Lessons Learned: The Varied Responses of Massachusetts' Local Health Departments During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

CONTEXT: Massachusetts' decentralized public health model holds tightly to its founding principle of home rule and a board of health system established in 1799. Consequently, Massachusetts has more local health departments (n = 351) than any other state. During COVID-19, each health department, steeped in centuries of independence, launched its own response to the pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To analyze local public health resources and responses to COVID-19. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews and a survey gathered quantitative and qualitative information about communities' responses and resources before and during the pandemic. Municipality demographics (American Community Survey) served as a proxy for community health literacy. We tracked the frequency and content of local board of health meetings using minutes and agendas; we rated the quality of COVID-19 communications on town Web sites. SETTING: The first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Massachusetts: March-August 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Health directors and agents in 10 south-central Massachusetts municipalities, identified as the point of contact by the Academic Public Health Corps. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured municipality resources using self-reported budgets, staffing levels, and demographic-based estimates of community health literacy. We identified COVID-19 responses through communities' self-reported efforts, information on town Web sites, and meeting minutes and agendas. RESULTS: Municipalities excelled in communicating with residents, local businesses, and neighboring towns but lacked the staffing and funding for an efficient and coordinated response. On average, municipal budgets ranged from $5 to $16 per capita, and COVID-19 consumed 75% of health department staff time. All respondents noted extreme workload increases. While municipal Web sites received high scores for Accurate Information, other categories (Navigability; Timeliness; Information Present) were less than 50%. CONCLUSIONS: Increased support for regionalization and sustained public health funding would improve local health responses during complex emergencies in states with local public health administration.

Bacteremia in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis: Prevalence and Predictors of Multidrug Resistant Organisms.

GOALS: The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence and predictors of multidrug resistant organisms (MDRO) in cirrhotic patients with bacteremia at a large tertiary center in the United States. BACKGROUND: The epidemiology of bacteremia in patients with liver cirrhosis has not been well studied in the United States. STUDY: This case-case control study included 180 adults with liver cirrhosis hospitalized from 2011 to 2015. Case group 1 were patients with bacteremia due to a MDRO (n=30). Case group 2 were patients with bacteremia due to a non-MDRO (n=60). Control group comprised patients without bacteremia (n=90). MDRO was defined as bacteria that was nonsusceptible to ≥1 agent in ≥3 antimicrobial categories. RESULTS: Of the 90 bacteremia episodes, 44% were because of gram-positive bacteria, 50% were because of gram-negative bacteria, and 6% were polymicrobial. MDROs caused 30 of 90 (33%) bacteremia episodes, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus species [12% (11/90)], fluoroquinolone-resistant Enterobacteriaceae [10% (9/90)], and Enterococcus faecium [3% (3/90)]. Eight percent of Enterobacteriaceae produced extended-spectrum ß-lactamases. Four independent predictors of MDROs were identified: nonwhite race [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 3.35; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19-9.38], biliary cirrhosis (aOR, 11.75; 95% CI, 2.08-66.32), blood cultures obtained >48 hours after hospital admission (aOR, 6.02; 95% CI, 1.70-21.40), and recent health care exposure (aOR, 9.81; 95% CI, 2.15-44.88). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of bacteremia in cirrhotic patients was due to MDROs at a large US tertiary care center. Local epidemiology data and identification of risk factors associated with MDROs may help with optimal empiric antibiotic selection.

Safety and Effectiveness of Factor VIII Inhibitor Bypassing Activity (FEIBA) and Fresh Frozen Plasma in Oral Anticoagulant-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulant (OAT)-associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is a life-threatening emergency for which prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC) are considered first-line reversal agents. The only approved PCC in the USA for warfarin-associated ICH is non-activated PCC. Little data are available regarding the safety and effectiveness of factor VIII inhibitor bypassing activity (FEIBA) which is an activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC). The aim of this analysis was to assess the safety and effectiveness of FEIBA compared to fresh frozen plasma (FFP) for reversal of OAT-associated ICH. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected to compare coagulation markers and in-hospital clinical outcomes in patients who received aPCC with or without FFP versus FFP alone for the reversal of OAT-associated ICH. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients met inclusion criteria; 50 patients received FFP alone, and 34 patients received FEIBA (mean dose 20 U/kg) with or without FFP for OAT-associated ICH. The proportion of diagnosed thrombotic events during hospitalization was similar in both groups (8% in the FFP group vs. 12% in the FEIBA group; P = 0.56). Median time to INR < 1.5 was achieved faster in the FEIBA group versus the FFP group (0.5 h [IQR 0.5-1.] vs. 10 h [IQR 5-16.3], respectively; P < 0.001) reflecting a trend toward shorter median time to neurosurgical intervention. Hematoma expansion, length of stay, and all-cause mortality were similar between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of FEIBA does not appear to increase the risk of thrombotic events compared with FFP. FEIBA administration resulted in faster INR reversal with a trend toward shorter time to neurosurgical intervention. However, there was no difference in hematoma expansion, mortality or length of stay.

Evaluation of Discharge Opioid Prescribing in Coronary Artery Bypass Patients Following an Opioid Stewardship Intervention for Providers.

Introduction: Opioid stewardship efforts can promote safe and effective use of opioids to optimize pain control and minimize unintended consequences. The purpose of this study is to assess the difference in post-operative opioid discharge prescribing in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery following implementation of a tripartite opioid stewardship intervention. Methods: This was a single-center, quality improvement study at a large, quaternary academic medical center. Adult patients undergoing CABG from July 2019 to June 2020 (pre-intervention) and November 2020 to February 2021 (post-intervention) were included. The intervention included adopting hospital-wide post-surgical opioid discharge prescribing guidelines, discharge prescriber education, and electronic medical record changes. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving an opioid prescription at discharge. Secondary outcomes included total morphine milligram equivalents (MME) prescribed and non-opioid analgesics prescribed at discharge. Results: A total of 200 patients were included in the study; 100 pre- and 100 post-intervention. There was no difference in opioid discharge prescribing at discharge (74% pre-intervention vs. 72% post-intervention; P = .87). There was no difference in MMEs prescribed at discharge (145.6 ± 57 pre- vs. 162.2 ± 95 post-; P = .202). No difference was seen in non-opioid analgesic prescriptions prescribed at discharge (35% pre- vs. 40% post-; P = .56). Conclusion: A multipronged opioid stewardship intervention did not lead to a reduction in opioid prescribing at discharge. Post-intervention, there was a non-statistically significant increase in the proportion of patients who received non-opioid analgesics discharge. Future studies should assess the effect of different stewardship interventions on prescribing and patient outcomes.

An institutional review of antimicrobial stewardship interventions.

In order to combat increasing rates of bacterial resistance, many institutions have implemented antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs) to improve antibiotic use. To ascertain the potential impact of our stewardship programme at Baylor St Luke's Medical Center (Houston, TX), antimicrobial-related interventions were analysed over a 4-year period. ASP recommendations related to antimicrobial therapy from 2009 to 2012 were retrieved from the hospital electronic database and were retrospectively reviewed. The number of interventions for each time period was adjusted to the hospital census data. The interventions were randomly assessed and categorised for clinical significance based on established institutional guidelines. In total, 14654 non-duplicate antimicrobial therapy interventions were retrieved, of which 11874 (81.0%) were audited for accuracy. Approximately 13 interventions were made per 1000 patient-days, but there were no significant patterns observed regarding the number of interventions performed from month to month (range 8-21). The most frequent types of interventions were related to inappropriate dosing (39.0%), antimicrobial selection (20.5%) and drug allergy (13.0%). Serious adverse drug events (ADEs) were potentially avoided in 20.7% of all interventions. Cumulative potential cost avoidance was more than US$6.5 million. In our institution, proper drug and dose selection were the major components of the ASP. Without focusing solely on reduction of drug acquisition costs, implementation of an ASP could still be cost effective by improving the quality of patient care and avoiding ADEs with serious consequences.

Antibiogram compliance in University HealthSystem Consortium participating hospitals with Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines.

PURPOSE: The degree of compliance with antibiogram guidance among University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC) hospitals was analyzed. METHODS: The UHC Pharmacy Council Pharmacy Practice Advancement Committee conducted a survey to evaluate hospital policies regarding the generation, reporting, and utilization of antibiograms among UHC hospitals. The survey was distributed via a UHC online survey tool to pharmacy directors at 237 UHC hospitals. Responses were collected from April 13 to May 14, 2010. RESULTS: Of the 237 hospitals to which surveys were sent, 49 hospitals (21%) from 28 states submitted survey responses. Forty-eight hospitals reported that they routinely generated antibiograms, and 36 reported that they adopted all or most of the standards recommended by the 2009 guidelines on antibiograms published by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). The compliance rates to the four key CLSI recommendations were as follows: 98% reported data at least annually, 89% eliminated duplicate isolates, 83% did not include surveillance isolates, and 64% required at least 30 isolates for each reported species. Thirty-eight hospitals had an antimicrobial stewardship program; 35 of them formally reviewed antibiograms and 19 implemented new programs based on the antibiogram data. In 16 hospitals, formulary changes were made as a consequence of antibiogram results. In 30 hospitals, pharmacists had significant involvement in compiling, reviewing, and reporting antibiograms. CONCLUSION: Among respondents from 47 UHC hospitals, the compliance rates to four key CLSI recommendations for antibiograms ranged from 64% to 98%. Respondents from 30 hospitals reported significant involvement of pharmacists in compiling, reviewing, and reporting antibiograms.

Improving patient care through implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship program.

PURPOSE: The implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship program at a health system is described. SUMMARY: In 2008, the Center for Antimicrobial Stewardship and Epidemiology (CASE) was formed at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital (SLEH) to improve the quality of care for patients as it related to antimicrobial therapy. The charter of CASE contained specific aims for improving patient care, furthering clinical research, and training the next generation of clinical infectious diseases pharmacists. The CASE team consists of at least two infectious diseases pharmacists and one physician (the medical director) who provide direct oversight for antimicrobial utilization within the hospital. The CASE medical director, an infectious diseases physician, is responsible for overseeing the activities of the center. With the oversight of the CASE advisory board, the medical director develops and implements the antimicrobial stewardship and management policies for SLEH. Another key innovative feature of CASE is its extensive involvement in training new infectious diseases pharmacists and conducting research. CASE uses a model in which a clinical scenario or problem is identified, a research project is undertaken to further elucidate the problem, and policy changes are made to improve patient outcomes. The CASE team is supported by a CASE advisory board, a CASE research collaborative including university faculty, and a dedicated training program for pharmacy fellows, residents, and students. CONCLUSION: Implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship program at a health system helped decrease the inappropriate use of antibiotics, improve patient care and outcomes, further clinical research, and increase training opportunities for future clinical infectious diseases pharmacists.