The contamination of patients’ surroundings by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains understudied. We sampled the surroundings and the air of six negative-pressure non-intensive care unit (non-ICU) rooms in a designated isolation ward in Chengdu, China, that were occupied by 13 laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients who had returned from overseas travel, including 2 asymptomatic patients. A total of 44 of 112 (39.3%) surface samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2 as detected by real-time PCR, suggesting extensive contamination, although all of the air samples were negative. In particular, in a single room occupied by an asymptomatic patient, four sites were SARS-CoV-2 positive, highlighting that asymptomatic COVID-19 patients do contaminate their surroundings and impose risks for others with close contact. Placement of COVID-19 patients in rooms with negative pressure may bring a false feeling of safety, and the importance of rigorous environment cleaning should be emphasized. IMPORTANCE Although it has been well recognized that the virus SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, can be acquired by exposure to fomites, surprisingly, the contamination of patients’ surroundings by SARS-CoV-2 is largely unknown, as there have been few studies. We performed an environmental sampling study for 13 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients and found extensive contamination of patients’ surroundings. In particular, we found that asymptomatic COVID-19 patients contaminated their surroundings and therefore imposed risks for other people. Environment cleaning should be emphasized in negative-pressure rooms. The findings may be useful to guide infection control practice to protect health care workers.

Background Handwashing sinks can become contaminated by carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella (CRK), including carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella oxytoca (CRKO), but whether they are major sources of CRK infections remains unknown. Methods We performed a prospective multicenter study in 16 intensive care units (ICUs) (9 general and 7 neonatal) at 11 hospitals. All sinks at these locations were sampled to screen CRK. All CRK clinical isolates recovered between 2 weeks before and 3 months after sampling in ICUs with CRK-positive sinks or other participating ICUs at the same hospital were collected. Whole-genome sequencing of all isolates was performed. Isolates of the same sequence type (ST) were assigned to clones by calling single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Results Among 158 sinks sampled, 6 CRKP and 6 CRKO were recovered from 12 sinks in 7 ICUs, corresponding to a 7.6% CRK contamination rate. Twenty-eight clinical isolates were collected, and all were CRKP. The 34 CRKP isolates belonged to 7 STs, including ST789 (n = 14, all had blaNDM-5); ST11 (n = 12, 5 belonged to KL64 and 7 to KL47, all had blaKPC-2); ST709 (n = 4, all had blaNDM-5); and ST16, ST20, ST1027, and ST2407 (n = 1 each). One particular ST789 clone caused an outbreak and contaminated a sink. ST11_KL47 sink isolates were likely the source of a cluster of clinical isolates. Two ST11_KL64 isolates belonged to a common clone but were from 2 hospitals. Conclusions Contaminated sinks were not the major source of CRK in our local settings. ST789 blaNDM-5-carrying CRKP might represent an emerging lineage causing neonatal infections.