Current Infectious Disease Reports最新文献

Purpose of review: The purpose of this study is to review racial and ethnic inequities in the incidence and prevention of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) in the USA, identify gaps in the literature, and recommend future directions to mitigate these inequities.

Recent findings: While some existing literature has identified the presence of racial/ethnic inequities in HAI incidence and outcomes, few studies to date have evaluated whether HAI prevention efforts have mitigated these inequities. Factors contributing to inequities in HAI prevention may include unconscious bias of healthcare professionals towards minoritized patients; socioeconomic and structural inequities disparately affecting minoritized communities; the racial segregation of quality healthcare through hospital price discrimination; divergent reimbursement rates between public and private insurers; policies or performance metrics which underfund and financially penalize safety-net hospitals; and insufficient research evaluating and addressing HAI inequities.

Summary: Expansion of the literature is needed to further interrogate root causes and evaluate the impact of interventions on racial/ethnic inequities in HAI incidence. Measures to mitigate inequities might include teaching healthcare workers how to recognize and mitigate unconscious biases, expanding community resources which address the social and structural determinants of health, increasing access to preventive health services, reforming federal and institutional policies to better support safety-net hospitals and disincentivize price discrimination, and improving diversity and inclusion within the health workforce.

Purpose of review: Sepsis is a leading cause of death worldwide. Groundbreaking international collaborative efforts have culminated in the widely accepted surviving sepsis guidelines, with iterative improvements in management strategies and definitions providing important advances in care for patients. Key to the diagnosis of sepsis is identification of infection, and whilst the diagnostic criteria for sepsis is now clear, the diagnosis of infection remains a challenge and there is often discordance between clinician assessments for infection.

Recent findings: We review the utility of common biochemical, microbiological and radiological tools employed by clinicians to diagnose infection and explore the difficulty of making a diagnosis of infection in severe inflammatory states through illustrative case reports. Finally, we discuss some of the novel and emerging approaches in diagnosis of infection and sepsis.

Summary: While prompt diagnosis and treatment of sepsis is essential to improve outcomes in sepsis, there remains no single tool to reliably identify or exclude infection. This contributes to unnecessary antimicrobial use that is harmful to individuals and populations. There is therefore a pressing need for novel solutions. Machine learning approaches using multiple diagnostic and clinical inputs may offer a potential solution but as yet these approaches remain experimental.

Purpose of review: We describe the similarities between antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) and infection prevention programs (IPPs), and we discuss how these similarities lend themselves to synergy between programs. We also discuss how the COVID-19 pandemic has generated further opportunities for future collaborations that could benefit both programs.

Recent findings: The COVID-19 pandemic has created new needs, such as real-time data and access to personnel important to both programs, such as information technologists and infectious diseases specialists. It has also increased concerns about rising rates of antimicrobial resistance and healthcare-associated infections, both of which overlap significantly and are key focus areas for both ASPs and IPPs. These emergent issues have highlighted the need for enhanced program infrastructure and new team models. The shift towards telecommunication and telework has facilitated the creation of enhanced infrastructures for collaboration on activities ranging from data access and reporting to providing telehealth services to remote hospitals. These enhanced infrastructures can be leveraged in future collaborative efforts between ASPs and IPPs.

Summary: Collaboration between IPPs and ASPs can mitigate setbacks experienced by health systems during the current pandemic, enhance the performance of both programs in the post-pandemic era and increase their preparedness for future pandemic threats. As health systems plan for the post-pandemic era, they should invest in opportunities for synergy between ASPs and IPPs highlighted during the pandemic.