Real-time virtual infection prevention and control assessments in skilled nursing homes, New York, March 2020—A pilot project. (19th March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ostrowsky, Belinda E.; Weil, Lauren M.; Olaisen, R. Henry; Stricof, Rachel L.; Adams, Eleanor H.; Tsivitis, Marie I.; Eramo, Antonella; Giardina, Rosalie; Erazo, Richard; Southwick, Karen L.; Greenko, Jane A.; Lutterloh, Emily C.; Blog, Debra S.; Green, Crystal; Carrasco, Kimberly; Fernandez, Rafael; Vallabhaneni, Snigdha; Quinn, Monica; Kogut, Sarah J.; Bennett, Joy; Chico, David M.; Luzinas, Martha
• Other Names: collab.
• Is Part Of: Infection control and hospital epidemiology. Volume 43:Number 3(2022)
• Page Start: 351
• Page End: 357
• Publication Date: 2022-03-19
• Subjects: Nosocomial infections -- Epidemiology -- Periodicals; Health facilities -- Sanitation -- Periodicals; Hospital buildings -- Sanitation -- Periodicals; Cross Infection -- Periodicals; Epidemiology -- Periodicals; Hospitals -- Periodicals; Infection Control -- Periodicals; 614.44
• DOI: 10.1017/ice.2021.100
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0899-823X

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To describe a pilot project infection prevention and control (IPC) assessment conducted in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) in New York State (NYS) during a pivotal 2-week period when the region became the nation's epicenter for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Design: A telephone and video assessment of IPC measures in SNFs at high risk or experiencing COVID-19 activity. Participants: SNFs in 14 New York counties, including New York City. Intervention: A 3-component remote IPC assessment: (1) screening tool; (2) telephone IPC checklist; and (3) COVID-19 video IPC assessment (ie, "COVIDeo"). Results: In total, 92 SNFs completed the IPC screening tool and checklist: 52 (57%) were conducted as part COVID-19 investigations, and 40 (43%) were proactive prevention-based assessments. Among the 40 proactive assessments, 14 (35%) identified suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases. COVIDeo was performed in 26 (28%) of 92 assessments and provided observations that other tools would have missed: personal protective equipment (PPE) that was not easily accessible, redundant, or improperly donned, doffed, or stored and specific challenges implementing IPC in specialty populations. The IPC assessments took ∼1 hour each and reached an estimated 4 times as many SNFs as on-site visits in a similar time frame. Conclusions: Remote IPC assessments by telephone and video were timely and feasible methods of assessing the extent to which IPC interventions had been implemented in a vulnerable setting and to disseminate real-time recommendations. Remote assessments are now being implemented across New York State and in various healthcare facility types. Similar methods have been adapted nationally by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.