Background/Objective
Recommendations for infection prevention and control (IPC) of COVID‐19 in long‐term care settings were developed based on limited understanding of COVID‐19 and should be evaluated to determine their efficacy in reducing transmission among high‐risk populations.
Design and Setting
Site visits to 24 long‐term care facilities (LTCFs) in Fulton County, Georgia, were conducted between June and July 2020 to assess adherence to current guidelines, provide real‐time feedback on potential weaknesses, and identify specific indicators whose implementation or lack thereof was associated with higher or lower prevalence of COVID‐19.
Participants
Twenty‐four LTCFs were visited, representing 2,580 LTCF residents, among whom 1,004 (39%) were infected with COVID‐19.
Measurements
Overall IPC adherence in LTCFs was analyzed for 33 key indicators across five categories: Hand Hygiene, Disinfection, Social Distancing, PPE, and Symptom Screening. Facilities were divided into Higher‐ and Lower‐prevalence groups based on cumulative COVID‐19 infection prevalence to determine differences in IPC implementation.
Results
IPC implementation was lowest in the Disinfection category (32%) and highest in the Symptom Screening category (74%). Significant differences in IPC implementation between the Higher‐ and Lower‐prevalence groups were observed in the Social Distancing category (Higher‐prevalence group 54% vs Lower‐prevalence group 74%, P < .01) and the PPE category (Higher‐prevalence group 41% vs Lower‐prevalence group 72%, P < .01).
Conclusion
LTCFs with lower COVID‐19 prevalence among residents had significantly greater implementation of IPC recommendations compared to those with higher COVID‐19 prevalence, suggesting the utility in adhering to current guidelines to reduce transmission in this vulnerable population.
Through infection prevention and control (IPC) site visits to 23 LTCFs in Fulton County, Georgia, comparison between the Higher- and Lower-prevalence groups revealed significant differences in PPE and Social Distancing, with five specific indicators driving these differences.
Scombrotoxin fish poisoning (SFP) is caused by the ingestion of certain fish species with elevated concentrations of histamine due to decomposition. In fall 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was notified of 51 SFP cases including two hospitalizations from 11 states through the FDA consumer complaint system or directly from state partners. A case patient was defined as an individual who experienced a histamine-type reaction after consumption of tuna imported from Vietnam and an illness onset between 14 August and 24 November 2019. A traceback investigation was initiated at 19 points of service to identify a common tuna source. The FDA and state partners collected 34 product samples throughout the distribution chain, including from a case patient's home, points of service, distributors, and the port of entry. Samples were analyzed for histamine by sensory evaluation and/or chemical testing. Case patients reported exposure to tuna imported from Vietnam. The traceback investigation identified two Vietnamese manufacturers as the sources of the tuna. Twenty-nine samples were confirmed as decomposed by sensory evaluation and/or were positive for elevated histamine concentrations by chemical testing. Both Vietnamese companies were placed on an import alert. Seven U.S. companies and one Vietnamese company initiated voluntary recalls. The FDA released public communication naming the U.S. importers to help suppliers and distributors identify the product and effectuate the foreign company's recall. This SFP outbreak investigation highlights the complexities of the federal outbreak response, specifically related to imported food. Cultural considerations regarding imported foods should be addressed during outbreak responses when timing is critical. Collaboration with countries where confidentiality agreements are not in place can limit information sharing and the speed of public health responses.
HIGHLIGHTS
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.