Adjunctive linezolid versus clindamycin for toxin inhibition in ß-lactam-treated patients with invasive group A streptococcal infections in 195 US hospitals from 2016 to 2021: a retrospective cohort study with target trial emulation.

BACKGROUND: Adjunctive clindamycin use is associated with survival in invasive group A streptococcus (GAS) infections but increasing clindamycin resistance in GAS has called into question its durability for this indication. Linezolid also inhibits GAS toxin and virulence factor production, but clinical efficacy data remain sparse. METHODS: We retrospectively emulated a target multicentre, non-blinded, non-inferiority trial to assess the efficacy of adjunctive linezolid compared with clindamycin in adult inpatients with invasive GAS infection treated with a ß-lactam using the PINC AI database between 2016 and 2021. Patients were eligible if they had a monomicrobial GAS culture and received adjunctive therapy within 3 days of culture either concurrently or after ß-lactam initiation and completed at least 3 days of ß-lactam therapy. The primary outcome was adjusted risk ratio (aRR) of in-hospital mortality assessed by overlap-weighting using propensity scores. Secondary outcomes were length of stay among survivors and Clostridium difficile infection. FINDINGS: Of 1095 ß-lactam-treated patients with GAS, 829 (76%) received clindamycin and 266 (24%) received linezolid. In the overlap weighted cohort, the receipt of linezolid was not associated with a statistically significant different aRR of in-hospital mortality compared with clindamycin (linezolid: 9·8% [26/266] vs clindamycin: 7·0% [58/829]; aRR: 0·92 [95% CI 0·42 to 1·43]; p=0·76). The risk difference was -0·005 (95% CI -0·05 to 0·04; p=0·81) and fell within the non-inferiority margin of 0·05. The primary analysis results were consistent across important subgroups and sensitivity analyses. Among survivors, median length of stay (adjusted ratio 0·96 [95% CI 0·16 to 0·08]; p=0·47) and C difficile infection risk (aRR 1·76 [95% CI 0·37 to 1·75]; p=0·29) were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: In this emulated trial of adult patients with invasive GAS infections treated with ß-lactam, linezolid appeared non-inferior to clindamycin suggesting linezolid as an alternative for adjunctive antitoxin therapy. FUNDING: The Intramural Research Program of the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Center and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease.

Association Between Hospital Type and Resilience During COVID-19 Caseload Stress : A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Imbalances between hospital caseload and care resources that strained U.S. hospitals during the pandemic have persisted after the pandemic amid ongoing staff shortages. Understanding which hospital types were more resilient to pandemic overcrowding-related excess deaths may prioritize patient safety during future crises. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether hospital type classified by capabilities and resources (that is, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO] capability, multiplicity of intensive care unit [ICU] types, and large or small hospital) influenced COVID-19 volume-outcome relationships during Delta wave surges. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: 620 U.S. hospitals in the PINC AI Healthcare Database. PARTICIPANTS: Adult inpatients with COVID-19 admitted July to November 2021. MEASUREMENTS: Hospital-months were ranked by previously validated surge index (severity-weighted COVID-19 inpatient caseload relative to hospital bed capacity) percentiles. Hierarchical models were used to evaluate the effect of log-transformed surge index on the marginally adjusted probability of in-hospital mortality or discharge to hospice. Effect modification was assessed for by 4 mutually exclusive hospital types. RESULTS: Among 620 hospitals recording 223 380 inpatients with COVID-19 during the Delta wave, there were 208 ECMO-capable, 216 multi-ICU, 36 large (≥200 beds) single-ICU, and 160 small (<200 beds) single-ICU hospitals. Overall, 50 752 (23%) patients required admission to the ICU, and 34 274 (15.3%) died. The marginally adjusted probability for mortality was 5.51% (95% CI, 4.53% to 6.50%) per unit increase in the log surge index (strain attributable mortality = 7375 [CI, 5936 to 8813] or 1 in 5 COVID-19 deaths). The test for interaction showed no difference (P = 0.32) in log surge index-mortality relationship across 4 hospital types. Results were consistent after excluding transferred patients, restricting to patients with acute respiratory failure and mechanical ventilation, and using alternative strain metrics. LIMITATION: Residual confounding. CONCLUSION: Comparably detrimental relationships between COVID-19 caseload and survival were seen across all hospital types, including highly advanced centers, and well beyond the pandemic's learning curve. These lessons from the pandemic heighten the need to minimize caseload surges and their effects across all hospital types during public health and staffing crises. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center.

Trends in Empiric Broad-Spectrum Antibiotic Use for Suspected Community-Onset Sepsis in US Hospitals.

Importance: Little is known about the degree to which suspected sepsis drives broad-spectrum antibiotic use in hospitals, what proportion of antibiotic courses are unnecessarily broad in retrospect, and whether these patterns are changing over time. Objective: To describe trends in empiric broad-spectrum antibiotic use for suspected community-onset sepsis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used clinical data from adults admitted to 241 US hospitals in the PINC AI Healthcare Database. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or more and were admitted between 2017 and 2021 with suspected community-onset sepsis, defined by a blood culture draw, lactate measurement, and intravenous antibiotic administration on admission. Exposures: Empiric anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and/or antipseudomonal ß-lactam agent use. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual rates of empiric anti-MRSA and/or antipseudomonal ß-lactam agent use and the proportion that were likely unnecessary in retrospect based on the absence of ß-lactam resistant gram-positive or ceftriaxone-resistant gram-negative pathogens from clinical cultures obtained through hospital day 4. Annual trends were calculated using mixed-effects logistic regression models, adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. Results: Among 6 272 538 hospitalizations (median [IQR] age, 66 [53-78] years; 443 465 male [49.6%]; 106 095 Black [11.9%], 65 763 Hispanic [7.4%], 653 907 White [73.1%]), 894 724 (14.3%) had suspected community-onset sepsis, of whom 582 585 (65.1%) received either empiric anti-MRSA (379 987 [42.5%]) or antipseudomonal ß-lactam therapy (513 811 [57.4%]); 311 213 (34.8%) received both. Patients with suspected community-onset sepsis accounted for 1 573 673 of 3 141 300 (50.1%) of total inpatient anti-MRSA antibiotic days and 2 569 518 of 5 211 745 (49.3%) of total antipseudomonal ß-lactam days. Between 2017 and 2021, the proportion of patients with suspected sepsis administered anti-MRSA or antipseudomonal therapy increased from 63.0% (82 731 of 131 275 patients) to 66.7% (101 003 of 151 435 patients) (adjusted OR [aOR] per year, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.03-1.04). However, resistant organisms were isolated in only 65 434 cases (7.3%) (30 617 gram-positive [3.4%], 38 844 gram-negative [4.3%]) and the proportion of patients who had any resistant organism decreased from 9.6% to 7.3% (aOR per year, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.87-0.88). Most patients with suspected sepsis treated with empiric anti-MRSA and/or antipseudomonal therapy had no resistant organisms (527 356 of 582 585 patients [90.5%]); this proportion increased from 88.0% in 2017 to 91.6% in 2021 (aOR per year, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.11-1.13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of adults admitted to 241 US hospitals, empiric broad-spectrum antibiotic use for suspected community-onset sepsis accounted for half of all anti-MRSA or antipseudomonal therapy; the use of these types of antibiotics increased between 2017 and 2021 despite resistant organisms being isolated in less than 10% of patients treated with broad-spectrum agents.

Carbapenem use in extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales infections in US hospitals and influence of IDSA guidance: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Disparate and rapidly changing practice recommendations from major professional infectious diseases societies for managing non-severe infections caused by extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales might hamper carbapenem stewardship. We aimed to understand the real-world management of extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant (ECR) Enterobacterales infections in US hospitals and factors influencing preference for carbapenems over alternative treatments. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with ECR Enterobacterales infections in the PINC AI database. Antibiotic regimens were assessed during empirical and targeted treatment periods and by infection severity and site. Likelihood of receiving targeted carbapenems over time and before or after initial release of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidance on Sept 8, 2020, was established with generalised estimating equations controlling for patient, hospital, and temporal confounders. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2018, and Dec 31, 2021, 30 041 inpatient encounters with ECR Enterobacterales infections were identified at 168 US hospitals, of which 16 006 (53·3%) encounters were in women and 14 035 (46·7%) were in men, with a mean age of 67·3 years (SD 15·1). Although few patients received carbapenems empirically (5324 [17·7%] of 30 041), many did so as targeted treatment (17 518 [58·3%] of 30 041), including subgroups of patients without septic shock (3031 [45·6%] of 6651) and patients with urinary tract infections without septic shock (1845 [46·8%] of 3943) in whom specific narrower-spectrum alternatives were active. Transitions from non-carbapenem to carbapenem antibiotics occurred most often on the day that the ECR phenotype was reported, regardless of illness severity. Carbapenems were the predominant choice to treat ECR Enterobacterales infections over time (adjusted odds ratio 1·00 [95% CI 1·00-1·00]), with no additional immediate change (1·07 [0·95-1·20]) or sustained change (0·99 [0·98-1·00]) after IDSA guidance release. INTERPRETATION: High carbapenem use in targeting non-severe ECR Enterobacterales infections in US hospitals predates 2020 IDSA guidance and has persisted thereafter. Efforts to increase awareness and implementation of recommendations among clinicians to use carbapenem-sparing alternatives in ECR Enterobacterales infections might decrease global carbapenem selective pressure. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and US Food and Drug Administration.

Bronchiectasis-associated infections and outcomes in a large, geographically diverse electronic health record cohort in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Bronchiectasis is a pulmonary disease characterized by irreversible dilation of the bronchi and recurring respiratory infections. Few studies have described the microbiology and prevalence of infections in large patient populations outside of specialized tertiary care centers. METHODS: We used the Cerner HealthFacts Electronic Health Record database to characterize the nature, burden, and frequency of pulmonary infections among persons with bronchiectasis. Chronic infections were defined based on organism-specific guidelines. RESULTS: We identified 7,749 patients who met our incident bronchiectasis case definition. In this study population, the organisms with the highest rates of isolate prevalence were Pseudomonas aeruginosa with 937 (12%) individuals, Staphylococcus aureus with 502 (6%), Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) with 336 (4%), and Aspergillus sp. with 288 (4%). Among persons with at least one isolate of each respective pathogen, 219 (23%) met criteria for chronic P. aeruginosa colonization, 74 (15%) met criteria for S. aureus chronic colonization, 101 (30%) met criteria for MAC chronic infection, and 50 (17%) met criteria for Aspergillus sp. chronic infection. Of 5,795 persons with at least two years of observation, 1,860 (32%) had a bronchiectasis exacerbation and 3,462 (60%) were hospitalized within two years of bronchiectasis diagnoses. Among patients with chronic respiratory infections, the two-year occurrence of exacerbations was 53% and for hospitalizations was 82%. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with bronchiectasis experiencing chronic respiratory infections have high rates of hospitalization.

Assessing Clinician Utilization of Next-Generation Antibiotics Against Resistant Gram-Negative Infections in U.S. Hospitals : A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. antibiotic market failure has threatened future innovation and supply. Understanding when and why clinicians underutilize recently approved gram-negative antibiotics might help prioritize the patient in future antibiotic development and potential market entry rewards. OBJECTIVE: To determine use patterns of recently U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved gram-negative antibiotics (ceftazidime-avibactam, ceftolozane-tazobactam, meropenem-vaborbactam, plazomicin, eravacycline, imipenem-relebactam-cilastatin, and cefiderocol) and identify factors associated with their preferential use (over traditional generic agents) in patients with gram-negative infections due to pathogens displaying difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR; that is, resistance to all first-line antibiotics). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: 619 U.S. hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adult inpatients. MEASUREMENTS: Quarterly percentage change in antibiotic use was calculated using weighted linear regression. Machine learning selected candidate variables, and mixed models identified factors associated with new (vs. traditional) antibiotic use in DTR infections. RESULTS: Between quarter 1 of 2016 and quarter 2 of 2021, ceftolozane-tazobactam (approved 2014) and ceftazidime-avibactam (2015) predominated new antibiotic usage whereas subsequently approved gram-negative antibiotics saw relatively sluggish uptake. Among gram-negative infection hospitalizations, 0.7% (2551 [2631 episodes] of 362 142) displayed DTR pathogens. Patients were treated exclusively using traditional agents in 1091 of 2631 DTR episodes (41.5%), including "reserve" antibiotics such as polymyxins, aminoglycosides, and tigecycline in 865 of 1091 episodes (79.3%). Patients with bacteremia and chronic diseases had greater adjusted probabilities and those with do-not-resuscitate status, acute liver failure, and Acinetobacter baumannii complex and other nonpseudomonal nonfermenter pathogens had lower adjusted probabilities of receiving newer (vs. traditional) antibiotics for DTR infections, respectively. Availability of susceptibility testing for new antibiotics increased probability of usage. LIMITATION: Residual confounding. CONCLUSION: Despite FDA approval of 7 next-generation gram-negative antibiotics between 2014 and 2019, clinicians still frequently treat resistant gram-negative infections with older, generic antibiotics with suboptimal safety-efficacy profiles. Future antibiotics with innovative mechanisms targeting untapped pathogen niches, widely available susceptibility testing, and evidence demonstrating improved outcomes in resistant infections might enhance utilization. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Food and Drug Administration; NIH Intramural Research Program.

Measures and Impact of Caseload Surge During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 pandemic surges strained hospitals globally. We performed a systematic review to examine measures of pandemic caseload surge and its impact on mortality of hospitalized patients. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. STUDY SELECTION: English-language studies published between December 1, 2019, and November 22, 2023, which reported the association between pandemic "surge"-related measures and mortality in hospitalized patients. DATA EXTRACTION: Three authors independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed individual study risk of bias. We assessed measures of surge qualitatively across included studies. Given multidomain heterogeneity, we semiquantitatively aggregated surge-mortality associations. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 17,831 citations, we included 39 studies, 17 of which specifically described surge effects in ICU settings. The majority of studies were from high-income countries ( n = 35 studies) and included patients with COVID-19 ( n = 31). There were 37 different surge metrics which were mapped into four broad themes, incorporating caseloads either directly as unadjusted counts ( n = 11), nested in occupancy ( n = 14), including additional factors (e.g., resource needs, speed of occupancy; n = 10), or using indirect proxies (e.g., altered staffing ratios, alternative care settings; n = 4). Notwithstanding metric heterogeneity, 32 of 39 studies (82%) reported detrimental adjusted odds/hazard ratio for caseload surge-mortality outcomes, reporting point estimates of up to four-fold increased risk of mortality. This signal persisted among study subgroups categorized by publication year, patient types, clinical settings, and country income status. CONCLUSIONS: Pandemic caseload surge was associated with lower survival across most studies regardless of jurisdiction, timing, and population. Markedly variable surge strain measures precluded meta-analysis and findings have uncertain generalizability to lower-middle-income countries (LMICs). These findings underscore the need for establishing a consensus surge metric that is sensitive to capturing harms in everyday fluctuations and future pandemics and is scalable to LMICs.

Trends in Patient Transfers From Overall and Caseload-Strained US Hospitals During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Transferring patients to other hospitals because of inpatient saturation or need for higher levels of care was often challenging during the early waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding how transfer patterns evolved over time and amid hospital overcrowding could inform future care delivery and load balancing efforts. Objective: To evaluate trends in outgoing transfers at overall and caseload-strained hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic vs prepandemic times. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data for adult patients at continuously reporting US hospitals in the PINC-AI Healthcare Database. Data analysis was performed from February to July 2023. Exposures: Pandemic wave, defined as wave 1 (March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020), wave 2 (June 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020), wave 3 (October 1, 2020, to June 19, 2021), Delta (June 20, 2021, to December 18, 2021), and Omicron (December 19, 2021, to February 28, 2022). Main Outcomes and Measures: Weekly trends in cumulative mean daily acute care transfers from all hospitals were assessed by COVID-19 status, hospital urbanicity, and census index (calculated as daily inpatient census divided by nominal bed capacity). At each hospital, the mean difference in transfer counts was calculated using pairwise comparisons of pandemic (vs prepandemic) weeks in the same census index decile and averaged across decile hospitals in each wave. For top decile (ie, high-surge) hospitals, fold changes (and 95% CI) in transfers were adjusted for hospital-level factors and seasonality. Results: At 681 hospitals (205 rural [30.1%] and 476 urban [69.9%]; 360 [52.9%] small with <200 beds and 321 [47.1%] large with ≥200 beds), the mean (SD) weekly outgoing transfers per hospital remained lower than the prepandemic mean of 12.1 (10.4) transfers per week for most of the pandemic, ranging from 8.5 (8.3) transfers per week during wave 1 to 11.9 (10.7) transfers per week during the Delta wave. Despite more COVID-19 transfers, overall transfers at study hospitals cumulatively decreased during each high national surge period. At 99 high-surge hospitals, compared with a prepandemic baseline, outgoing acute care transfers decreased in wave 1 (fold change -15.0%; 95% CI, -22.3% to -7.0%; P < .001), returned to baseline during wave 2 (2.2%; 95% CI, -4.3% to 9.2%; P = .52), and displayed a sustained increase in subsequent waves: 19.8% (95% CI, 14.3% to 25.4%; P < .001) in wave 3, 19.2% (95% CI, 13.4% to 25.4%; P < .001) in the Delta wave, and 15.4% (95% CI, 7.8% to 23.5%; P < .001) in the Omicron wave. Observed increases were predominantly limited to small urban hospitals, where transfers peaked (48.0%; 95% CI, 36.3% to 60.8%; P < .001) in wave 3, whereas large urban and small rural hospitals displayed little to no increases in transfers from baseline throughout the pandemic. Conclusions and Relevance: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, study hospitals reported paradoxical decreases in overall patient transfers during each high-surge period. Caseload-strained rural (vs urban) hospitals with fewer than 200 beds were unable to proportionally increase transfers. Prevailing vulnerabilities in flexing transfer capabilities for care or capacity reasons warrant urgent attention.

Improving Sepsis Outcomes in the Era of Pay-for-Performance and Electronic Quality Measures: A Joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIDP Position Paper.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced the Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) as a pay-for-reporting measure in 2015 and is now planning to make it a pay-for-performance measure by incorporating it into the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program. This joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIPD position paper highlights concerns with this change. Multiple studies indicate that SEP-1 implementation was associated with increased broad-spectrum antibiotic use, lactate measurements, and aggressive fluid resuscitation for patients with suspected sepsis but not with decreased mortality rates. Increased focus on SEP-1 risks further diverting attention and resources from more effective measures and comprehensive sepsis care. We recommend retiring SEP-1 rather than using it in a payment model and shifting instead to new sepsis metrics that focus on patient outcomes. CMS is developing a community-onset sepsis 30-day mortality electronic clinical quality measure (eCQM) that is an important step in this direction. The eCQM preliminarily identifies sepsis using systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, antibiotic administrations or diagnosis codes for infection or sepsis, and clinical indicators of acute organ dysfunction. We support the eCQM but recommend removing SIRS criteria and diagnosis codes to streamline implementation, decrease variability between hospitals, maintain vigilance for patients with sepsis but without SIRS, and avoid promoting antibiotic use in uninfected patients with SIRS. We further advocate for CMS to harmonize the eCQM with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Adult Sepsis Event surveillance metric to promote unity in federal measures, decrease reporting burden for hospitals, and facilitate shared prevention initiatives. These steps will result in a more robust measure that will encourage hospitals to pay more attention to the full breadth of sepsis care, stimulate new innovations in diagnosis and treatment, and ultimately bring us closer to our shared goal of improving outcomes for patients.

Impact of Surge Strain and Pandemic Progression on Prognostication by an Established COVID-19-Specific Severity Score.

IMPORTANCE: Many U.S. State crisis standards of care (CSC) guidelines incorporated Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), a sepsis-related severity score, in pandemic triage algorithms. However, SOFA performed poorly in COVID-19. Although disease-specific scores may perform better, their prognostic utility over time and in overcrowded care settings remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated prognostication by the modified 4C (m4C) score, a COVID-19-specific prognosticator that demonstrated good predictive capacity early in the pandemic, as a potential tool to standardize triage across time and hospital-surge environments. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Two hundred eighty-one U.S. hospitals in an administrative healthcare dataset. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 298,379 hospitalized adults with COVID-19 were identified from March 1, 2020, to January 31, 2022. m4C scores were calculated from admission diagnosis codes, vital signs, and laboratory values. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hospital-surge index, a severity-weighted measure of COVID-19 caseload, was calculated for each hospital-month. Discrimination of in-hospital mortality by m4C and surge index-adjusted models was measured by area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Calibration was assessed by training models on early pandemic waves and measuring fit (deviation from bisector) in subsequent waves. RESULTS: From March 2020 to January 2022, 298,379 adults with COVID-19 were admitted across 281 U.S. hospitals. m4C adequately discriminated mortality in wave 1 (AUC 0.779 [95% CI, 0.769-0.789]); discrimination was lower in subsequent waves (wave 2: 0.772 [95% CI, 0.765-0.779]; wave 3: 0.746 [95% CI, 0.743-0.750]; delta: 0.707 [95% CI, 0.702-0.712]; omicron: 0.729 [95% CI, 0.721-0.738]). m4C demonstrated reduced calibration in contemporaneous waves that persisted despite periodic recalibration. Performance characteristics were similar with and without adjustment for surge. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Mortality prediction by the m4C score remained robust to surge strain, making it attractive for when triage is most needed. However, score performance has deteriorated in recent waves. CSC guidelines relying on defined prognosticators, especially for dynamic disease processes like COVID-19, warrant frequent reappraisal to ensure appropriate resource allocation.

Reducing antimicrobial overuse through targeted therapy for patients with community-acquired pneumonia: a study protocol for a cluster-randomized factorial controlled trial (CARE-CAP).

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a significant public health concern and a leading cause of hospitalization and inpatient antimicrobial use in the USA. However, determining the etiologic pathogen is challenging because traditional culture methods are slow and insensitive, leading to prolonged empiric therapy with extended-spectrum antibiotics (ESA) that contributes to increased hospital length of stay, and antimicrobial resistance. Two potential ways to reduce the exposure to ESA are (a) rapid diagnostic assays that can provide accurate results within hours, obviating the need for empiric therapy, and (b) de-escalation following negative bacterial cultures in clinically stable patients. METHODS: We will conduct a large pragmatic 2 × 2 factorial cluster-randomized controlled trial across 12 hospitals in the Cleveland Clinic Health System that will test these two approaches to reducing the use of ESA in adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with CAP. We will enroll over 12,000 patients and evaluate the independent and combined effects of routine use of rapid diagnostic testing at admission and pharmacist-led de-escalation after 48 h for clinically stable patients with negative cultures vs usual care. We hypothesize that both approaches will reduce days on ESA. Our primary outcome is the duration of exposure to ESA therapy, a key driver of antimicrobial resistance. Secondary outcomes include detection of respiratory viruses, treatment with anti-viral medications, positive pneumococcal urinary antigen test, de-escalation by 72 h from admission, re-escalation to ESA after de-escalation, total duration of any antibiotic, 14-day in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit transfer after admission, healthcare-associated C. difficile infection, acute kidney injury, total inpatient cost, and hospital length-of-stay. DISCUSSION: Our study aims to determine whether identifying an etiological agent early and pharmacist-led de-escalation (calling attention to negative cultures) can safely reduce the use of ESA in patients with CAP. If successful, our findings should lead to better antimicrobial stewardship, as well as improved patient outcomes and reduced healthcare costs. Our findings may also inform clinical guidelines on the optimal management of CAP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05568654 . Registered on October 4, 2022.

Risk of Misleading Conclusions in Observational Studies of Time-to-Antibiotics and Mortality in Suspected Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Influential studies conclude that each hour until antibiotics increases mortality in sepsis. However, these analyses often (1) adjusted for limited covariates, (2) included patients with long delays until antibiotics, (3) combined sepsis and septic shock, and (4) used linear models presuming each hour delay has equal impact. We evaluated the effect of these analytic choices on associations between time-to-antibiotics and mortality. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 104 248 adults admitted to 5 hospitals from 2015-2022 with suspected infection (blood culture collection and intravenous antibiotics ≤24 h of arrival), including 25 990 with suspected septic shock and 23 619 with sepsis without shock. We used multivariable regression to calculate associations between time-to-antibiotics and in-hospital mortality under successively broader confounding-adjustment, shorter maximum time-to-antibiotic intervals, stratification by illness severity, and removing assumptions of linear hourly associations. RESULTS: Changing covariates, maximum time-to-antibiotics, and severity stratification altered the magnitude, direction, and significance of observed associations between time-to-antibiotics and mortality. In a fully adjusted model of patients treated ≤6 hours, each hour was associated with higher mortality for septic shock (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.04-1.11) but not sepsis without shock (aOR: 1.03; .98-1.09) or suspected infection alone (aOR: .99; .94-1.05). Modeling each hour separately confirmed that every hour of delay was associated with increased mortality for septic shock, but only delays >6 hours were associated with higher mortality for sepsis without shock. CONCLUSIONS: Associations between time-to-antibiotics and mortality in sepsis are highly sensitive to analytic choices. Failure to adequately address these issues can generate misleading conclusions.

Assessment of Hospital-Onset SARS-CoV-2 Infection Rates and Testing Practices in the US, 2020-2022.

Importance: Characterizing the scale and factors associated with hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infections could help inform hospital and public health policies regarding prevention and surveillance needs for these infections. Objective: To evaluate associations of hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection rates with different periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital characteristics, and testing practices. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of US hospitals reporting SARS-CoV-2 testing data in the PINC AI Healthcare Database COVID-19 special release files was conducted from July 2020 through June 2022. Data were collected from hospitals that reported at least 1 SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction or antigen test during hospitalizations discharged that month. For each hospital-month where the hospital reported sufficient data, all hospitalizations discharged in that month were included in the cohort. SARS-CoV-2 viral tests and results reported in the microbiology files for all hospitalizations in the study period by discharge month were identified. Data analysis was conducted from September 2022 to March 2023. Exposure: Hospitalizations discharged in an included hospital-month. Main Outcomes and Measures: Multivariable generalized estimating equation negative-binomial regression models were used to assess associations of monthly rates of hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infections per 1000 patient-days (defined as a first positive SARS-CoV-2 test during after hospitalization day 7) with the phase of the pandemic (defined as the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant in circulation), admission testing rates, and hospital characteristics (hospital bed size, teaching status, urban vs rural designation, Census region, and patient distribution variables). Results: A total of 5687 hospital-months from 288 distinct hospitals were included, which contributed 4 421 268 hospitalization records. Among 171 564 hospitalizations with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, 7591 (4.4%) were found to be hospital onset and 6455 (3.8%) were indeterminate onset. The mean monthly hospital-onset infection rate per 1000 patient-days was 0.27 (95 CI, 0.26-0.29). Hospital-onset infections occurred in 2217 of 5687 hospital-months (39.0%). The monthly percentage of discharged patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 at admission varied; 1673 hospital-months (29.4%) had less than 25% of hospitalizations tested at admission; 2199 hospital-months (38.7%) had 25% to 50% of all hospitalizations tested, and 1815 hospital months (31.9%) had more than 50% of all hospitalizations tested at admission. Postadmission testing rates and community-onset infection rates increased with admission testing rates. In multivariable models restricted to hospital-months testing at least 25% of hospitalizations at admission, a 10% increase in community-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was associated with a 178% increase in the hospital-onset infection rate (rate ratio, 2.78; 95% CI, 2.52-3.07). Additionally, the phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the admission testing rate, Census region, and bed size were all significantly associated with hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infection rates. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of hospitals reporting SARS-CoV-2 infections, there was an increase of hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infections when community-onset infections were higher, indicating a need for ongoing and enhanced surveillance and prevention efforts to reduce in-hospital transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infections, particularly when community-incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections is high.