Isolation precautions associated with COVID-19 infections among immunocompromised populations: A multicenter study of nine National Cancer Institute--designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers - 15/04/25
, Jennifer Harrington, MA, CIC b, Joanna Suh, MPH, CIC c, Candice Fearon, MSGH, BSN, RN, CIC d, Maggie Reavis, MPH, BSN, RN, CIC, CPHQ e, Suwannee Srisatidnarakul, MSN, RN, CIC f, Michelle Swetky, MPH, CIC, FAPIC a, Nancy Warren, MHA, MLT(ASCP), CIC g, Angela Badalucco, MPH, MT(ASCP) c, Caitlin M. Adams Barker, MSN, RN, CIC, FAPIC h, Shobana Nandakumar, MHA, M(ASCP), CQPA i, Steven A. Pergam, MD, MPH aResumen |
Background |
Nine Comprehensive Cancer Centers sought to understand COVID-19 infection management experiences to improve future immunocompromised host guidelines.
Methods |
Volunteers from Comprehensive Cancer Center Infection Prevention and Control (C3IC) completed 2 surveys on COVID-19 practices from March 2020 to December 2023. Three reviewers independently validated qualitative analysis of findings. Virtual meetings were leveraged to discuss findings and identify themes.
Results |
100% (9/9) of respondents changed COVID-19-associated isolation discontinuation guidance at least once. All (9/9) included patient immune status as criterion. All (9/9) required clearance testing at some point in the pandemic, 6 of 9 (66%) continued to require clearance testing at the time of the survey. Only 1 of 9 (11%) allowed antigen testing to meet criteria. Seven isolation titles were noted across 9 institutions, despite near agreement on measures employed.
Discussion |
Variability existed in COVID-19 management among study participants, despite serving similar populations, which may stem from limited data supporting understanding of viral transmissibility in immunocompromised hosts.
Conclusions |
Guideline development for immunocompromised hosts, potential drivers for viral evolution, can lack clarity for consistent management of the population. Engaging subject matters in specialty populations with future guideline development will improve infection prevention in health care settings.
El texto completo de este artículo está disponible en PDF.Highlights |
• | COVID-19 patient management varied in study representing 16% of Comprehensive Cancer Centers. |
• | 7 labels across nine centers were used for similar isolation needs in COVID-19 patient management. |
• | COVID-19 infection resolution inconsistently uses test of cure in Comprehensive Cancer Centers. |
Key Words : Cancer, Immunosuppressed hosts, SARS-CoV-2
Esquema
| Conflicts of interest: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships that may be considered as potential competing interests: One author, Steven A Pergam, reports a relationship with Global Life Technologies Corp that includes funding grants unrelated to these data or paper. He also participates in clinical trials with F2G, Mundipharma, and Symbio, none of which had any relationship to these data or paper. Other authors acknowledge volunteer leadership roles within C3IC or APIC; otherwise, authors Marie Wilson and Joanna Suh noted financial support for attending meetings or travel relative to those APIC volunteer roles. Maggie Reavis received scholarship funds to attend a conference. None of these roles or rewards had any relationship to the data or paper. |
|
| Funding/support: This research study did not receive any specific grant or internal or external funding from agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. The authors report no potential conflict of interest related to this data or study. |
Vol 53 - N° 5
P. 596-601 - mai 2025 Regresar al númeroBienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.
