Antimicrobial resistance patterns and empiric antibiotic selections for patients admitted from post-acute care facilities.

PURPOSE: To characterize the susceptibilities of positive bacterial cultures and the appropriateness of empiric antimicrobial regimens for patients admitted from post-acute care facilities (PACFs). METHODS: This was a retrospective quality improvement study. The study included patients admitted from a PACF to one of 2 tertiary care teaching hospitals within the University of Pennsylvania Health System, located in Philadelphia, PA, from August 2020 to December 2021. Patients were included if they had at least one positive culture within 72 hours of admission. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients and 230 isolates from the study period were evaluated. The majority of positive cultures were from a urinary source (114 of 230, 49.6%). Nineteen patients (11.4%) had a history of multidrug-resistant organisms. The most common empiric antibiotics used were vancomycin (61.7%) and cefepime (59.3%). Sixty-one patients (36.5%) received inappropriate empiric therapy based on the culture results. When comparing our hospitals' general antibiogram to that of only PACF patients, Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae had at least a 20% difference in susceptibility to levofloxacin, ceftriaxone, and cefepime. Extended-spectrum ß-lactamase resistance was also higher in the PACF cohort (odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-3.1). CONCLUSION: Clinically significant differences in antimicrobial susceptibility were found among patients admitted from PACFs compared to our health system's general antibiogram. The increased resistance rates identified in this study support the need for hospitals to evaluate this at-risk patient population, which may drive changes to empiric antibiotic prescribing practices.

The Penn Medicine COVID-19 Therapeutics Committee-Reflections on a Model for Rapid Evidence Review and Dynamic Practice Recommendations During a Public Health Emergency.

The Penn Medicine COVID-19 Therapeutics Committee-an interspecialty, clinician-pharmacist, and specialist-front line primary care collaboration-has served as a forum for rapid evidence review and the production of dynamic practice recommendations during the 3-year coronavirus disease 2019 public health emergency. We describe the process by which the committee went about its work and how it navigated specific challenging scenarios. Our target audiences are clinicians, hospital leaders, public health officials, and researchers invested in preparedness for inevitable future threats. Our objectives are to discuss the logistics and challenges of forming an effective committee, undertaking a rapid evidence review process, aligning evidence-based guidelines with operational realities, and iteratively revising recommendations in response to changing pandemic data. We specifically discuss the arc of evidence for corticosteroids; the noble beginnings and dangerous misinformation end of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin; monoclonal antibodies and emerging viral variants; and patient screening and safety processes for tocilizumab, baricitinib, and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir.

Rethinking Carbapenems: A Pharmacokinetic Approach for Antimicrobial Selection in Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of pathophysiological changes to the pancreas during infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP), optimal drug properties needed to penetrate the pancreas, human and animal studies supporting the use of antimicrobials, and carbapenem-sparing strategies in INP. DATA SOURCES: A literature analysis of PubMed/MEDLINE was performed (from 1960 to September 2020) using the following key terms: infected necrotizing pancreatitis, necrotizing acute pancreatitis, and infected pancreatitis antimicrobial concentration. Individual antimicrobials were investigated with these search terms. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All relevant studies describing the management of INP, and human and animal pharmacokinetic (PK) data supporting antimicrobial use in the pancreas were reviewed for possible inclusion regardless of sample size or study design. DATA SYNTHESIS: Piperacillin/tazobactam and cefepime achieve adequate pancreatic tissue concentrations in INP studies. A majority of the literature supporting carbapenem use in INP involves imipenem, and meropenem Monte Carlo simulations suggest that standard dosing regimens of meropenem may not achieve PK targets to eradicate Pseudomonas aeruginosa. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: Carbapenems are often utilized for INP treatment based on guideline recommendations. This review discusses PK data, the history of carbapenem use in INP, and the pathophysiology of pancreatitis to suggest carbapenem-sparing strategies and provides stewardship tactics such as when to start antimicrobials, which empirical antimicrobial to use, and when to discontinue antimicrobials in the INP setting. CONCLUSIONS: Noncarbapenem antipseudomonals, such as piperacillin/tazobactam and cefepime, are appropriate carbapenem-sparing options in INP, based on PK data, spectrum of activity, and risk of collateral damage.

Employer-Sponsored Wellness Programs for Hypertension and Dyslipidemia in a 2-Hospital Health System.

BACKGROUND: The increasing prevalence of chronic disease states, such as hypertension and dyslipidemia, in the United States has placed a growing economic burden on the nation's healthcare system, and incentives for cost reductions have been used by various private health insurers. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the clinical outcomes of pharmacy department-managed, employer-sponsored wellness programs for dyslipidemia and hypertension in a 2-hospital health system. METHODS: Using a retrospective chart review, we evaluated outcomes of employees and their spouses who were enrolled in our dyslipidemia and hypertension Wellpath programs between November 2015 and April 2017. Employees or their spouses were referred to these programs, which were coordinated by the pharmacy department. Enrollees completed in-person appointments and telephone interviews with a pharmacist or an advanced practice nurse, who provided evidence-based lifestyle and pharmacologic recommendations. The primary outcomes were lipid changes in the dyslipidemia program, and changes in systolic or diastolic blood pressure in the hypertension program. The secondary outcome was the total number of pharmacologic interventions. Paired sample t-tests were used to assess the results. RESULTS: A total of 138 enrollees met the study inclusion criteria. The mean difference in systolic and diastolic blood pressure between baseline and completion of the program was -8.33 mm Hg (P = .001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.58-13.09) and -3.67 mm Hg (P = .015; 95% CI, 0.75-6.58), respectively. The mean differences in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein, and triglycerides from baseline were -27.67 mg/dL (P <.001; 95% CI, 19.36-35.99), -23.16 mg/dL (P <.001; 95% CI, 15.41-30.92), and -67.62 mg/dL (P <.001; 95% CI, 30.73-104.52), respectively. In all, 46 (46.9%) of the 98 enrollees in the dyslipidemia program required a pharmacologic intervention. In the hypertension program, 18 (31.6%) of 57 enrollees required a pharmacologic intervention. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that the use of a pharmacy department-managed, employer-sponsored wellness program that is managed by pharmacists and an advanced practice nurse could lead to significant reductions in blood pressure and lipid levels for employees and for their spouses who are enrolled in the program.