Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Basic Investigation of Outbreaks Karin Galil, MD MPH Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Atlanta, Georgia Outline Identify the outbreak Investigate the outbreak Interpret results Institute control measures Report results Identify Potential Outbreaks What is an outbreak ? How can one detect outbreaks ? Why should one look for outbreaks ? Outbreak: Definition An increase in the occurrence of a complication or disease above the background rate One rare event e.g. GAS surgical site infection Many episodes of common occurrence e.g. MRSA surgical site infections Background Rate of Disease Ongoing surveillance Determine rates—compare within and between institutions Trends Requires common, accepted case definitions Retrospective review of data Pitfalls in Rate Estimates Case definitions Numerator Different definition increased or decreased number Population at risk Denominator Different definition increased or decreased rate Who Identifies Potential Outbreaks ? Routine surveillance Infection control Registries Clinical staff Laboratory staff Reasons to Investigate Outbreak control Increased knowledge Pathogen Risk factors for acquisition Transmission Epidemiology Clusters that Suggest Nosocomial Transmission Similar cases on one unit or among similar patients Cases associated with invasive device HCW and patients with same infection Typical nosocomial pathogen multiply-resistant opportunistic Determining Risk Factors for Disease Known risk factors in hospital-acquired infections: Invasive devices Severe illness or underlying disease Environmental factors Especially immunocompromised patients (e.g. aspergillosis) Institute Control Measures Immediate control measures needed even before investigation begun or completed Simple: e.g. improved handwashing Complex: cohorting patients, closing unit, halting use of device or product Before the Investigation Cooperation All involved personnel and administration Laboratory capacity Antimicrobial susceptibility testing, typing (molecular and nonmolecular methods) Resources Personnel, supplies, lead investigator, statistician The Investigation Define “case” Find cases Confirm outbreak Review charts Describe epidemiology Generate hypothesis Test hypothesis Analyze data Communicate results Case Definitions “Working” case definition Person, place, time Clinical, laboratory or diagnostic findings Confirmed vs. possible cases Case definitions usually change during the investigation Example: Case Definition “A case of multi-drug resistant tuberculosis was defined as any patient in Hospital X diagnosed with active tuberculosis from January 1, 1999 to December 31, 1999 whose isolate was resistant to at least isoniazid and rifampin.” Case Finding Use case definition to find other cases in the source population Large potential source population: discharge diagnoses, microbiology log books, emergency room visits, use of diagnostic technique Small population (unit of hospital): review charts of entire cohort Line Listing Name Age Sex Ward Onset Outcome Confirm the Outbreak Calculate background rate of disease Compare rate during outbreak with background rate Define periods from incubation time to last case (or present) Rate Ratio = attack rate (outbreak period) attack rate (background period) Pseudo-Outbreaks Clusters of positive cultures in patients without evidence of disease Perceived increase in infections New or enhanced surveillance Different laboratory methods Descriptive Epidemiology Line listing of case-patients (person, place, time) Demographic information Clinical information Epidemic curve Point source Person-to-person Point Source Outbreak Shorter duration Sharp peak in epidemic curve Rapid resolution May resolve without intervention Epidemic Curve: Point Source Outbreak No. of cases 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day of Onset Day 4 Day 5 N=87 Epidemic Curve: Contaminated Product 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 r p A e n Ju g u A 1995 ct O ec D b e F r p A e n Ju 1996 g u A Bloodstream Infections and Pyrogenic Reactions 4 3 2 1 Bloodstream infection Pyrogenic reaction 10-A ug 03-A ug 27-J ul 20-J ul 13-J ul 06-J ul 0 29-J un Number of Cases Extrinsic Contamination Person-to-Person or Contaminated Equipment Poor infection control technique or contaminated patient equipment Long duration May not resolve without intervention If HCW and patients affected, plot separately and together to determine mode of transmission Clues Location Tb skin test conversion associated with outpatient HIV clinicair flow Patient characteristics Immunocompromised patients Persons of a certain age Persons with same disease/procedure Hypotheses What caused the outbreak ? Available data from the outbreak Published literature Expert opinion Hypothesis testing Epidemiologic Studies Case-control studies Cases : disease Controls : equal likelihood of exposure as cases Cohort studies Cohort selected on the basis of exposure status Case-Control Study Advantages: small number of cases, better for rare diseases, diseases with long latency periods, multiple exposures Disadvantages: selection and recall bias, not good if exposure is rare, cannot measure disease incidence rate (OR vs. RR) Cohort Study Advantages: can study rare exposures, can calculate disease incidence rates, selection bias less likely Disadvantages: feasibility, not suited to rare diseases Collect Data Complete: same data for cases and controls Unbiased: same way to avoid bias Potential Types of Bias Selection bias Self-selection Diagnostic bias Information bias Differential vs. misclassification Recall bias Questionnaire Design questionnaire Demographic information Potential risk factors Outcomes Field test Complete for on all patients Enter and Clean Data Line listing Statistical program EpiInfo, SAS, STATA Clean data Correct errors Data Analysis Descriptive statistics Univariate analysis Stratified analysis Complex analysis Descriptive Statistics Vital first step Describe person, place, time Describe frequency of all variables collected Look for errors Decide on further analyses based on these results Disease . Exposure Yes Yes No No a b a+b c d c+d a+c b+d N Risk Estimate OR/RR >> 1 Strong positive association OR/RR = 1 No association OR/RR << 1 Strong negative association Statistical Significance Confidence Intervals Include 1 Exclude 1 P value p > 0.05 p << 0.05 Univariate Analysis: Categorical Variables Categorical variables (yes/no; young/old) Odds Ratio (OR) case-control study Relative Risk (RR) cohort study Odds Ratio Case-control study OR = odds that person with disease was exposed compared to odds that a person without disease was not exposed to risk factor OR estimates the relative risk Odds Ratio OR = ad / bc Odds Ratio Disease Exposure 14 No 5 exposure 19 No disease 7 21 8 13 15 34 Calculating the Odds Ratio OR = ad / bc OR = (14)(8) / (7)(5) OR = 3.2 Relative Risk Cohort study RR = risk ratio = incidence rate ratio = relative rate RR = risk of disease among exposed compared to risk among the unexposed Relative Risk RR = a(c+d) / c(a+b) Confidence Intervals Sampling estimates the OR or RR 95% confidence Intervals—if we resampled numerous times, our estimate would fall within these bounds 95% of the time Finite population correction Statistical Tests for 2x2 Tables Chi-square test Fisher’s exact test—if value of any cell <5 P value indicates level of certainty that association was not due to chance alone Risk Estimate vs. P Value OR or RR –direction & strength of association >>1: strong association = 1 : no association <<1: strong inverse association P Value—level of certainty about the estimate of the association <<.05: unlikely to be due to chance Univariate Analysis: Continuous Variables Continuous variables (e.g. age, bp) Distribution Normal (bell-shaped) • Mean and standard deviation Not normal • Median and range Stratified Analysis Simple stratified analysis Control for one variable Logistic/linear regression models Control for multiple variables at once Control for confounding and effect modification Non-linear relationships Microbiologic Investigation Alert lab: save all specimens + positive cultures Typing of organisms Species identification Biotyping Antimicrobial susceptibility testing Advanced typing (serotyping, plasmid analysis, phage typing, isoenzyme electrophoresis, genetic fingerprinting) Environmental Investigation Are inanimate objects linked with the outbreak ? Were infections clustered in one area ? Consider infected devices, medications/products, airflow patterns Interpret Results Is there an association ? It is statistically significant ? Was study biased ? Are the results plausible ? Did the exposure precede the outcome ? Are results consistent with other studies ? Is there a dose-response effect ? Control the Outbreak Routine infection control procedures Guidelines for universal precautions Specific guidelines for patient-care equipment Specific interventions for the ongoing outbreak Clues—person, place, time Evaluate Control Measures Did the control measures stop the outbreak? Were there multiple modes of transmission ? Were control measures implemented properly ? Were control measures sufficient ? Implement Successful Control Measures Report Results Inform all concerned parties of results Hospital staff, consultants, health department Contaminated products/devices— government authorities, manufacturers Media — spokesperson Investigations are: Challenging Time - consuming Imperfect