TY - JOUR
T1 - Hospital-acquired influenza in an Australian tertiary Centre 2017
T2 - A surveillance based study
AU - Parkash, Nikita
AU - Beckingham, Wendy
AU - Andersson, Patiyan
AU - Kelly, Paul
AU - Senanayake, Sanjaya
AU - Coatsworth, Nicholas
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The Author(s).
PY - 2019/4/16
Y1 - 2019/4/16
N2 - Background: In 2017, Australia experienced its highest levels of influenza virus activity since the 2009 pandemic. This allowed detailed comparison of the characteristics of patients with community and hospital-acquired influenza, and infection control factors that contributed to influenza spread. Methods: A surveillance based study was conducted on hospitalised patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza at the Canberra Hospital during April-October 2017. Differences between the hospital-acquired and community-acquired patient characteristics and outcomes were assessed by univariate analysis. Epidemiologic curves were developed and cluster distribution within the hospital was determined. Results: Two hundred and ninety-two patients were included in the study. Twenty-eight (9.6%) acquired influenza in hospital, representing a higher proportion than any of the previous 5 years (range 0.9-5.8%). These patients were more likely to have influenza A (p = 0.021), had higher rates of diabetes (p = 0.015), malignancy (p = 0.046) and chronic liver disease (p = 0.043). Patients acquiring influenza in hospital met clinical criteria for influenza like illness in 25% of cases, compared with 64.4% for community-acquired cases (p < 0.001). Hospital-acquired influenza cases occurred in two distinct clusters. Patients were moved an average of 5 times after diagnosis. Mean length of stay following diagnosis was 13 days compared to 5 days for community-acquired cases (p < 0.001). Of the patients with hospital-acquired influenza, 22 were in shared rooms during their incubation period and 9 were not isolated in single rooms following diagnosis. Treatment was initiated within the recommended 48 h period following symptom onset for 62.5% of hospital-acquired cases compared with 39.8% of community-acquired cases (p = 0.033). Conclusions: Our results show that clinical presentation differed between patients with hospital-acquired influenza compared with those who acquired influenza in the community. Cases occurred in two clusters suggesting intra-hospital transmission rather than random importation from the community, highlighting the importance of infection control measures to limit influenza spread. Patients with hospital-acquired influenza may present without classical features of an influenza-like illness and this should promote earlier diagnostic testing and isolation to limit spread. Movement of patients after diagnosis is likely to facilitate spread within the hospital.
AB - Background: In 2017, Australia experienced its highest levels of influenza virus activity since the 2009 pandemic. This allowed detailed comparison of the characteristics of patients with community and hospital-acquired influenza, and infection control factors that contributed to influenza spread. Methods: A surveillance based study was conducted on hospitalised patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza at the Canberra Hospital during April-October 2017. Differences between the hospital-acquired and community-acquired patient characteristics and outcomes were assessed by univariate analysis. Epidemiologic curves were developed and cluster distribution within the hospital was determined. Results: Two hundred and ninety-two patients were included in the study. Twenty-eight (9.6%) acquired influenza in hospital, representing a higher proportion than any of the previous 5 years (range 0.9-5.8%). These patients were more likely to have influenza A (p = 0.021), had higher rates of diabetes (p = 0.015), malignancy (p = 0.046) and chronic liver disease (p = 0.043). Patients acquiring influenza in hospital met clinical criteria for influenza like illness in 25% of cases, compared with 64.4% for community-acquired cases (p < 0.001). Hospital-acquired influenza cases occurred in two distinct clusters. Patients were moved an average of 5 times after diagnosis. Mean length of stay following diagnosis was 13 days compared to 5 days for community-acquired cases (p < 0.001). Of the patients with hospital-acquired influenza, 22 were in shared rooms during their incubation period and 9 were not isolated in single rooms following diagnosis. Treatment was initiated within the recommended 48 h period following symptom onset for 62.5% of hospital-acquired cases compared with 39.8% of community-acquired cases (p = 0.033). Conclusions: Our results show that clinical presentation differed between patients with hospital-acquired influenza compared with those who acquired influenza in the community. Cases occurred in two clusters suggesting intra-hospital transmission rather than random importation from the community, highlighting the importance of infection control measures to limit influenza spread. Patients with hospital-acquired influenza may present without classical features of an influenza-like illness and this should promote earlier diagnostic testing and isolation to limit spread. Movement of patients after diagnosis is likely to facilitate spread within the hospital.
KW - Cross infection
KW - Disease transmission
KW - Human
KW - Infection control
KW - Infectious
KW - Influenza
KW - Sentinel surveillance
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064441420&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12890-019-0842-6
DO - 10.1186/s12890-019-0842-6
M3 - Article
SN - 1471-2466
VL - 19
JO - BMC Pulmonary Medicine
JF - BMC Pulmonary Medicine
IS - 1
M1 - 79
ER -