4.7 Article

Regional Spread of an Outbreak of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Through an Ego Network of Healthcare Facilities

期刊

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 67, 期 3, 页码 407-410

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciy084

关键词

social network analysis; ego networks; HAI

资金

  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Epicenter Program [U54CK000161]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. In 2013, New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase (NDM)-producing Escherichia coli, a type of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae uncommon in the United States, was identified in a tertiary care hospital (hospital A) in northeastern Illinois. The outbreak was traced to a contaminated duodenoscope. Patient-sharing patterns can be described through social network analysis and ego networks, which could be used to identify hospitals most likely to accept patients from a hospital with an outbreak. Methods. Using Illinois' hospital discharge data and the Illinois extensively drug-resistant organism (XDRO) registry, we constructed an ego network around hospital A. We identified which facilities NDM outbreak patients subsequently visited and whether the facilities reported NDM cases. Results. Of the 31 outbreak cases entered into the XDRO registry who visited hospital A, 19 (61%) were subsequently admitted to 13 other hospitals during the following 12 months. Of the 13 hospitals, the majority (n = 9; 69%) were in our defined ego network, and 5 of those 9 hospitals consequently reported at least 1 additional NDM case. Ego network facilities were more likely to identify cases compared to a geographically defined group of facilities (9/22 vs 10/66; P = .01); only 1 reported case fell outside of the ego network. Conclusions. The outbreak hospital's ego network accurately predicted which hospitals the outbreak patients would visit. Many of these hospitals reported additional NDM cases. Prior knowledge of this ego network could have efficiently focused public health resources on these high-risk facilities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据