 2020/2021 in the UK.ParticipantsEligible patients must be admitted to hospital with first-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive test result >48 hour from time of admission, where COVID-19 diagnosis not suspected on admission. The projected sample size is 2380 patients.InterventionThe intervention is the return of a sequence report, within 48 hours in one phase (rapid local lab processing) and within 5-10 days in a second phase (mimicking central lab), comparing the viral genome from an eligible study participant with others within and outside the hospital site.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcomes are incidence of Public Health England (PHE)/IPC-defined SARS-CoV-2 hospital-acquired infection during the baseline and two interventional phases, and proportion of hospital-onset cases with genomic evidence of transmission linkage following implementation of the intervention where such linkage was not suspected by initial IPC investigation. Secondary outcomes include incidence of hospital outbreaks, with and without sequencing data; actual and desirable changes to IPC actions; periods of healthcare worker (HCW) absence. Health economic analysis will be conducted to determine cost benefit of the intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews with HCWs will be conducted alongside the study.Trial registration numberISRCTN50212645. Pre-results stage. This manuscript is based on protocol V.6.0. 2 September 2021.

Project description:ImportanceClostridioides difficile infection is the most common hospital-acquired infection in the United States, yet few studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of infection control initiatives targeting C difficile.ObjectiveTo compare the cost-effectiveness of 9 C difficile single intervention strategies and 8 multi-intervention bundles.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation was conducted in a simulated 200-bed tertiary, acute care, adult hospital. The study relied on clinical outcomes from a published agent-based simulation model of C difficile transmission. The model included 4 agent types (ie, patients, nurses, physicians, and visitors). Cost and utility estimates were derived from the literature.InterventionsDaily sporicidal cleaning, terminal sporicidal cleaning, health care worker hand hygiene, patient hand hygiene, visitor hand hygiene, health care worker contact precautions, visitor contact precautions, C difficile screening at admission, and reduced intrahospital patient transfers.Main outcomes and measuresCost-effectiveness was evaluated from the hospital perspective and defined by 2 measures: cost per hospital-onset C difficile infection averted and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).ResultsIn this agent-based model of a simulated 200-bed tertiary, acute care, adult hospital, 5 of 9 single intervention strategies were dominant, reducing cost, increasing QALYs, and averting hospital-onset C difficile infection compared with baseline standard hospital practices. They were daily cleaning (most cost-effective, saving $358 268 and 36.8 QALYs annually), health care worker hand hygiene, patient hand hygiene, terminal cleaning, and reducing intrahospital patient transfers. Screening at admission cost $1283/QALY, while health care worker contact precautions and visitor hand hygiene interventions cost $123 264/QALY and $5 730 987/QALY, respectively. Visitor contact precautions was dominated, with increased cost and decreased QALYs. Adding screening, health care worker hand hygiene, and patient hand hygiene sequentially to the daily cleaning intervention formed 2-pronged, 3-pronged, and 4-pronged multi-intervention bundles that cost an additional $29 616/QALY, $50 196/QALY, and $146 792/QALY, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this study suggest that institutions should seek to streamline their infection control initiatives and prioritize a smaller number of highly cost-effective interventions. Daily sporicidal cleaning was among several cost-saving strategies that could be prioritized over minimally effective, costly strategies, such as visitor contact precautions.

Project description:BackgroundBackground Population-based data on SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy and assessment of passive immunity to the neonate, is lacking. We profiled the maternal and fetal response using a combination of viral RNA from naso-pharyngeal swabs and serological assessment of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.MethodsThis multicentre prospective observational study was conducted between March 24th and August 31st 2020. Two independent cohorts were established, a symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 cohort and a cohort of asymptomatic pregnant women attending two of the largest maternity hospitals in Europe. Symptomatic women were invited to provide a serum sample to assess antibody responses. Asymptomatic pregnant women provided a nasopharyngeal swab and serum sample. RT-PCR for viral RNA was performed using the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 6800 platform (Roche). Umbilical cord bloods were obtained at delivery. Maternal and fetal serological response was measured using both the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (Roche), Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG Assay and the IgM Architect assay. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants.ResultsTen of twenty three symptomatic women had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected on nasopharyngeal swabs. Five (5/23, 21.7%) demonstrated serological evidence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies and seven (30.4%, 7/23) were positive for IgM antibodies. In the asymptomatic cohort, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in RNA was 0.16% (1/608). IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 1·67% (10/598, 95% CI 0·8%-3·1%) and IgM in 3·51% (21/598, 95% CI 2·3-5·5%). Nine women had repeat testing post the baseline test. Four (4/9, 44%) remained IgM positive and one remained IgG positive. 3 IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detectable in cord bloods from babies born to five seropositive women who delivered during the study. The mean gestation at serological test was 34 weeks. The mean time between maternal serologic positivity and detection in umbilical cord samples was 28 days.ConclusionUsing two independent serological assays, we present a comprehensive illustration of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in pregnancy, and show a low prevalence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV2. Transplacental migration of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was identified in cord blood of women who demonstrated antenatal anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, raising the possibility of passive immunity.

Project description:ImportanceCharacterizing the scale and factors associated with hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infections could help inform hospital and public health policies regarding prevention and surveillance needs for these infections.ObjectiveTo evaluate associations of hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection rates with different periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital characteristics, and testing practices.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study of US hospitals reporting SARS-CoV-2 testing data in the PINC AI Healthcare Database COVID-19 special release files was conducted from July 2020 through June 2022. Data were collected from hospitals that reported at least 1 SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction or antigen test during hospitalizations discharged that month. For each hospital-month where the hospital reported sufficient data, all hospitalizations discharged in that month were included in the cohort. SARS-CoV-2 viral tests and results reported in the microbiology files for all hospitalizations in the study period by discharge month were identified. Data analysis was conducted from September 2022 to March 2023.ExposureHospitalizations discharged in an included hospital-month.Main outcomes and measuresMultivariable generalized estimating equation negative-binomial regression models were used to assess associations of monthly rates of hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infections per 1000 patient-days (defined as a first positive SARS-CoV-2 test during after hospitalization day 7) with the phase of the pandemic (defined as the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant in circulation), admission testing rates, and hospital characteristics (hospital bed size, teaching status, urban vs rural designation, Census region, and patient distribution variables).ResultsA total of 5687 hospital-months from 288 distinct hospitals were included, which contributed 4 421 268 hospitalization records. Among 171 564 hospitalizations with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, 7591 (4.4%) were found to be hospital onset and 6455 (3.8%) were indeterminate onset. The mean monthly hospital-onset infection rate per 1000 patient-days was 0.27 (95 CI, 0.26-0.29). Hospital-onset infections occurred in 2217 of 5687 hospital-months (39.0%). The monthly percentage of discharged patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 at admission varied; 1673 hospital-months (29.4%) had less than 25% of hospitalizations tested at admission; 2199 hospital-months (38.7%) had 25% to 50% of all hospitalizations tested, and 1815 hospital months (31.9%) had more than 50% of all hospitalizations tested at admission. Postadmission testing rates and community-onset infection rates increased with admission testing rates. In multivariable models restricted to hospital-months testing at least 25% of hospitalizations at admission, a 10% increase in community-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was associated with a 178% increase in the hospital-onset infection rate (rate ratio, 2.78; 95% CI, 2.52-3.07). Additionally, the phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the admission testing rate, Census region, and bed size were all significantly associated with hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection rates.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of hospitals reporting SARS-CoV-2 infections, there was an increase of hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infections when community-onset infections were higher, indicating a need for ongoing and enhanced surveillance and prevention efforts to reduce in-hospital transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infections, particularly when community-incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections is high.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent microbiological methods lack the resolution to accurately identify multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) transmission, however, whole genome sequencing can identify highly-related patient isolates providing opportunities for precision infection control interventions. We investigated the feasibility and potential impact of a prospective multi-centre genomics workflow for hospital infection control.MethodsWe conducted a prospective genomics implementation study across eight Australian hospitals over 15 months (2017,2018), collecting all clinical and screening isolates from inpatients with vanA VRE, MRSA, ESBL Escherichia coli (ESBL-Ec), or ESBL Klebsiella pneumoniae (ESBL-Kp). Genomic and epidemiologic data were integrated to assess MDRO transmission.FindingsIn total, 2275 isolates were included from 1970 patients, predominantly ESBL-Ec (40·8%) followed by MRSA (35·6%), vanA VRE (15·2%), and ESBL-Kp (8·3%).Overall, hospital and genomic epidemiology showed 607 patients (30·8%) acquired their MDRO in hospital, including the majority of vanA VRE (266 patients, 86·4%), with lower proportions of ESBL-Ec (186 patients, 23·0%), ESBL-Kp (42 patients, 26·3%), and MRSA (113 patients, 16·3%). Complex patient movements meant the majority of MDRO transmissions would remain undetected without genomic data.The genomics implementation had major impacts, identifying unexpected MDRO transmissions prompting new infection control interventions, and contributing to vanA VRE becoming a notifiable condition. We identified barriers to implementation and recommend strategies for mitigation.InterpretationImplementation of a multi-centre genomics-informed infection control workflow is feasible and identifies many unrecognised MDRO transmissions. This provides critical opportunities for interventions to improve patient safety in hospitals.FundingMelbourne Genomics Health Alliance (supported by State Government of Victoria, Australia), and National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia).

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of rapid SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing in supporting infection control for hospital-onset COVID-19 infection: Multicentre, prospective study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Funding

Clinical trial number

Publications

Effectiveness of rapid SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing in supporting infection control for hospital-onset COVID-19 infection: Multicentre, prospective study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets