You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Protocol
Risk factors for nosocomial bloodstream infections in COVID-19 affected patients: protocol for a case–control study
Free
  1. Carla Codina-Jiménez1,
  2. Sergio Marin1,
  3. Marlene Álvarez1,
  4. Maria Dolores Quesada2,
  5. Beatriz Rodríguez-Ponga2,
  6. Ester Valls1,
  7. Carles Quiñones1
  1. 1 Pharmacy Department, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain
  2. 2 Microbiology Department, Clinical Laboratory North Metropolitan Area, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain
  1. Correspondence to Carla Codina-Jiménez, Pharmacy Department, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain; carla.codinaa{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Background Nosocomial bloodstream infection (nBSI) is an important clinical concern among COVID-19 hospitalised patients. It can cause sepsis and septic shock leading to high morbidity, mortality, and the emergence of antibiotic resistance. The aim of this case–control study is to identify the risk factors associated with the nBSI development in COVID-19 hospitalised patients and its incidence.

Methods and analysis A retrospective case–control study will be performed. Cases will include nBSI episodes of adult patients (≥18 years) admitted to Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Barcelona, Spain, from April to December 2020 with a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Patients transferred from other hospitals will be excluded. Controls will include hospitalisation episodes of COVID-19 patients without nBSI. We will recruit a minimum of 74 nBSI episodes (cases) and 74 controls (according to sample size calculation). We will collect data on sociodemographics, clinical status at admission, hospital admission, in-hospital mortality, and exposure data (use of antivirals, glucocorticoids or immunomodulatory agents, length of hospitalisation, and use of medical devices such as intravenous catheters). A bivariate and a subsequent multivariate regression analysis will be performed to assess the independent effect of the associated risk factors after adjusting for confounders. The nBSI incidence rate will be estimated according to the number of nBSI episodes in admitted COVID-19 patients among the total person-month of follow-up.

Ethics and dissemination The protocol of this study was approved by the Ethical Committee for Drug Investigation of the Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol. The results of this case–control study will be published in a peer reviewed journal.

  • case-control studies
  • critical care
  • COVID-19
  • drug-related side effects and adverse reactions
  • pharmacy service
  • hospital

This article is made freely available for personal use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.

https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usage

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2021-002776

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is one of the biggest challenges undergone by health professionals around the world, being a public health emergency of international concern. From the first case reported in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, SARS-CoV-2 spread progressively to other countries, saturating hospitals throughout the world and leading to an unprecedented strain on hospital resources.1 2

    Hospitalised patients are susceptible to hospital-acquired infections such as bacterial bloodstream infections (BSIs).3 BSIs can cause sepsis and septic shock which can lead to high morbidity and mortality.4–7 A systematic review which aimed to estimate the total number of BSI episodes and related deaths per year in North America and Europe showed that there were over 1.2 million BSI episodes that caused 157 000 deaths per year in Europe, based on studies performed in Denmark, England, and Finland.8 Nosocomial bloodstream infections (nBSI), which occur beyond the first 48 hours of hospitalisation, are associated with high mortality and healthcare resource consumption, especially in intensive care units (ICUs), and are one of the biggest clinical concerns regarding the quality of care and patient safety.4 5 9–13 Also, the emergence and spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria are of great concern. Due to the emergence of antimicrobial resistance, treatment has become difficult, especially for infections caused by gram-negative bacteria, which can be serious and even fatal in hospitalised patients.14 15

    Moreover, recent studies have shown that the incidence of nBSI among COVID-19 patients admitted to an ICU is high and that it could be related to significant increases in length of ICU stay, and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation.16 17 This condition could be related to the immune dysregulation of severely affected patients, the need for extensive antimicrobial use, and less compliance with preventive measures. 17 Commonly, nBSI has been associated with multiple risk factors in hospitalised patients such as admission to an ICU, prolonged hospitalisation, the need for mechanical ventilation, use of intravenous catheters, use of immunosuppressive drugs, presence of neutropenia or haematological or solid organ transplants, among others.3 18–25 Many of these risk factors are common clinical conditions among hospitalised patients with COVID-19.26–29 Furthermore, these patients are often exposed to prolonged antibiotic therapies and/or strong treatments with immunomodulators or anti-inflammatory drugs, which could be associated with nBSI.30–34

    Recently, numerous studies have been published to assess the clinical characteristics, demographics, mortality, and therapeutic outcomes in COVID-19 patients.26–28 However, little is still known about the risk factors for developing non-viral infections such as nBSI or the emergence of antimicrobial resistance in COVID-19 patients, which may participate in adversely influencing the outcome of any hospitalised patient.35 36

    Determining the incidence and risk factors for developing nBSI in hospitalised COVID-19 patients is a first step towards planning the appropriate strategies aimed to prevent this clinical complication and to be taken into consideration by healthcare professionals. The aim of this case–control study is to identify the risk factors associated with the development of nBSI in COVID-19 hospitalised patients and to determine its incidence.

    Methods and analysis

    A retrospective case–control study to assess the risk factors associated with the development of nBSI in COVID-19 hospitalised patients will be performed. Moreover, the incidence of nBSI among hospitalised patients with COVID-19 will be calculated.

    This single centre study will be performed at Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, a 650 bed tertiary teaching hospital near Barcelona, Spain, which assists over 800 000 inhabitants and which has provided medical assistance to >4500 COVID-19 affected patients.

    Study sample

    The study sample will include patients admitted to the Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol Hospital from April to December 2020 with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Patients will be included if they were adult patients (≥18 years) and excluded if they were transferred from other hospitalisation centres before admission. Positive COVID-19 patients admitted to the hospital during this period were those having at least one PCR test (polymerase chain reaction) positive for SARS-CoV-2 obtained from the nasopharynx and/or oropharynx sample, or a positive antigen rapid test detection from a nasopharynx sample.

    Case and control identification

    For cases, we will include all the nBSI episodes developed in patients complying with eligibility criteria during the period of study with a minimum of 74 episodes (according to sample size calculation).

    These episodes are those in which patients presented positive blood cultures in a blood sample taken after 48 hours since hospital admission.37 In the case of a blood culture positive for coagulase-negative staphylococci or other common skin bacteria, the presence of another consecutive positive blood culture for the same pathogen and/or the following clinical characteristics will be necessary: fever (>37°C) and/or leukocytosis (>11×109/L) and/or high inflammatory parameters such as C-reactive protein (CRP) (≥3 mg/mL) or procalcitonin (≥0.5 ng/mL).37–40 Cases in which the patient presents more than one positive blood culture for the same microorganism, but separated by ≥30 days, will be considered independent episodes of nBSI. In the case of patients affected by polymicrobial infections, an independent episode for each isolated microorganism will also be considered.

    For controls, a minimum of 74 admission episodes (the same number as the cases and according to the sample size calculation) will be randomly selected in patients with COVID-19 and without nBSI who were admitted during the same period of time, and will be matched with the cases by date of admission (±7 days) to homogenise the epidemiological situation, in-hospital treatment protocol and hospital pressure.

    Data collection

    A database will be created to record the variables to be obtained (Microsoft Excel Software, USA, 2010). A consecutive numerical value will be assigned to each patient, and with this coding they will be entered into the database created. In this way, the information recorded will be completely anonymous and will not contain any value that allows the study participants to be identified or traceability carried out. The identity of the patients will be protected and recorded on paper and only under the custody of the main researchers and collaborators, guaranteeing the security of the data and avoiding any undue access of third parties. The following data will be obtained and recorded in the created database.

    Demographic data and previous medical record: age in years, gender, comorbidities (number and Charlson index), diabetes mellitus, hypertension, chronic renal failure (defined as glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 41), dialysis, solid cancer, haematological malignancy, neutropenia (defined as neutrophil blood count ≤1.5×109/L 42), solid organ transplants, HIV infection, liver disease (moderate to severe, including compensated or decompensated liver cirrhosis), colonisations and/or infections during the last year before hospital admission, and hospital admissions during the last year.

    Specific data of the current admission and related to the nBSI: hospital admission date, admission units, surgeries during the current admission before nBSI, nBSI (origin, microorganism, and resistance mechanism), leucocyte blood count and CRP value (they were collected the day when the first positive blood culture was drawn), use of antibiotics before nBSI, the need for mechanical ventilation before nBSI, use of intravenous catheters before nBSI, use of interleukin-6 blockers (tocilizumab, sarilumab and siltuximab) before nBSI, antivirals against COVID-19 before nBSI, use of corticosteroids before nBSI, in-hospital mortality, and hospital discharge date.

    Sample size and statistical analysis

    Accepting an α risk of 0.05 and a β risk of <0.2 in a unilateral contrast, it takes a minimum of 74 cases and 74 controls to detect a minimum odds ratio of 2.5. It is assumed that the exposure rate in the control group will be 0.5. A loss to follow-up rate of 0% has been estimated. The Poisson approximation has been used.

    Patients’ data will be registered in an electronic database in a way that is dissociated from any information that may allow the identification of the patient for subsequent purification and statistical analysis.

    The statistical plan analysis will include:

    • Descriptive analysis of the main characteristics of the study sample through means and standard deviations for the numerical variables and percentages for the categorical variables.

    • Evaluation of the homogeneity between cases and controls. The numerical variables will be compared using the Student’s t-test or the Mann-Whitney test and the categorical variables using the χ2 or Fisher’s exact test.

    • Bivariate evaluation of the main factors associated with nBSI will be evaluated with the same statistical tests as in the previous section. The odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) will be considered as a measure of association, which will be estimated using logistic regression.

    • A subsequent multivariate regression analysis will be performed to assess the independent effect of the associated risk factors after adjusting for confounders.

    • The incidence rate of nBSI developed during the study period and its 95% CI will be estimated according to the number of new nBSI episodes in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 divided by the total person-month of follow-up (sum of the months follow-up of all patients with COVID-19 admitted from the moment of admission to the moment of nBSI or the moment of discharge).

    • The incidence rate of nBSI developed from April to December 2019 and its 95% CI will be estimated according to the number of new nBSI episodes in hospitalised patients divided by the total person-month of follow-up (sum of the follow-up months of all patients from the moment of admission to the moment of nBSI or the moment of discharge), and it will be compared with the COVID-19 patients’ incidence using the χ2 test.

    • Analysis of nBSI-free survival in patients with COVID-19 using Kaplan-Meyer tables, comparison of survival curves between various groups or risk factors with the log rank pot, and Cox regression (bivariate and multivariate).

    Ethics and dissemination

    The results of this case–control study will be published in a peer reviewed journal. The protocol of this study was evaluated and approved by the Ethical Committee for Drug Investigation of the Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol (protocol code PI-21–047).

    This project will be carried out in accordance with the basic principles of protection of the rights and dignity of the human being, as stated in the Declaration of Helsinki, and in accordance with current regulations. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union 2016/679 will be followed. The patients included in the study were not subjected to any experimental procedure.

    The protocol for this case–control study is the first step towards establishing the relationship between some sanitary interventions and the occurrence of nBSI in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 disease. This research will be performed and reported following the recommendations stated in the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies using the points applicable to case–control studies.43

    Discussion

    The protocol for this case–control study is the first step to assess the risk factors involved and the incidence of nBSI in hospitalised COVID-19 affected patients. This important clinical concern has been previously addressed in some recent studies. Nevertheless, there is still some controversy in the available evidence both in the risk factors involved and in the incidence of nBSI in this population. Therefore, our purpose is to perform the first study aimed to evaluate these conditions over a longer period of time, including patients affected by two COVID-19 waves in Spain (from April to December 2020).

    A retrospective single centre study performed in 226 hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in the USA showed a significantly higher rate of both bacterial (25% vs 13.1%, p=0.041) and fungal (12.7% vs 0.7%, p<0.001) infections in those patients treated with steroids. A subgroup analysis denied a significant effect of tocilizumab on the occurrence of these infections.44 Similarly, a case–control study performed in 100 hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in Pakistan showed that the treatment with systemic steroids was an independent risk factor for the development of bacterial infections (OR 4.60, 95% CI 1.24 to 17.05), but this effect was not described for treatments with tocilizumab or antibiotics.45 Furthermore, a study performed in critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Italy showed an independent association between anti-inflammatory treatments (cause-specific hazard ratio (csHR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.38 to 3.04 for tocilizumab, csHR 3.95, 95% CI 1.20 to 13.03 for methylprednisolone, and csHR 10.69, 95% CI 2.71 to 42.17 for methylprednisolone plus tocilizumab) and the development of BSI.35 However, a prospective matched case–cohort study performed in France, which included patients admitted to an ICU requiring ventilation due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (235 patients with COVID-19 and 235 without) showed a significantly increased risk in those patients treated with tocilizumab or anakinra (sHR 3.20, 95% CI 1.31 to 7.81; p=0.011), but not with corticosteroids.46 Other studies dealt with this issue without assessing the effect of drugs commonly used in COVID-19 patients. A study performed in China showed that white blood cell count (>10 or ≤4×109/L, OR 8.38, 95% CI 1.07 to 65.55), procalcitonin (>0.1 ng/mL, OR 4.92, 95% CI 1.39 to 17.33) and the presence of urinary catheterization (OR 25.38, 95% CI 5.09 to 126.53) before the infectious episode were independent risk factors for nosocomial bacterial infections in patients with COVID-19, after adjusting for age and use of a ventilator and venous catheterization.47 Another study performed in 227 hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in Copenhagen showed that lower peripheral oxygen saturation, oxygen supplementation or mechanical ventilation, lower lymphocyte count, and elevated plasma lactate dehydrogenase and CRP were associated with the BSI development.34

    The incidence of nBSI in COVID-19 affected patients has also been assessed in some studies showing a high variability that depended on the context and the methodology used. A study conducted in Italy on 89 COVID-19-affected patients admitted to the ICU showed a high frequency of BSI (60 affected patients, 67.4%). Moreover, significantly higher frequencies were reported in the period between 21 February 2020 and 30 April 2020 (87/1000 days of ICU stay, 95% CI 67 to 112) than that during the same period in 2018 (24/1000 days of ICU stay, 95% CI 11 to 54) or 2019 (19/1000 days of ICU stay, 95% CI 8 to 45; p<0.001).16 Similarly, another study performed in Italy found that from 57 COVID-19 patients admitted to an ICU, BSI occurred in 49% of them with an incidence rate of 373 per 10 000 patient-days.17 However, a study performed in Sweden detected a clinically relevant microbial growth in blood cultures in 6.5% of COVID-19-affected patients, which was significantly lower compared with 10.8% in the 2020 control group without COVID-19 (p<0.0001) and 10.4% in the 2019 control group without COVID-19 (p<0.0001).48 These data coincide with a study conducted in the USA which found that the blood culture positivity rate was significantly lower for patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 when compared with those who did not and to those who were not tested (3.8%, 8.0% and 7.1%, respectively; p<0.001).49

    A rapid systematic review of 24 studies (3338 hospitalised paediatric and adult COVID-19 affected patients), that aimed to assess the available literature on the prevalence of bacterial infections in COVID-19 affected patients, showed that 3.5% (95% CI 0.4% to 6.7%) and 14.3% (95% CI 9.6% to 18.9%) of these patients suffered a bacterial co-infection or secondary infection, respectively, and that this was more common in those patients who were critically ill (8.1%, 95% CI 2.3% to 13.8%).50 A systematic review and meta-analysis of 30 studies performed by Lansbury et al showed that 7% (95% CI 3% to 12%, n=2183, data from 18 studies and 19 datasets) of COVID-19 hospitalised patients had laboratory-confirmed bacterial co-infections.51

    The evidence presented to date is inconclusive since different risk factors and different effects of the drugs used to treat COVID-19 on the presence of nBSI have been described. This study will be of interest to know in-depth what the reality has been in our surrounding area, a teaching university hospital with over 650 beds near Barcelona (900 beds during the COVID-19 pandemic), which has given medical attention to more than 4500 COVID-19 affected patients.

    Ethics statements

    Patient consent for publication

    Acknowledgments

    The authors thank Dr Pere Clavé MD, PhD from the Gastrointestinal Physiology Laboratory of Mataró Hospital, and Dr Mateu Serra-Prat MD, PhD from the Research Unit of Mataró Hospital for their assistance with the performance of this protocol.

    References

    1. ↵
      2. Lu H ,
      3. Stratton CW ,
      4. Tang Y-W
      . Outbreak of pneumonia of unknown etiology in Wuhan, China: the mystery and the miracle. J Med Virol 2020;92:401–2.doi:10.1002/jmv.25678 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31950516
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    2. ↵
      1. World Health Organization (WHO)
      . Novel Coronavirus - Situation Report 22, 2020. Available: https://www.who.int/indonesia/news/novel-coronavirus/qa-for-public [Accessed Jan 2020].
    3. ↵
      2. Aliyu S ,
      3. Cohen B ,
      4. Liu J , et al
      . Prevalence and risk factors for bloodstream infection present on hospital admission. J Infect Prev 2018;19:37–42.doi:10.1177/1757177417720998 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29317913
      OpenUrlPubMed
    4. ↵
      2. Garrouste-Orgeas M ,
      3. Timsit JF ,
      4. Tafflet M , et al
      . Excess risk of death from intensive care unit-acquired nosocomial bloodstream infections: a reappraisal. Clin Infect Dis 2006;42:1118–26.doi:10.1086/500318 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16575729
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    5. ↵
      2. Lambert M-L ,
      3. Suetens C ,
      4. Savey A , et al
      . Clinical outcomes of health-care-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance in patients admitted to European intensive-care units: a cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 2011;11:30–8.doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(10)70258-9 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21126917
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    6. ↵
      2. Santoro A ,
      3. Franceschini E ,
      4. Meschiari M , et al
      . Epidemiology and risk factors associated with mortality in consecutive patients with bacterial bloodstream infection: impact of MDR and XDR bacteria. Open Forum Infect Dis 2020;7:ofaa461. doi:10.1093/ofid/ofaa461 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33209951
      OpenUrlPubMed
    7. ↵
      2. McNamara JF ,
      3. Righi E ,
      4. Wright H , et al
      . Long-term morbidity and mortality following bloodstream infection: a systematic literature review. J Infect 2018;77:1–8.doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2018.03.005 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29746948
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    8. ↵
      2. Goto M ,
      3. Al-Hasan MN
      . Overall burden of bloodstream infection and nosocomial bloodstream infection in North America and Europe. Clin Microbiol Infect 2013;19:501–9.doi:10.1111/1469-0691.12195 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23473333
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    9. ↵
      2. Kaye KS ,
      3. Marchaim D ,
      4. Chen T-Y , et al
      . Effect of nosocomial bloodstream infections on mortality, length of stay, and hospital costs in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2014;62:306–11.doi:10.1111/jgs.12634 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24438554
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    10. ↵
      2. Prowle JR ,
      3. Echeverri JE ,
      4. Ligabo EV , et al
      . Acquired bloodstream infection in the intensive care unit: incidence and attributable mortality. Crit Care 2011;15:R100. doi:10.1186/cc10114 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21418635
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    11. ↵
      2. Vallés J ,
      3. Alvarez-Lerma F ,
      4. Palomar M , et al
      . Health-care-associated bloodstream infections at admission to the ICU. Chest 2011;139:810–5.doi:10.1378/chest.10-1715 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21106655
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    12. ↵
      2. Tabah A ,
      3. Koulenti D ,
      4. Laupland K , et al
      . Characteristics and determinants of outcome of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in intensive care units: the EUROBACT international cohort study. Intensive Care Med 2012;38:1930–45.doi:10.1007/s00134-012-2695-9 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23011531
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    13. ↵
      2. Garrouste Orgeas M ,
      3. Timsit JF ,
      4. Soufir L , et al
      . Impact of adverse events on outcomes in intensive care unit patients. Crit Care Med 2008;36:2041–7.doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e31817b879c pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18552694
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    14. ↵
      2. Blot S ,
      3. Vandewoude K ,
      4. De Bacquer D , et al
      . Nosocomial bacteremia caused by antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria in critically ill patients: clinical outcome and length of hospitalization. Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:1600–6.doi:10.1086/340616 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12032895
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    15. ↵
      2. Jernigan JA ,
      3. Hatfield KM ,
      4. Wolford H , et al
      . Multidrug-resistant bacterial infections in U.S. hospitalized patients, 2012-2017. N Engl J Med 2020;382:1309–19.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1914433 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32242356
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    16. ↵
      2. Bonazzetti C ,
      3. Morena V ,
      4. Giacomelli A , et al
      . Unexpectedly high frequency of enterococcal bloodstream infections in coronavirus disease 2019 patients admitted to an Italian ICU: an observational study. Crit Care Med 2021;49:e31–40.doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000004748 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33122577
      OpenUrlPubMed
    17. ↵
      2. Cataldo MA ,
      3. Tetaj N ,
      4. Selleri M , et al
      . Incidence of bacterial and fungal bloodstream infections in COVID-19 patients in intensive care: an alarming "collateral effect". J Glob Antimicrob Resist 2020;23:290–1.doi:10.1016/j.jgar.2020.10.004 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33130024
      OpenUrlPubMed
    18. ↵
      2. Mitchell E ,
      3. Pearce MS ,
      4. Roberts A
      . Gram-negative bloodstream infections and sepsis: risk factors, screening tools and surveillance. Br Med Bull 2019;132:5–15.doi:10.1093/bmb/ldz033 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31815280
      OpenUrlPubMed
    19. ↵
      2. He Q ,
      3. Liu P ,
      4. Li X , et al
      . Risk factors of bloodstream infections in recipients after liver transplantation: a meta-analysis. Infection 2019;47:77–85.doi:10.1007/s15010-018-1230-5 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30370489
      OpenUrlPubMed
    20. ↵
      2. Tomar S ,
      3. Lodha R ,
      4. Das B , et al
      . Risk factors for central line associated bloodstream infections. Indian Pediatr 2016;53:790–2.doi:10.1007/s13312-016-0932-y pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27484446
      OpenUrlPubMed
    21. ↵
      2. Islas-Muñoz B ,
      3. Volkow-Fernández P ,
      4. Ibanes-Gutiérrez C , et al
      . Bloodstream infections in cancer patients. Risk factors associated with mortality. Int J Infect Dis 2018;71:59–64.doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2018.03.022 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29649549
      OpenUrlPubMed
    22. ↵
      2. Sante L ,
      3. Aguirre-Jaime A ,
      4. Miguel MA , et al
      . Epidemiological study of secondary bloodstream infections: the forgotten issue. J Infect Public Health 2019;12:37–42.doi:10.1016/j.jiph.2018.08.011 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30266540
      OpenUrlPubMed
    23. ↵
      2. Yoshida T ,
      3. Tsushima K ,
      4. Tsuchiya A , et al
      . Risk factors for hospital-acquired bacteremia. Intern Med 2005;44:1157–62.doi:10.2169/internalmedicine.44.1157 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16357453
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    24. ↵
      2. Endimiani A ,
      3. Tamborini A ,
      4. Luzzaro F , et al
      . A two-year analysis of risk factors and outcome in patients with bloodstream infection. Jpn J Infect Dis 2003;56:1–7.pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12711818
      OpenUrlPubMed
    25. ↵
      2. Wolfe CM ,
      3. Cohen B ,
      4. Larson E
      . Prevalence and risk factors for antibiotic-resistant community-associated bloodstream infections. J Infect Public Health 2014;7:224–32.doi:10.1016/j.jiph.2014.01.001 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24631369
      OpenUrlPubMed
    26. ↵
      2. Serafim RB ,
      3. Póvoa P ,
      4. Souza-Dantas V , et al
      . Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection: a systematic review. Clin Microbiol Infect 2021;27:47–54.doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2020.10.017 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33190794
      OpenUrlPubMed
    27. ↵
      2. Richardson S ,
      3. Hirsch JS ,
      4. Narasimhan M , et al
      . Presenting characteristics, comorbidities, and outcomes among 5700 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in the new York City area. JAMA 2020;323:323:2052. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.6775 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32320003
      OpenUrlPubMed
    28. ↵
      2. Goyal P ,
      3. Choi JJ ,
      4. Pinheiro LC , et al
      . Clinical characteristics of Covid-19 in New York City. N Engl J Med 2020;382:2372–4.doi:10.1056/NEJMc2010419 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32302078
      OpenUrlPubMed
    29. ↵
      2. Zhou F ,
      3. Yu T ,
      4. Du R , et al
      . Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2020;395:1054–62.doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30566-3 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32171076
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    30. ↵
      2. Tleyjeh IM ,
      3. Kashour Z ,
      4. Damlaj M , et al
      . Efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients: a living systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect 2021;27:215–27.doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2020.10.036 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33161150
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    31. ↵
      2. Prescott HC ,
      3. Rice TW
      . Corticosteroids in COVID-19 ARDS. JAMA 2020;324:1292. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.16747
    32. ↵
      2. Cusumano JA ,
      3. Dupper AC ,
      4. Malik Y , et al
      . Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in patients infected with COVID-19: a case series. Open Forum Infect Dis 2020;7:5–11.doi:10.1093/ofid/ofaa518 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33269299
      OpenUrlPubMed
    33. ↵
      2. Zhang H ,
      3. Zhang Y ,
      4. Wu J , et al
      . Risks and features of secondary infections in severe and critical ill COVID-19 patients. Emerg Microbes Infect 2020;9:1958–64.doi:10.1080/22221751.2020.1812437 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32815458
      OpenUrlPubMed
    34. ↵
      2. Engsbro AL ,
      3. Israelsen SB ,
      4. Pedersen M , et al
      . Predominance of hospital-acquired bloodstream infection in patients with Covid-19 pneumonia. Infect Dis 2020;52:919–22.doi:10.1080/23744235.2020.1802062 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32779951
      OpenUrlPubMed
    35. ↵
      2. Giacobbe DR ,
      3. Battaglini D ,
      4. Ball L , et al
      . Bloodstream infections in critically ill patients with COVID‐19. Eur J Clin Invest 2020;50.doi:10.1111/eci.13319
    36. ↵
      2. Clancy CJ ,
      3. Nguyen MH
      . Coronavirus disease 2019, superinfections, and antimicrobial development: what can we expect? Clin Infect Dis 2020;71:2736–43.doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa524 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32361747
      OpenUrlPubMed
    37. ↵
      2. Elzi L ,
      3. Babouee B ,
      4. Vögeli N , et al
      . How to discriminate contamination from bloodstream infection due to coagulase-negative staphylococci: a prospective study with 654 patients. Clin Microbiol Infect 2012;18:E355–61.doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2012.03964.x pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22784359
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    38. ↵
      2. Opota O ,
      3. Croxatto A ,
      4. Prod'hom G , et al
      . Blood culture-based diagnosis of bacteraemia: state of the art. Clin Microbiol Infect 2015;21:313–22.doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2015.01.003 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25753137
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    39. ↵
      2. Garcia RA ,
      3. Spitzer ED ,
      4. Beaudry J , et al
      . Multidisciplinary team review of best practices for collection and handling of blood cultures to determine effective interventions for increasing the yield of true-positive bacteremias, reducing contamination, and eliminating false-positive central line-associated bloodstream infections. Am J Infect Control 2015;43:1222–37.doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2015.06.030 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26298636
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    40. ↵
      2. Yang M ,
      3. Choi SJ ,
      4. Lee J , et al
      . Serum procalcitonin as an independent diagnostic marker of bacteremia in febrile patients with hematologic malignancies. PLoS One 2019;14:e0225765. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0225765 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31821331
      OpenUrlPubMed
    41. ↵
      2. Levey AS ,
      3. Coresh J ,
      4. Balk E , et al
      . National Kidney Foundation practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:137. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-139-2-200307150-00013 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12859163
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    42. ↵
      2. Palmblad J ,
      3. Dufour C ,
      4. Papadaki HA
      . How we diagnose neutropenia in the adult and elderly patient. Haematologica 2014;99:1130–3.doi:10.3324/haematol.2014.110288 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24986874
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    43. ↵
      2. von Elm E ,
      3. Altman DG ,
      4. Egger M , et al
      . Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 2007;335:806–8.doi:10.1136/bmj.39335.541782.AD pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17947786
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    44. ↵
      2. Obata R ,
      3. Maeda T ,
      4. DO DR , et al
      . Increased secondary infection in COVID-19 patients treated with steroids in New York City. Jpn J Infect Dis 2020. doi:doi:10.7883/yoken.JJID.2020.884. [Epub ahead of print: 25 Dec 2020].pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33390434
    45. ↵
      2. Nasir N ,
      3. Rehman F ,
      4. Omair SF
      . Risk factors for bacterial infections in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19: a case-control study. J Med Virol 2021;93:4564–9.doi:10.1002/jmv.27000 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33822390
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    46. ↵
      2. Buetti N ,
      3. Ruckly S ,
      4. de Montmollin E , et al
      . COVID-19 increased the risk of ICU-acquired bloodstream infections: a case-cohort study from the multicentric OUTCOMEREA network. Intensive Care Med 2021;47:180–7.doi:10.1007/s00134-021-06346-w pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33506379
      OpenUrlPubMed
    47. ↵
      2. Cheng K ,
      3. He M ,
      4. Shu Q , et al
      . Analysis of the risk factors for nosocomial bacterial infection in patients with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital. Risk Manag Healthc Policy 2020;13:2593–9.doi:10.2147/RMHP.S277963 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33223859
      OpenUrlPubMed
    48. ↵
      2. Yu D ,
      3. Ininbergs K ,
      4. Hedman K , et al
      . Low prevalence of bloodstream infection and high blood culture contamination rates in patients with COVID-19. PLoS One 2020;15:e0242533. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0242533 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33226995
      OpenUrlPubMed
    49. ↵
      2. Sepulveda J ,
      3. Westblade LF ,
      4. Whittier S , et al
      . Bacteremia and blood culture utilization during covid-19 surge in New York City. J Clin Microbiol 2020;58:1–7.doi:10.1128/JCM.00875-20 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32404482
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    50. ↵
      2. Langford BJ ,
      3. So M ,
      4. Raybardhan S , et al
      . Bacterial co-infection and secondary infection in patients with COVID-19: a living rapid review and meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020;26:1622–9.doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2020.07.016 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32711058
      OpenUrlPubMed
    51. ↵
      2. Lansbury L ,
      3. Lim B ,
      4. Baskaran V , et al
      . Co-infections in people with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Infect 2020;81:266–75.doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2020.05.046 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32473235
      OpenUrlPubMed

    Footnotes

    • Contributors CC is the guarantor for the study. She also wrote the first draft of this manuscript. All authors participated in developing the methodology of this work. All authors contributed to the performance of this protocol and read and approved the final version of this manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.