OBJECTIVE: State agencies have developed reporting systems of safety events that include events related to health information technology (HIT). These data come from hospital reporting systems where staff submit safety reports and nurses, in the role of safety managers, review, and code events. Safety managers may have varying degrees of experience with identifying events related to HIT. Our objective was to review events potentially involving HIT and compare those with what was reported to the state.

METHODS: We performed a structured review of 1 year of safety events from an academic pediatric healthcare system. We reviewed the free-text description of each event and applied a classification scheme derived from the AHRQ Health IT Hazard Manager and compared the results with events reported to the state as involving HIT.

RESULTS: Of 33,218 safety events for a 1-year period, 1247 included key words related to HIT and/or were indicated by safety managers as involving HIT. Of the 1247 events, the structured review identified 769 as involving HIT. In comparison, safety managers only identified 194 of the 769 events (25%) as involving HIT. Most events, 353 (46%), not identified by safety managers were documentation issues. Of the 1247 events, the structured review identified 478 as not involving HIT while safety managers identified and reported 81 of these 478 events (17%) as involving HIT.

CONCLUSIONS: The current process of reporting safety events lacks standardization in identifying health technology contributions to safety events, which may minimize the effectiveness of safety initiatives.

<p><strong>PURPOSE: </strong>Outbreaks of adenovirus in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) can lead to widespread transmission and serious adverse outcomes. We describe the investigation, response, and successful containment of an adenovirus outbreak in a NICU associated with contaminated handheld ophthalmologic equipment used during retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening.</p>

<p><strong>DESIGN: </strong>Epidemiologic outbreak investigation.</p>

<p><strong>PARTICIPANTS: </strong>A total of 23 hospitalized neonates, as well as NICU staff and parents of affected infants.</p>

<p><strong>MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: </strong>Routine surveillance identified an adenovirus outbreak in a level IV NICU in August 2016. Epidemiologic investigation followed, including chart review, staff interviews, and observations. Cases were defined as hospital-acquired adenovirus identified from any clinical specimen (NICU patient or employee) or compatible illness in a family member. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and partial- and whole-genome sequencing assays were used for testing of clinical and environmental specimens.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>We identified 23 primary neonatal cases and 9 secondary cases (6 employees and 3 parents). All neonatal case-patients had respiratory symptoms. Of these, 5 developed pneumonia and 12 required increased respiratory support. Less than half (48%) had ocular symptoms. All neonatal case-patients (100%) had undergone a recent ophthalmologic examination, and 54% of neonates undergoing examinations developed adenovirus infection. All affected employees and parents had direct contact with infected neonates. Observations revealed inconsistent disinfection of bedside ophthalmologic equipment and limited glove use. Sampling of 2 handheld lenses and 2 indirect ophthalmoscopes revealed adenovirus serotype 3 DNA on each device. Sequence analysis of 16 neonatal cases, 2 employees, and 2 lenses showed that cases and equipment shared 100% identity across the entire adenovirus genome. Infection control interventions included strict hand hygiene, including glove use; isolation precautions; enhanced cleaning of lenses and ophthalmoscopes between all examinations; and staff furlough. We identified no cases of secondary transmission among neonates.</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>Adenovirus outbreaks can result from use of contaminated ophthalmologic equipment. Even equipment that does not directly contact patients can facilitate indirect transmission. Patient-to-patient transmission can be prevented with strict infection control measures and equipment cleaning. Ophthalmologists performing inpatient examinations should take measures to avoid adenoviral spread from contaminated handheld equipment.</p>