Outbreaks in hospitalized African neonates are frequent but under-reported, with high mortality and a predominance of Gram-negative bacteria. Breaches in IP practice are commonly implicated, with the outbreak source confirmed in less than 50% of cases. Programmes to improve IP practice and address antimicrobial resistance in African neonatal units are urgently required.

Please cite this article as: { doi: https://doi.org/ This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) infections are leading causes of neonatal morbidity and mortality, contributing to an extended hospital stay and increased healthcare costs. Although the burden and impact of HAI/AMR in resource-limited neonatal units are substantial, there are few HAI/AMR prevention studies in these settings. We reviewed the mechanism of action and evidence supporting HAI/AMR prevention interventions, including care bundles, for hospitalized neonates in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC).

Background Contamination of the hospital environment contributes to neonatal bacterial colonization and infection. Cleaning of hospital surfaces and equipment is seldom audited in resource-limited settings. Methods A quasi-experimental study was conducted to assess the impact of a multimodal cleaning intervention for surfaces and equipment in a 30-bed neonatal ward. The intervention included cleaning audits with feedback, cleaning checklists, in-room cleaning wipes and training of staff and mothers in cleaning methods. Cleaning adequacy was evaluated for 100 items (58 surfaces, 42 equipment) using quantitative bacterial surface cultures, adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence assays and fluorescent ultraviolet markers, performed at baseline (P1, October 2019), early intervention (P2, November 2019) and late intervention (P3, February 2020). Results Environmental swabs (55/300; 18.3%) yielded growth of 78 potential neonatal pathogens with Enterococci, S. marcescens, K. pneumoniae, S. aureus and A. baumannii predominating. Highest aerobic colony counts were noted from moist surfaces such as sinks, milk kitchen surfaces, humidifiers and suction tubing. The proportion of surfaces and equipment exhibiting no bacterial growth increased between phases (P1 = 49%, P2 = 66%, P3 = 69%; p = 0.007). The proportion of surfaces and equipment meeting the ATP “cleanliness” threshold (< 200 relative light units) increased over time (P1 = 40%, P2 = 54%, P3 = 65%; p = 0.002), as did the UV marker removal rate (P1 = 23%, P2 = 71%, P3 = 74%; p < 0.001). Conclusion Routine environmental cleaning of this neonatal ward was sub-optimal at baseline but improved significantly following a multimodal cleaning intervention. Involving mothers and nursing staff was key to achieving improved environmental and equipment cleaning in this resource-limited neonatal unit.