C. difficile PCR testing identifies both colonized and infected patients, making it critical to only test patients that meet clinical criteria for C. difficile infection (CDI). We implemented an automated order-entry protocol that reduced inappropriate testing by 64% and hospital-onset (HO) CDI Standardized Infection Ratio (SIR) from 1.62 to 0.82.

A retrospective cohort study at four academic medical centers with high COVID-19 vaccination rates evaluated breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant (B.1.617.2) infections in vaccinated healthcare workers. Few work-related secondary cases were identified. Breakthrough cases were largely due to unmasked social activities outside of work.

Objective:To assess the impact of a newly developed Central-Line Insertion Site Assessment (CLISA) score on the incidence of local inflammation or infection for CLABSI prevention.Design:A pre- and postintervention, quasi-experimental quality improvement study.Setting and participants:Adult inpatients with central venous catheters (CVCs) hospitalized in an intensive care unit or oncology ward at a large academic medical center.Methods:We evaluated CLISA score impact on insertion site inflammation and infection (CLISA score of 2 or 3) incidence in the baseline period (June 2014–January 2015) and the intervention period (April 2015–October 2017) using interrupted times series and generalized linear mixed-effects multivariable analyses. These were run separately for days-to-line removal from identification of a CLISA score of 2 or 3. CLISA score interrater reliability and photo quiz results were evaluated.Results:Among 6,957 CVCs assessed 40,846 times, percentage of lines with CLISA score of 2 or 3 in the baseline and intervention periods decreased by 78.2% (from 22.0% to 4.7%), with a significant immediate decrease in the time-series analysis (P < .001). According to the multivariable regression, the intervention was associated with lower percentage of lines with a CLISA score of 2 or 3, after adjusting for age, gender, CVC body location, and hospital unit (odds ratio, 0.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.06–0.34; P < .001). According to the multivariate regression, days to removal of lines with CLISA score of 2 or 3 was 3.19 days faster after the intervention (P < .001). Also, line dwell time decreased 37.1% from a mean of 14 days (standard deviation [SD], 10.6) to 8.8 days (SD, 9.0) (P < .001). Device utilization ratios decreased 9% from 0.64 (SD, 0.08) to 0.58 (SD, 0.06) (P = .039).Conclusions:The CLISA score creates a common language for assessing line infection risk and successfully promotes high compliance with best practices in timely line removal.