Experiences of children with central venous access devices: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Our study aims to explore the experience of having a central venous access device (CVAD) from the perspective of the child and family and how movements within and outside of hospital environments influence this experience. METHODS: A mixed-methods study was conducted across Children's Health Queensland (Australia), including inpatient and home-care settings. Children less than 18 years with CVADs were eligible and followed for 3 months or CVAD removal. A subgroup of primary caregivers participated in semi-structured interviews. Quantitative and qualitative measures of child and family CVAD experiences were explored. RESULTS: In total, 163 patients with 200 CVADs were recruited and followed for 6993 catheter days (3329 [48%] inpatients; 3147 [45%] outpatients; 517 [7%] home). Seventeen participants were interviewed. Experiences of having a CVAD were complex but predominantly positive primarily related to personalized CVAD care, healthcare quality, and general wellbeing. Their experience was shaped by their movements through hospital and home environments, including care variation and distress with procedures. Device selection and insertion location further influenced experience, including safety, impairments in activities of daily living, school, and recreation. CONCLUSIONS: CVAD experiences were influenced by nonmodifiable (e.g., diagnosis) and modifiable factors (e.g., education; care variation). Clinical approaches and policies that account for family and child considerations should be explored. IMPACT: Variation in decision making and management for pediatric CVADs is accepted by many clinicians, but the influence this variation has on the health experience of children and their families is less well explored. This is the first study to draw from a broad range of children requiring CVADs to determine their experience within and outside of healthcare facilities. Interdisciplinary clinicians and researchers need to work collaboratively with children and their families to provide resources and support services to ensure they have positive experiences with CVADs, no matter where they are managed, or who they are managed by.

Contribution of Individual- and Neighborhood-Level Social, Demographic, and Health Factors to COVID-19 Hospitalization Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Although disparities in COVID-19 outcomes have been observed, factors contributing to these differences are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether COVID-19 hospitalization outcomes are related to neighborhood-level social vulnerability, independent of patient-level clinical factors. DESIGN: Pooled cross-sectional study of prospectively collected data. SETTING: 38 Michigan hospitals. PATIENTS: Adults older than 18 years hospitalized for COVID-19 in a participating site between March and December 2020. MEASUREMENTS: COVID-19 outcomes included acute organ dysfunction, organ failure, invasive mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay, death, and discharge disposition. Social vulnerability was measured by the social vulnerability index (SVI), a composite measure of social disadvantage. RESULTS: Compared with patients in low-vulnerability ZIP codes, those living in high-vulnerability ZIP codes were more frequently treated in the intensive care unit (29.0% vs. 24.5%); more frequently received mechanical ventilation (19.3% vs. 14.2%); and experienced higher rates of organ dysfunction (51.9% vs. 48.6%), organ failure (54.7% vs. 51.6%), and in-hospital death (19.4% vs. 16.7%). In mixed-effects regression analyses accounting for age, sex, and comorbid conditions, an increase in a patient's neighborhood SVI by 0.25 (1 quartile) was associated with greater likelihood of mechanical ventilation (increase of 2.1 percentage points), acute organ dysfunction (increase of 2.8 percentage points), and acute organ failure (increase of 2.8 percentage points) but was not associated with intensive care unit stay, mortality, or discharge disposition. LIMITATION: Observational data focused on hospitalizations in a single state. CONCLUSION: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from socially vulnerable neighborhoods presented with greater illness severity and required more intensive treatment, but once hospitalized they did not experience differences in hospital mortality or discharge disposition. Policies that target socially vulnerable neighborhoods and access to COVID-19 care may help ameliorate health disparities. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) and Blue Care Network as part of the BCBSM Value Partnerships Program, the Michigan Public Health Institute, and the Michigan Department of Health & Human Services.

Parent Preferences for Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Physician Attire: A Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: Physician attire may influence the parent-provider relationship. Previous studies in adult and outpatient pediatrics showed that formal attire with a white coat was preferred. We aimed to describe parent preferences for physician attire in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed 101 parents in a level IV NICU. The survey included photographs of a physician in seven different attires. Attire was scored in five domains and parents selected the most preferred attire in different contexts. All attires were compared with formal attire with white coat. Descriptive statistics, Fisher's exact tests, and one-way analysis of variance were used to compare parent responses. RESULTS: Scrubs without white coat (40.8 [7.0]) and formal attire without white coat (39.7 [8.0]) had the highest mean (standard deviation) composite preference scores. However, no significant differences between formal attire with white coat (37.1 [9.0]) versus any other attire were observed. When asked to choose a single most preferred attire, scrubs with a coat (32%) and formal with a coat (32%) were chosen most often, but preferences varied by clinical context and parent age. For example, parents preferred surgical scrubs for physicians performing procedures. Parents indicated that physician attire is important to them but does not influence their satisfaction with care. CONCLUSION: Although parents generally favored formal attire and scrubs, the variations based on the context of care and lack of significant preference of one attire suggests that a single dress code policy for physicians in a NICU is unlikely to improve the patient-provider relationship. KEY POINTS: · Adult patients prefer doctors to wear formal attire.. · Physician attire preferences influenced by age, setting, and context of care.. · Little is known about physician attire preferences of the parents of neonates.. · Unlike adult patients, NICU parents did not prefer formal attire with a white coat..

Impact of socio-behavioral measures implemented during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the outcomes of febrile neutropenia episodes in pediatric cancer patients: a single center quasi-experimental pre-post study.

During COVID-19, public health measures including masks and social distancing decreased viral upper respiratory infections (URI). Upper respiratory infections are the most common infectious etiology for low-risk pediatric febrile neutropenia (FN). This single-center, quasi-experimental, pre-post study was designed to understand the impact of public health measures on FN admissions and outcomes in the general pediatric oncology population during the COVID (March 2020-February 2021) vs. pre-COVID era (January 2018-February 2020) and their respective respiratory seasons (November-February). Episodes were risk-stratified using a tool recommended by the Children's Oncology Group. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were used to compare admission characteristics and outcomes. Comparing respiratory seasons, the Covid-era season had 60% fewer URI diagnoses (5/12), while high-risk episodes (63.6% [28/44] vs. 44.2% [23/52]) and intensive care admissions (18.2% [8/44] vs. 3.8% [2/52]) increased. Between eras, URIs were lower in the COVID-era (10.8% [16/148] vs. 19.9% [67/336]; p = 0.01), but admission characteristics and severe outcomes were not different. The impact of public health measures was most prominent during the respiratory season. Despite decreased incidence of URIs, the overall admission characteristics and severe outcomes were minimally impacted due to the brevity of respiratory seasons, but larger studies are warranted.

Patterns of use and outcomes of peripherally inserted central catheters in hospitalized patients with solid tumors: A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The risk of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)-related complications in patients hospitalized with solid tumors remains unclear. Existing studies are limited by single-center, outpatient designs and include heterogenous patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was designed and included adult patients with solid organ cancers who were admitted to a general medicine ward or intensive care unit and received a PICC. Data were collected from November 2013 to December 2019 at 50 Michigan hospitals. Major complications were defined as central line-associated bloodstream infection, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and catheter occlusion. Hospital variation in PICC use and outcomes was examined. RESULTS: Data included 3235 hospitalized patients with solid tumors who had PICCs placed for 51,047 catheter days. Most catheters were double-lumen devices (57.0%). Notably, 17.5% of patients had another central venous catheter at the time of PICC insertion. The most common indications for PICC use were antibiotics (34.5%) and difficult access or blood draws (21.6%); chemotherapy was the primary indication in only 15.7% of patients. A major PICC-related complication occurred in 491 patients (15.2%); catheter occlusion was the most prevalent complication (n = 322; 10.0%) followed by deep vein thrombosis (n = 116; 3.6%), central line-associated bloodstream infection (n = 82; 2.5%), and pulmonary embolism (n = 20; 0.6%). Significant variation in indications for PICC use, device characteristics, and frequency of major complications across hospitals was observed (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: PICCs were associated with significant complications in hospitalized patients who had solid malignancies and were often used for reasons other than chemotherapy. Policies and guidance for the appropriate use of PICCs in oncologic patients appear necessary. LAY SUMMARY: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are devices placed in peripheral veins to deliver medication to large veins near the heart. PICCs are used frequently in oncology. The objective of this report was to describe PICC-associated complications in hospitalized patients with solid tumors. This study was performed across 50 Michigan hospitals and included 3235 patients with solid tumor cancers and who had a PICC. Overall, 15.2% of patients experienced a complication, including central line-associated bloodstream infections, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or catheter occlusion. Complication rates varied across hospitals. PICCs are associated with substantial complications in hospitalized patients with solid tumors.

Pediatric central venous access devices: practice, performance, and costs.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare delivery is reliant on a functional central venous access device (CVAD), but the knowledge surrounding the burden of pediatric CVAD-associated harm is limited. METHODS: A prospective cohort study at a tertiary-referral pediatric hospital in Australia. Children <18 years undergoing insertion of a CVAD were screened from the operating theatre and intensive care unit records, then assessed bi-weekly for up to 3 months. Outcomes were CVAD failure and complications, and associated healthcare costs (cost of complications). RESULTS: 163 patients with 200 CVADs were recruited and followed for 6993 catheter days, with peripherally inserted central catheters most common (n = 119; 60%). CVAD failure occurred in 20% of devices (n = 30; 95% CI: 15-26), at an incidence rate (IR) of 5.72 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI: 4.09-7.78). CVAD complications were evident in 43% of all CVADs (n = 86; 95% CI: 36-50), at a rate of 12.29 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI: 9.84-15.16). CVAD failure costs were A$826 per episode, and A$165,372 per 1000 CVADs. Comparisons between current and recommended practice revealed inconsistent use of ultrasound guidance for insertion, sub-optimal tip-positioning, and appropriate device selection. CONCLUSIONS: CVAD complications and failures represent substantial burdens to children and healthcare. Future efforts need to focus on the inconsistent use of best practices. IMPACT: Current surveillance of central venous access device (CVAD) performance is likely under-estimating actual burden on pediatric patients and the healthcare system. CVAD failure due to complication was evident in 20% of CVADs. Costs associated with CVAD complications average at $2327 (AUD, 2020) per episode. Further investment in key diverse practice areas, including new CVAD types, CVAD pathology-based occlusion and dislodgment strategies, the appropriate use of device types, and tip-positioning technologies, will likely lead to extensive benefit.

Patterns of vascular access device use and thrombosis outcomes in patients with COVID-19: a pilot multi-site study of Michigan hospitals.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is an important complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To date, few studies have described vascular access device use and VTE risk in this cohort. To examine the use of vascular access devices and incidence of VTE in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We performed a retrospective, multi-center cohort study of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who received a midline catheter, peripherally inserted central catheter (PICCs), tunneled or non-tunneled central venous catheter (CVC), hemodialysis (HD) catheter or a port during hospitalization. Mixed-effects multivariable logit models adjusting for VTE risk factors in the Caprini risk score were fit to understand the incremental risk of VTE in patients with vascular access devices vs. those that did not receive devices. Management of VTE was determined by examining anticoagulant use pre- vs. post-thrombosis. Results were expressed using odds ratios (ORs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 1228 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in 40 hospitals, of which 261 (21.3%) received at least one vascular access device of interest, were included. The prevalence of acute, non-tunneled CVCs was 42.2%, acute HD catheters 18.4%, midline catheters 15.6%, PICCs 15.6%, tunneled CVCs 6.8%, and implanted ports 1.4%. The prevalence of VTE was 6.0% in the study cohort, and 10.0% among patients with vascular access devices. After adjusting for known VTE risk factors, patients that had a vascular access device placed were observed to have a four-fold greater odds of VTE than those that did not (OR 4.17, 95% CI 2.33-7.46). Patients who received multiple different catheters experienced more VTE events compared with patients that received only one type (21.5% vs. 6.1%, p < .001). Among the 26 patients with VTE, only 8 (30.8%) survived to discharge and among these, only 5 were discharged on therapeutic doses of anticoagulation. Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 that receive vascular access devices experienced higher rates of VTE than those that do not. Future studies to evaluate the nexus between COVID-19, vascular device use, and thrombosis appear are warranted.

Empiric Antibacterial Therapy and Community-onset Bacterial Coinfection in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Multi-hospital Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Antibacterials may be initiated out of concern for bacterial coinfection in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We determined prevalence and predictors of empiric antibacterial therapy and community-onset bacterial coinfections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A randomly sampled cohort of 1705 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in 38 Michigan hospitals between 3/13/2020 and 6/18/2020. Data were collected on early (within 2 days of hospitalization) empiric antibacterial therapy and community-onset bacterial coinfections (positive microbiologic test ≤3 days). Poisson generalized estimating equation models were used to assess predictors. RESULTS: Of 1705 patients with COVID-19, 56.6% were prescribed early empiric antibacterial therapy; 3.5% (59/1705) had a confirmed community-onset bacterial infection. Across hospitals, early empiric antibacterial use varied from 27% to 84%. Patients were more likely to receive early empiric antibacterial therapy if they were older (adjusted rate ratio [ARR]: 1.04 [1.00-1.08] per 10 years); had a lower body mass index (ARR: 0.99 [0.99-1.00] per kg/m2), more severe illness (eg, severe sepsis; ARR: 1.16 [1.07-1.27]), a lobar infiltrate (ARR: 1.21 [1.04-1.42]); or were admitted to a for-profit hospital (ARR: 1.30 [1.15-1.47]). Over time, COVID-19 test turnaround time (returned ≤1 day in March [54.2%, 461/850] vs April [85.2%, 628/737], P < .001) and empiric antibacterial use (ARR: 0.71 [0.63-0.81] April vs March) decreased. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of confirmed community-onset bacterial coinfections was low. Despite this, half of patients received early empiric antibacterial therapy. Antibacterial use varied widely by hospital. Reducing COVID-19 test turnaround time and supporting stewardship could improve antibacterial use.

Antibiotic Overuse After Hospital Discharge: A Multi-hospital Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are commonly prescribed to patients as they leave the hospital. We aimed to create a comprehensive metric to characterize antibiotic overuse after discharge among hospitalized patients treated for pneumonia or urinary tract infection (UTI), and to determine whether overuse varied across hospitals and conditions. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients treated for pneumonia or UTI in 46 hospitals between 1 July 2017-30 July 2019, we quantified the proportion of patients discharged with antibiotic overuse, defined as unnecessary antibiotic use, excess antibiotic duration, or suboptimal fluoroquinolone use. Using linear regression, we assessed hospital-level associations between antibiotic overuse after discharge in patients treated for pneumonia versus a UTI. RESULTS: Of 21 825 patients treated for infection (12 445 with pneumonia; 9380 with a UTI), nearly half (49.1%) had antibiotic overuse after discharge (56.9% with pneumonia; 38.7% with a UTI). For pneumonia, 63.1% of overuse days after discharge were due to excess duration; for UTIs, 43.9% were due to treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria. The percentage of patients discharged with antibiotic overuse varied 5-fold among hospitals (from 15.9% [95% confidence interval, 8.7%-24.6%] to 80.6% [95% confidence interval, 69.4%-88.1%]) and was strongly correlated between conditions (regression coefficient = 0.85; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic overuse after discharge was common and varied widely between hospitals. Antibiotic overuse after discharge was associated between conditions, suggesting that the prescribing culture, physician behavior, or organizational processes contribute to overprescribing at discharge. Multifaceted efforts focusing on all 3 types of overuse and multiple conditions should be considered to improve antibiotic prescribing at discharge.

Designed to Fail? the Future of Primary Care.

Primary care is widely viewed as being in crisis despite its purported central role in addressing population issues related to healthcare cost, quality, access, and equity. Despite this pivotal role, the nature of the clinical practice today has largely emerged by default. We review the evolution of clinical practice in primary care from its genesis in small practices with paper charts and telephonic patient communication to managed care, pay-for-performance, and today's era of the electronic medical record, value-based payment, and consumerism. We suggest a necessary "reset" of expectations that focuses on today's practice structure and the historic face-to-face patient care expectations. Only by doing so can we successfully meet the demands of patients, society, and practicing internists.

Support opportunities for second victims lessons learned: a qualitative study of the top 20 US News and World Report Honor Roll Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Second Victim Programs (SVPs) provide support for healthcare providers involved in a near-miss, medical error, or adverse patient outcomes. Little is known about existence and structure of SVPs in top performing US hospitals. METHODS: We performed a prospective study and interviewed individuals representing SVPs from 20 US News and World Report (USNWR) Honor Roll Hospitals. Telephone interviews were recorded, transcribed, and de-identified. To allow identification of both quantitative and qualitative themes that unified or distinguished programs with SVPs from each other, a content analysis approach was used. RESULTS: Of the Top 20 UNSWR hospitals, nineteen individuals with knowledge of or involvement in SVPs were identified. One individual represented two hospital systems for the same institution. Thirteen representatives agreed to participate, 12 declined, and 5 did not respond. One individual who initially agreed to participate did not attend the interview. Among twelve representatives interviewed, 10 reported establishment of SVPs at their hospitals between 2011 and 2016. Most program representatives reported that participants sought support voluntarily. Four domains were identified in the qualitative analysis: (a) identification of need for Second Victim Program (SVP); (b) challenges to program viability; (c) structural changes following SVP creation, and (d) insights for success. Driving SVP creation was the need support medical providers following a traumatic patient event. Poor physician participation due to the stigma associated with seeking support was commonly reported as a challenge. However, acceptance of the mission of SVPs, growing recognition of the value of the program across hospital departments, and systematic safety enhancements were cited as key advantages. To ensure success, participants suggested training a variety of volunteers and incorporating SVPs within quality improvement processes. CONCLUSIONS: In this convenience sample, programs for healthcare providers that experience psychosocial or emotional trauma from clinical care were uncommon. Variation in structure, performance, and measures of success among SVPs was observed. A systematic approach to evaluating SVPs is needed to help inform institutions of how to best serve their second victims.

Annals for Hospitalists - 19 May 2020.

[Figure: see text].

A Process for Assessing Products for Infection Prevention in Health Care Settings: A Framework From the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Infection control is a complex task that spans people, products, and practices in diverse settings. For years, the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) has provided advice and guidance to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on how best to prevent infections. These recommendations have focused largely on health care delivery practices and occasionally on general categories of products. With an influx of novel infection control products and growing use of these products by frontline clinicians, an efficient process for developing transparent, rigorous product recommendations that includes myriad data sources was necessary. To address this gap, the CDC asked HICPAC to develop a process that would help inform committees considering product-related recommendations. This article describes the process to develop this approach and provides an outline of how the tool may be used when products with infection control claims are recommended in guidelines or recommendations for infection prevention.

An Implementation Framework for the Clinically Indicated Removal Policy for Peripheral Intravenous Catheters.

BACKGROUND: Equivalent clinical outcomes, lower costs, and fewer invasive procedures have resulted in revised recommendations for the removal of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) from the traditional 72- to 96-hourly removal to removal based upon clinical indication. PROBLEM: Uptake of this evidence-based innovation to health systems is often delayed, in part due to the lack of a guiding framework for successful implementation strategies to guide systems to transition to and sustain clinically indicated PIVC removal. APPROACH: We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to reflect on strategies likely important for the successful implementation of PIVC removal evidence into policy and practice. OUTCOMES: We discuss and provide a critique of salient strategies for successful implementation of clinically indicated PIVC removal with regard to intervention characteristics, the outer and inner settings, characteristics of individuals, and implementation processes. CONCLUSIONS: Successful implementation of clinically indicated PIVC removal can be achieved through planned and systematic processes within the CFIR framework.

Health system interventions for adults with type 2 diabetes in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Effective health system interventions may help address the disproportionate burden of diabetes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We assessed the impact of health system interventions to improve outcomes for adults with type 2 diabetes in LMICs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, African Index Medicus, LILACS, and Global Index Medicus from inception of each database through February 24, 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of health system interventions targeting adults with type 2 diabetes in LMICs. Eligible studies reported at least 1 of the following outcomes: glycemic change, mortality, quality of life, or cost-effectiveness. We conducted a meta-analysis for the glycemic outcome of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). GRADE and Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care methods were used to assess risk of bias for the glycemic outcome and to prepare a summary of findings table. Of the 12,921 references identified in searches, we included 39 studies in the narrative review of which 19 were cluster RCTs and 20 were individual RCTs. The greatest number of studies were conducted in the East Asia and Pacific region (n = 20) followed by South Asia (n = 7). There were 21,080 total participants enrolled across included studies and 10,060 total participants in the meta-analysis of HbA1c when accounting for the design effect of cluster RCTs. Non-glycemic outcomes of mortality, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness had sparse data availability that precluded quantitative pooling. In the meta-analysis of HbA1c from 35 of the included studies, the mean difference was -0.46% (95% CI -0.60% to -0.31%, I2 87.8%, p < 0.001) overall, -0.37% (95% CI -0.64% to -0.10%, I2 60.0%, n = 7, p = 0.020) in multicomponent clinic-based interventions, -0.87% (-1.20% to -0.53%, I2 91.0%, n = 13, p < 0.001) in pharmacist task-sharing studies, and -0.27% (-0.50% to -0.04%, I2 64.1%, n = 7, p = 0.010) in trials of diabetes education or support alone. Other types of interventions had few included studies. Eight studies were at low risk of bias for the summary assessment of glycemic control, 15 studies were at unclear risk, and 16 studies were at high risk. The certainty of evidence for glycemic control by subgroup was moderate for multicomponent clinic-based interventions but was low or very low for other intervention types. Limitations include the lack of consensus definitions for health system interventions, differences in the quality of underlying studies, and sparse data availability for non-glycemic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, we found that health system interventions for type 2 diabetes may be effective in improving glycemic control in LMICs, but few studies are available from rural areas or low- or lower-middle-income countries. Multicomponent clinic-based interventions had the strongest evidence for glycemic benefit among intervention types. Further research is needed to assess non-glycemic outcomes and to study implementation in rural and low-income settings.

Is Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Therapy Non-Inferior to Antibiotic Therapy in Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Amid growing antimicrobial resistance, there is an increasing focus on antibiotic stewardship efforts to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. In this context, novel approaches for treating infections without antibiotics are being explored. One such strategy is the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs). Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the rates of symptom resolution and infectious complications in adult women with uncomplicated UTIs treated with antibiotics versus NSAIDs. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, CINHAL, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until January 13, 2020, for randomized controlled trials comparing NSAIDs with antibiotics for treatment of uncomplicated UTIs in adult women. Studies comparing symptom resolution between groups were eligible. Two authors screened all studies independently and in duplicate; data were abstracted using a standardized template. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. RESULTS: Five randomized trials that included 1309 women with uncomplicated UTI met inclusion criteria. Three studies (1130 patients) favored antibiotic therapy in terms of symptom resolution. Two studies (179 patients) found no difference between NSAIDs and antibiotics in terms of symptom resolution. Three studies reported rates of pyelonephritis, two of which found higher rates in patients treated with NSAIDs versus antibiotics. Between two studies that reported this outcome (747 patients), patients randomized to NSAIDs received fewer antibiotic prescriptions compared with those in the antibiotics group. Three studies were at low risk of bias, one had an unclear risk of bias, and one was at high risk of bias. DISCUSSION: For the outcomes of symptom resolution and complications in adult women with UTI, evidence favors antibiotics over NSAIDs. PROSPERO: CRD42018114133.

Use of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in Patients With Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Background: Existing guidelines, including Choosing Wisely recommendations, endorse avoiding placement of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Objective: To describe the frequency of and characteristics associated with PICC use in hospitalized patients with stage 3b or greater CKD (glomerular filtration rate [GFR] <45 mL/min/1.73 m2). Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: 52 hospitals participating in the Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium. Participants: Hospitalized medical patients who received a PICC between November 2013 and September 2016. Measurements: Percentage of patients receiving PICCs who had CKD, frequency of PICC-related complications, and variation in the proportion of PICCs placed in patients with CKD. Results: Of 20 545 patients who had PICCs placed, 4743 (23.1% [95% CI, 20.9% to 25.3%]) had an estimated GFR (eGFR) less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 699 (3.4%) were receiving hemodialysis. In the intensive care unit (ICU), 30.9% (CI, 29.7% to 32.2%) of patients receiving PICCs had an eGFR less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2; the corresponding percentage in wards was 19.3% (CI, 18.8% to 19.9%). Among patients with an eGFR less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2, multilumen PICCs were placed more frequently than single-lumen PICCs. In wards, PICC-related complications occurred in 15.3% of patients with an eGFR less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 and in 15.2% of those with an eGFR of 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 or higher. The corresponding percentages in ICU settings were 22.4% and 23.9%. In patients with an eGFR less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2, PICC placement varied widely across hospitals (interquartile range, 23.7% to 37.8% in ICUs and 12.8% to 23.7% in wards). Limitation: Nephrologist approval for placement could not be determined, and 2.7% of eGFR values were unknown and excluded. Conclusion: In this sample of hospitalized patients who received PICCs, placement in those with CKD was common and not concordant with clinical guidelines. Primary Funding Source: Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network.

Qualitative Assessment of a State Partner-Facilitated Health Care-Associated Infection Prevention National Collaborative.

Background: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded a 3-year national collaborative focused on facilitating relationships between health care-associated infection (HAI) prevention stakeholders within states and improving HAI prevention activities within hospitals. This program-STRIVE (States Targeting Reduction in Infections via Engagement)-targeted hospitals with elevated rates of common HAIs. Objective: To use qualitative methods to better understand STRIVE's effect on state partner relationships and HAI prevention efforts by hospitals. Design: Qualitative case study, by U.S. state. Setting: 7 of 22 eligible STRIVE state partnerships. Participants: Representatives from state hospital associations, state health departments, and other participating organizations (for example, Quality Innovation Networks-Quality Improvement Organizations), referred to as "state partners." Measurements: Phone interviews (n = 17) with each organization were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. Results: State partners reported that relationships with each other and with participating hospitals improved through STRIVE participation. The partners saw improvements in hospital-level HAI prevention activities, such as improved auditing and feedback practices and inclusion of environmental services in prevention efforts; however, some noted those improvements may not be reflected in HAI rates. Many partners outlined plans to sustain their partner relationships by working on future state-level initiatives, such as opioid abuse prevention and antimicrobial stewardship. Limitation: Only 7 participating states were included; direct feedback from participating hospitals was not available. Conclusion: Although there were no substantial changes in aggregate HAI rates, STRIVE achieved its goal of improving state partner relationships and coordination. This improved collaboration may lead to a more streamlined response to future HAI outbreaks and public health emergencies. Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Quantitative Results of a National Intervention to Prevent Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection: A Pre-Post Observational Study.

Background: Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) remains prevalent in hospitals in the United States. Objective: To evaluate the impact of a multimodal intervention in hospitals with elevated rates of health care-associated infection. Design: Pre-post observational evaluation of a prospective, national, clustered, nonrandomized initiative of 3 cohorts of hospitals. Setting: Acute care, long-term acute care, and critical access hospitals, including intensive care units and medical/surgical wards. Participants: Target hospitals had a cumulative attributable difference above the first tertile of performance for Clostridioides difficile infection and another health care-associated infection (such as CLABSI). Some hospitals that did not meet these criteria also participated. Intervention: A multimodal intervention consisting of recommendations and tools for prioritizing and implementing evidence-based infection prevention strategies, on-demand educational videos, webinars led by content experts, and access to content experts. Measurements: Rates of CLABSI and device utilization ratio pre- and postintervention. Results: Between November 2016 and May 2018, 387 hospitals in 23 states and the District of Columbia participated. Monthly preimplementation CLABSI rates ranged from 0 to 71.4 CLABSIs per 1000 catheter-days. Over the study period, the unadjusted CLABSI rate was low and decreased from 0.88 to 0.80 CLABSI per 1000 catheter-days. Between the pre- and postintervention periods, device utilization decreased from 24.05 to 22.07 central line-days per 100 patient-days. However, a decreasing trend in device utilization was also observed during the preintervention period. Limitations: The intervention period was brief. Participation in and adherence to recommended interventions were not fully assessed. Rates of CLABSI were low. Patient characteristics could not be assessed. Conclusion: In hospitals with a disproportionate burden of health care-associated infection, a multimodal intervention did not reduce rates of CLABSI. Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Quantitative Results of a National Intervention to Prevent Clostridioides difficile Infection: A Pre-Post Observational Study.

Background: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is on the rise. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a tiered, evidence-based intervention to prevent CDI. Design: Pre-post observational evaluation of a prospective, 12-month, national, nonrandomized, clustered quality improvement project to reduce hospital health care-associated infection. Setting: Acute care, long-term acute care, and critical access hospitals working with state partner organizations (state hospital associations and state health departments) to improve health care-associated infection prevention practices. Participants: Targeted hospitals had a high burden of CDI and another health care-associated infection. Other hospitals that did not meet these criteria volunteered to participate. Intervention: Multimodal intervention that consisted of 1) on-demand educational modules and webinars, 2) in-person meetings facilitated by state-level partners, 3) feedback and recommendations for implementation of evidence-based recommendations (including a CDI-specific guide on which interventions to implement), and 4) guided facilitation through infection prevention resources and site visits. Measurements: Pre- and postintervention CDI rates. Results: Between November 2016 and May 2018, 387 hospitals (366 of which reported CDI data) in 23 states and the District of Columbia participated in the intervention. There was a statistically significant decrease in CDI incidence over the study period, from 7.0 cases per 10 000 patient-days in the preintervention period to 5.7 cases per 10 000 patient-days in the postintervention period. However, this decrease appeared to be part of a temporal trend rather than due to the study intervention. Limitations: Commitment to and adherence with recommended infection prevention practices before and after the intervention were not assessed. The intervention period was relatively brief, and patient-level data were not available. Conclusion: Although a statistically significant decline in hospital-onset CDI was observed, this trend appears to be unrelated to the study intervention. Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.