Program Health
84/100
Good standing · 1 active investigation
Open investigations1
Median TAT6 days
WGS coverage (90d)100%
HAIs (90d)10
HAIs (prev. 90d)15 ↓
In-hospital genomic links2
External genomic links — Prospect Global1
Units monitored4
Investigations 1 active
NICU — MRSA Cluster
Prospective Health Hospital · Jan 7 – Feb 5, 2025
5 patients 7 isolates 2 genomically linked 4 ruled out
Med/Surg — VRE Monitoring
Prospective Health Hospital · Dec 2024 – ongoing
3 patients 3 isolates
Monitoring
1
Cluster
2
Location
3
Connections
4
Actions
What am I looking at?
Two patients have the same MRSA strain — meaning it spread from one to the other, not two separate infections. You can act on this with confidence.
Technical: whole-genome sequencing found only 2 differences (SNPs) between the strains — well below the 10 SNP threshold used to define a transmission event.
Confirmed MRSA transmission — NICU
Patients 01 and 06 share an identical strain — just 2 SNPs apart by whole-genome sequencing, confirming direct transmission. The remaining 4 patients have genetically distinct strains: no expanded precautions required.
2
Linked patients
4
Patient links Ruled out
7
Isolates sequenced
6d
Median TAT
Cases over time
Estimated impact · as of Feb 5, 2025 · surveillance ongoing
1–2
infections likely prevented
$29–87K
avoided treatment costs
4 patients
spared expanded precautions
Based on co-exposure probability, published HAI cost data, and genomic ruling. Figures update as surveillance continues.
📄 Export C-suite summary ↗
1 of 4
What am I looking at?
Genomics compared all 7 isolates across the unit. Only the two Bay A patients share a strain — patients in Bays B and C have unrelated bugs acquired independently.
Technical: pairwise SNP distances between Bay A isolates (2 SNPs) vs. cross-bay comparisons (143–300 SNPs) confirm the outbreak is geographically contained.
Transmission contained to Bay A
Both linked patients were admitted to Bay A. Genomics confirms the 4 patients in Bays B and C acquired unrelated strains — the outbreak is localised to a single bay.
NICU floor map
2 of 4
What am I looking at?
Of all recorded exposures, 3 were shared by both linked patients — these are your most likely transmission routes. Genomics did the filtering; you just need to investigate these three.
Technical: Prospect cross-referenced EMR FHIR records with genomic timing constraints to rank exposures by transmission plausibility.
3 shared exposures — investigate these first
Genomics narrows the investigation from 12 recorded exposures across 5 patients to the 3 specific pathways shared by the 2 confirmed linked patients. 75% reduction in investigation scope.
Prioritised shared exposures
🔬
Echo Suite 2 — Jan 13
Both patients attended the same suite on the same date. Portable echo equipment is a documented MRSA reservoir.
⚑ Highest priority — culture equipment first
👤
RN-1 Night — Jan 12
Same night-shift nurse cared for both linked patients. Also cared for patients with unrelated strains.
⚠ Hand hygiene audit warranted
🔧
UAC — Jan 14
Both patients had UAC insertions. Patient 01 is CLABSI-flagged.
⚑ CLABSI — bundle audit required
🧬
Without genomics, all 12 exposures across all 5 patients would require investigation. WGS narrows this to 3 — specific to the 2 confirmed linked patients.
Exposure timeline
Click any dot to see exposure details

PatientExposureDate Transmission linkGenomic support
3 of 4
What am I looking at?
These actions are prioritised by urgency based on what genomics found. The two immediate actions address active transmission risk; the two surveillance actions prevent recurrence.
Technical: recommendations are generated using SNP clustering, AMR gene profiles (mecA, ermC), and NHSN outcome flags from this investigation.
4 actions required — Transmission genomically supported
Two require immediate response. Two are surveillance and education measures to prevent recurrence.
Need the genomic detail? Phylogenetic trees, SNP matrix, exposure timeline, and full metadata.
4 of 4