3. Stopping Hospital Infections with Environmental Services (SHINE): A Cluster-Randomized Trial of Intensive Monitoring Methods for Terminal Room Cleaning on Rates of Multidrug-Resistant Organisms (MDROs) in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU)

Abstract Background MDROs frequently contaminate hospital environments. We performed a multicenter cluster-randomized, crossover trial of two methods for intensive monitoring of terminal cleaning effectiveness at reducing infection and colonization with MDROs within ICUs. Methods Six medical and surgical ICUs at three medical centers received both intensive monitoring interventions sequentially, in a randomized order. The intervention included surveying a minimum of 10 surfaces each in 5 rooms weekly, after terminal cleaning, with adenosine triphosphate (ATP) monitoring or an ultraviolet fluorescent marker (UV/F). Results were delivered to environmental services (EVS) staff in real-time, with failing surfaces recleaned. The primary study outcome was the monthly rate of infection or colonization with MDROs, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Clostridioides difficile, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus, and multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacilli (MDR-GNB), assessed during a 12-month baseline comparison period and sequential 6-month intervention periods, separated by a 2-month washout. Outcomes during each intervention period were compared to the combined baseline period plus the alternative intervention period using mixed-effects Poisson regression, with study hospital as a random effect. Results The primary outcome rate varied by hospital and ICU (Figure 1). The ATP method was associated with a relative reduction in the incidence rate of infection or colonization with MDROs (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.887, 95% confidence-interval (CI) 0.811–0.969, P=0.008) (Table 1), infection with MDROs (IRR 0.924, 95% CI 0.855–0.998, P=0.04), and infection or colonization limited to multidrug-resistant MDR-GNB (IRR 0.856, 95% CI 0.825–0.887, P< 0.001). The UV/F intervention was not associated with a statistically significant impact on these outcomes. Room turn-around time was increased by a median of one minute with the ATP intervention and 4.5 minutes with the UV/F intervention compared to baseline. Conclusion Intensive monitoring of ICU terminal room cleaning with an ATP modality is associated with a relative reduction of infection and colonization with MDROs with a negligible impact on TAT. Disclosures Hilary Babcock, MD, MPH, FIDSA, FSHEA (nothing to disclose), David K. Warren, MD, MPH, Homburg & Partner (consultant), Ebbing Lautenbach, MD, MPH, MSCE (nothing to disclose), Jennifer Han, MD, MSCE, GlaxoSmithKline (employee, shareholder).


Session: O-01. Addressing MDRO Colonization and Infection
Background. MDROs frequently contaminate hospital environments. We performed a multicenter cluster-randomized, crossover trial of two methods for intensive monitoring of terminal cleaning effectiveness at reducing infection and colonization with MDROs within ICUs.
Methods. Six medical and surgical ICUs at three medical centers received both intensive monitoring interventions sequentially, in a randomized order. The intervention included surveying a minimum of 10 surfaces each in 5 rooms weekly, after terminal cleaning, with adenosine triphosphate (ATP) monitoring or an ultraviolet fluorescent marker (UV/F). Results were delivered to environmental services (EVS) staff in real-time, with failing surfaces recleaned. The primary study outcome was the monthly rate of infection or colonization with MDROs, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Clostridioides difficile, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus, and multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacilli (MDR-GNB), assessed during a 12-month baseline comparison period and sequential 6-month intervention periods, separated by a 2-month washout. Outcomes during each intervention period were compared to the combined baseline period plus the alternative intervention period using mixed-effects Poisson regression, with study hospital as a random effect.
Results. The primary outcome rate varied by hospital and ICU ( Figure 1). The ATP method was associated with a relative reduction in the incidence rate of infection or colonization with MDROs (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.887, 95% confidence-interval (CI) 0.811-0.969, P=0.008) (Table 1), infection with MDROs (IRR 0.924, 95% CI 0.855-0.998, P=0.04), and infection or colonization limited to multidrug-resistant MDR-GNB (IRR 0.856, 95% CI 0.825-0.887, P< 0.001). The UV/F intervention was not associated with a statistically significant impact on these outcomes. Room turnaround time was increased by a median of one minute with the ATP intervention and 4.5 minutes with the UV/F intervention compared to baseline.

Conclusion.
Intensive monitoring of ICU terminal room cleaning with an ATP modality is associated with a relative reduction of infection and colonization with MDROs with a negligible impact on TAT.
Disclosures  Background. ICU universal decolonization with daily chlorhexidine (CHG) baths plus mupirocin nasal decolonization reduces all-cause bloodstream infections (BSI) and MRSA clinical cultures. We assessed nasal iodophor, an antiseptic less susceptible to resistance, in place of mupirocin.
Methods. We conducted a cluster randomized non-inferiority trial in ICUs, comparing universal decolonization with: 1) Mupirocin-CHG: daily CHG baths and 5 days of twice daily nasal mupirocin, to 2) Iodophor-CHG: same regimen, substituting twice daily 10% povidone-iodine for mupirocin. All adult ICUs in a hospital were assigned to the same strategy. We compared each hospital's outcomes during the 18-month intervention (Nov 2017-Apr 2019) to its own baseline (May 2015-Apr 2017), during which all hospitals used mupirocin-CHG. The primary outcome was ICUattributable S. aureus clinical isolates. Secondary outcomes included ICU-attributable MRSA clinical isolates and all-cause BSI. As randomized and as treated analyses used unadjusted proportional hazards models assessing differences in outcomes between baseline and intervention periods across the two groups, accounting for clustering by hospital and patient.

Figure -Primary and Secondary Outcomes of Mupirocin Iodophor Swap Out Trial
Conclusion. Universal iodophor-CHG was equivalent to mupirocin-CHG for ICU BSI prevention. Mupirocin-CHG was superior to iodophor-CHG for S. aureus and MRSA clinical isolates, potentially due to greater adherence to mupirocin.
Disclosures. Susan S. Huang, MD, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products) Edward Septimus, MD, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products) Ken Kleinman, PhD, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic products) Lauren Heim, MPH, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted clinical trials and studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic and cleaning products)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product)Stryker (Sage) (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted clinical trials and studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic product)Xttrium (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted clinical trials and studies in which participating hospitals and nursing homes received contributed antiseptic product) Julia Moody, MS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product) Taliser R. Avery, MS, Medline (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted studies in which participating hospitals received contributed antiseptic product)Molnlycke (Other Financial or Material Support, Conducted