利用接触网络动力学实施有效干预,防止病原体在医院环境中传播:建模研究。

IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 Medicine PLoS Medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-30 eCollection Date: 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1004433
Quentin J Leclerc, Audrey Duval, Didier Guillemot, Lulla Opatowski, Laura Temime
{"title":"利用接触网络动力学实施有效干预,防止病原体在医院环境中传播:建模研究。","authors":"Quentin J Leclerc, Audrey Duval, Didier Guillemot, Lulla Opatowski, Laura Temime","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004433","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are hotspots for pathogen transmission. Infection control interventions are essential, but the high density and heterogeneity of interindividual contacts within LTCF may hinder their efficacy. Here, we explore how the patient-staff contact structure may inform effective intervention implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>Using an individual-based model (IBM), we reproduced methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonisation transmission dynamics over a detailed contact network recorded within a French LTCF of 327 patients and 263 staff over 3 months. Simulated baseline cumulative colonisation incidence was 21 patients (prediction interval: 11, 31) and 35 staff (prediction interval: 19, 54). We examined the potential impact of 3 types of interventions against transmission (reallocation reducing the number of unique contacts per staff, reinforced contact precautions, and hypothetical vaccination protecting against acquisition), targeted towards specific populations. All 3 interventions were effective when applied to all nurses or healthcare assistants (median reduction in MRSA colonisation incidence up to 35%), but the benefit did not exceed 8% when targeting any other single staff category. We identified \"supercontactor\" individuals with most contacts (\"frequency-based,\" overrepresented among nurses, porters, and rehabilitation staff) or with the longest cumulative time spent in contact (\"duration-based,\" overrepresented among healthcare assistants and patients in elderly care or persistent vegetative state (PVS)). Targeting supercontactors enhanced interventions against pathogen spread in the LTCF. With contact precautions, targeting frequency-based staff supercontactors led to the highest incidence reduction (20%, 95% CI: 19, 21). Vaccinating a mix of frequency- and duration-based staff supercontactors led to a higher reduction (23%, 95% CI: 22, 24) than all other approaches. Although based on data from a single LTCF, when varying epidemiological parameters to extend to other pathogens, our results suggest that targeting supercontactors is always the most effective strategy, indicating this approach could be applied to prevent transmission of other nosocomial pathogens.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>By characterising the contact structure in hospital settings and identifying the categories of staff and patients more likely to be supercontactors, with either more or longer contacts than others, interventions against nosocomial spread could be more effective. We find that the most efficient implementation strategy depends on the intervention (reallocation, contact precautions, vaccination) and target population (staff, patients, supercontactors). Importantly, both staff and patients may be supercontactors, highlighting the importance of including patients in measures to prevent pathogen transmission in LTCF.</p>","PeriodicalId":49008,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"21 7","pages":"e1004433"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11341093/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using contact network dynamics to implement efficient interventions against pathogen spread in hospital settings: A modelling study.\",\"authors\":\"Quentin J Leclerc, Audrey Duval, Didier Guillemot, Lulla Opatowski, Laura Temime\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004433\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are hotspots for pathogen transmission. Infection control interventions are essential, but the high density and heterogeneity of interindividual contacts within LTCF may hinder their efficacy. Here, we explore how the patient-staff contact structure may inform effective intervention implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>Using an individual-based model (IBM), we reproduced methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonisation transmission dynamics over a detailed contact network recorded within a French LTCF of 327 patients and 263 staff over 3 months. Simulated baseline cumulative colonisation incidence was 21 patients (prediction interval: 11, 31) and 35 staff (prediction interval: 19, 54). We examined the potential impact of 3 types of interventions against transmission (reallocation reducing the number of unique contacts per staff, reinforced contact precautions, and hypothetical vaccination protecting against acquisition), targeted towards specific populations. All 3 interventions were effective when applied to all nurses or healthcare assistants (median reduction in MRSA colonisation incidence up to 35%), but the benefit did not exceed 8% when targeting any other single staff category. We identified \\\"supercontactor\\\" individuals with most contacts (\\\"frequency-based,\\\" overrepresented among nurses, porters, and rehabilitation staff) or with the longest cumulative time spent in contact (\\\"duration-based,\\\" overrepresented among healthcare assistants and patients in elderly care or persistent vegetative state (PVS)). Targeting supercontactors enhanced interventions against pathogen spread in the LTCF. With contact precautions, targeting frequency-based staff supercontactors led to the highest incidence reduction (20%, 95% CI: 19, 21). Vaccinating a mix of frequency- and duration-based staff supercontactors led to a higher reduction (23%, 95% CI: 22, 24) than all other approaches. Although based on data from a single LTCF, when varying epidemiological parameters to extend to other pathogens, our results suggest that targeting supercontactors is always the most effective strategy, indicating this approach could be applied to prevent transmission of other nosocomial pathogens.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>By characterising the contact structure in hospital settings and identifying the categories of staff and patients more likely to be supercontactors, with either more or longer contacts than others, interventions against nosocomial spread could be more effective. We find that the most efficient implementation strategy depends on the intervention (reallocation, contact precautions, vaccination) and target population (staff, patients, supercontactors). Importantly, both staff and patients may be supercontactors, highlighting the importance of including patients in measures to prevent pathogen transmission in LTCF.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49008,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLoS Medicine\",\"volume\":\"21 7\",\"pages\":\"e1004433\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":15.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11341093/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLoS Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004433\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004433","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:长期护理设施(LTCF)是病原体传播的热点。感染控制干预措施至关重要,但 LTCF 内个体间接触的高密度和异质性可能会阻碍干预措施的效果。在此,我们探讨了病人与工作人员的接触结构如何为有效实施干预措施提供信息:利用基于个体的模型(IBM),我们在法国一家由 327 名患者和 263 名员工组成的 LTCF 中,通过详细的接触网络记录,再现了耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌在 3 个月内的定植传播动态。模拟的基线累积定植发生率为 21 名患者(预测区间:11-31)和 35 名员工(预测区间:19-54)。我们研究了针对特定人群的 3 种预防传播干预措施的潜在影响(重新分配减少每名员工的唯一接触者人数、加强接触预防措施和接种预防感染的假定疫苗)。当这三种干预措施应用于所有护士或医护助理时均有效(MRSA定植发生率的中位数降幅高达 35%),但当针对任何其他单一员工类别时,其效益不超过 8%。我们确定了接触最多("基于频率",在护士、搬运工和康复人员中比例偏高)或累计接触时间最长("基于持续时间",在医护助理和老年护理或持续植物人状态(PVS)患者中比例偏高)的 "超级接触者"。针对超级接触者加强了对 LTCF 中病原体传播的干预。在采取接触预防措施时,以频度为基础的超级接触者为目标可最大程度地降低发病率(20%,95% CI:19、21)。与所有其他方法相比,为频率型和持续时间型超级接触者混合接种疫苗可降低更高的发病率(23%,95% CI:22, 24)。我们的研究结果表明,以超级接触者为目标始终是最有效的策略,这表明这种方法可用于预防其他院内病原体的传播:通过分析医院环境中接触者的结构特征,确定哪些类别的员工和患者更有可能成为超级接触者,他们的接触次数比其他人多或接触时间比其他人长,这样就能更有效地干预非医院传播。我们发现,最有效的实施策略取决于干预措施(重新分配、接触预防、疫苗接种)和目标人群(员工、患者、超级接触者)。重要的是,工作人员和患者都可能是超级接触者,这突出了将患者纳入预防病原体在 LTCF 传播的措施中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Using contact network dynamics to implement efficient interventions against pathogen spread in hospital settings: A modelling study.

Background: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are hotspots for pathogen transmission. Infection control interventions are essential, but the high density and heterogeneity of interindividual contacts within LTCF may hinder their efficacy. Here, we explore how the patient-staff contact structure may inform effective intervention implementation.

Methods and findings: Using an individual-based model (IBM), we reproduced methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonisation transmission dynamics over a detailed contact network recorded within a French LTCF of 327 patients and 263 staff over 3 months. Simulated baseline cumulative colonisation incidence was 21 patients (prediction interval: 11, 31) and 35 staff (prediction interval: 19, 54). We examined the potential impact of 3 types of interventions against transmission (reallocation reducing the number of unique contacts per staff, reinforced contact precautions, and hypothetical vaccination protecting against acquisition), targeted towards specific populations. All 3 interventions were effective when applied to all nurses or healthcare assistants (median reduction in MRSA colonisation incidence up to 35%), but the benefit did not exceed 8% when targeting any other single staff category. We identified "supercontactor" individuals with most contacts ("frequency-based," overrepresented among nurses, porters, and rehabilitation staff) or with the longest cumulative time spent in contact ("duration-based," overrepresented among healthcare assistants and patients in elderly care or persistent vegetative state (PVS)). Targeting supercontactors enhanced interventions against pathogen spread in the LTCF. With contact precautions, targeting frequency-based staff supercontactors led to the highest incidence reduction (20%, 95% CI: 19, 21). Vaccinating a mix of frequency- and duration-based staff supercontactors led to a higher reduction (23%, 95% CI: 22, 24) than all other approaches. Although based on data from a single LTCF, when varying epidemiological parameters to extend to other pathogens, our results suggest that targeting supercontactors is always the most effective strategy, indicating this approach could be applied to prevent transmission of other nosocomial pathogens.

Conclusions: By characterising the contact structure in hospital settings and identifying the categories of staff and patients more likely to be supercontactors, with either more or longer contacts than others, interventions against nosocomial spread could be more effective. We find that the most efficient implementation strategy depends on the intervention (reallocation, contact precautions, vaccination) and target population (staff, patients, supercontactors). Importantly, both staff and patients may be supercontactors, highlighting the importance of including patients in measures to prevent pathogen transmission in LTCF.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS Medicine
PLoS Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
0.60%
发文量
227
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: PLOS Medicine is a prominent platform for discussing and researching global health challenges. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including biomedical, environmental, social, and political factors affecting health. It prioritizes articles that contribute to clinical practice, health policy, or a better understanding of pathophysiology, ultimately aiming to improve health outcomes across different settings. The journal is unwavering in its commitment to uphold the highest ethical standards in medical publishing. This includes actively managing and disclosing any conflicts of interest related to reporting, reviewing, and publishing. PLOS Medicine promotes transparency in the entire review and publication process. The journal also encourages data sharing and encourages the reuse of published work. Additionally, authors retain copyright for their work, and the publication is made accessible through Open Access with no restrictions on availability and dissemination. PLOS Medicine takes measures to avoid conflicts of interest associated with advertising drugs and medical devices or engaging in the exclusive sale of reprints.
期刊最新文献
The critical need for a robust research agenda on ultra-processed food consumption and cancer risk. The NOVA system can be used to address harmful foods and harmful food systems. Identification and outcomes of acute kidney disease in patients presenting in Bolivia, Brazil, South Africa, and Nepal. The association of bearing surface materials with the risk of revision following primary total hip replacement: A cohort analysis of 1,026,481 hip replacements from the National Joint Registry. Impact of active case finding for tuberculosis with mass chest X-ray screening in Glasgow, Scotland, 1950-1963: An epidemiological analysis of historical data.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1