Health care personnel (HCP) are at increased risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), as a result of their exposure to patients or community contacts with COVID-19 (1,2). Since the first confirmed case of COVID-19 in Minnesota was reported on March 6, 2020, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) has required health care facilities* to report HCP † exposures to persons with confirmed COVID-19 for exposure risk assessment and to enroll HCP with higher-risk exposures into quarantine and symptom monitoring. During March 6-July 11, MDH and 1,217 partnering health care facilities assessed 21,406 HCP exposures; among these, 5,374 (25%) were classified as higher-risk § (3). Higher-risk exposures involved direct patient care (66%) and nonpatient care interactions (e.g., with coworkers and social and household contacts) (34%). Within 14 days following a higher-risk exposure, nearly one third (31%) of HCP who were enrolled in monitoring reported COVID-19-like symptoms, ¶ and more than one half (52%) of enrolled HCP with symptoms received positive * Health care facilities as defined by MDH include acute care hospitals, critical access hospitals, long-term acute care hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, assisted living facilities, group homes, adult foster care, treatment facilities, dialysis centers, outpatient clinics, dental clinics, home health care, and hospice. † HCP as defined by MDH include, but are not limited to, emergency medical service personnel, nurses, nursing assistants, physicians, technicians, therapists, phlebotomists, pharmacists, students and trainees, contractual staff members not employed by the health care facility, and persons not directly involved in patient care, but who could be exposed to infectious agents that can be transmitted in the health care setting (e.g., clerical, dietary, environmental services, laundry, security, engineering and facilities management, administrative, billing, and volunteer personnel). HCP does not include clinical laboratory personnel. § During February 8-May 18, 2020, CDC exposure risk assessment guidance included medium-and high-risk categories, with risk level based on PPE worn and type of potential contact with a person with confirmed COVID-19. On May 19, CDC's risk assessment was updated to include a single higher-risk exposure category to include close (within 6 feet), prolonged (≥15 minutes or of any duration during an aerosol-generating procedure) contact with a person with confirmed COVID

Blastomycosis is a systemic disease caused by Blastomyces spp. fungi. To determine its epidemiology in blastomycosis-endemic Minnesota, USA, we evaluated all cases reported to public health officials during 1999-2018. We focused on time to diagnosis, exposure activities, and exposure location. A total of 671 cases and a median of 34 cases/year were reported. Median time to diagnosis was 31 days; 61% of patients were not tested for blastomycosis until they were hospitalized. The case-fatality rate was 10%, and patients SYNOPSIS In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by Medscape, LLC and Emerging Infectious Diseases. Medscape, LLC is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team. Medscape, LLC designates this Journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1.00 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn up to 1.0 MOC points in the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program. Participants will earn MOC points equivalent to the amount of CME credits claimed for the activity. It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABIM MOC credit. All other clinicians completing this activity will be issued a certificate of participation. To participate in this journal CME activity: (1) review the learning objectives and author disclosures; (2) study the education content; (3) take the post-test with a 75% minimum passing score and complete the evaluation at

Prospective, population-based surveillance to systematically ascertain exposures to food production animals or their environments among Minnesota residents with sporadic, domestically acquired, laboratory-confirmed enteric zoonotic pathogen infections was conducted from 2012 through 2016. Twenty-three percent (n = 1708) of the 7560 enteric disease cases in the study reported an animal agriculture exposure in their incubation period, including 60% (344/571) of Cryptosporidium parvum cases, 28% (934/3391) of Campylobacter cases, 22% (85/383) of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) O157 cases, 16% (83/521) of non-O157 STEC cases, 10% (253/2575) of non-typhoidal Salmonella enterica cases and 8% (9/119) of Yersinia enterocolitica cases. Living and/or working on a farm accounted for 61% of cases with an agricultural exposure, followed by visiting a private farm (29% of cases) and visiting a public animal agriculture venue (10% of cases). Cattle were the most common animal type in agricultural exposures, reported by 72% of cases. The estimated cumulative incidence of zoonotic enteric infections for people who live and/or work on farms with food production animals in Minnesota during 2012–2016 was 147 per 10 000 population, vs. 18.5 per 10 000 for other Minnesotans. The burden of enteric zoonoses among people with animal agriculture exposures appears to be far greater than previously appreciated.

Background No rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) failure has been documented in humans in the United States using modern cell-culture vaccines. In January 2021, an 84-year-old male died from rabies six months after being bitten by a rabid bat despite receiving timely rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). We investigated the cause of breakthrough infection. Methods We reviewed medical records, laboratory results, and autopsy findings, and performed whole genome sequencing (WGS) to compare patient and bat virus sequences. Storage, administration, and integrity of PEP biologics administered to the patient were assessed; samples from leftover rabies immunoglobulin were evaluated for potency. We conducted risk assessments for persons potentially exposed to the bat and for close contacts of the patient. Results Rabies virus antibodies present in serum and cerebrospinal fluid were non-neutralizing. Antemortem blood testing revealed the patient had unrecognized monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance. Autopsy findings showed rabies meningoencephalitis and metastatic prostatic adenocarcinoma. Rabies virus sequences from the patient and the offending bat were identical by WGS. No deviations were identified in potency, quality control, administration, or storage of administered PEP. Of 332 persons assessed for potential rabies exposure to the case patient, three (0.9%) warranted PEP. Conclusion This is the first reported failure of rabies PEP in the Western Hemisphere using a cell culture vaccine. Host-mediated primary vaccine failure attributed to previously unrecognized impaired immunity is the most likely explanation for this breakthrough infection. Clinicians should consider measuring rabies neutralizing antibody titers after completion of PEP if there is any suspicion for immunocompromise.

No abstract