Outpatient remdesivir treatment program for hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019: Patient perceptions, process and economic impact.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is FDA-approved for the treatment of hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. Many patients improve clinically to allow for hospital dismissal before completing the 5-day course. In a prior work, patients who continued remdesivir in an outpatient setting experienced better 28-day clinical outcomes. Here, we assessed patients' perspectives and the economic impact of this outpatient practice. METHODS: Hospitalized patients who received remdesivir for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, from 11/6/2020 to 11/5/2021 and were dismissed to continue remdesivir in the outpatient setting were surveyed. The cost of care was compared between those who remained hospitalized versus those who were dismissed. RESULTS: 93 (19.8 %) among 470 eligible patients responded to the electronic survey. Responders were older than non-responders. The majority (70.5 %) had symptoms resolved by the time of the survey. Ten (11.4 %) patients had persistent symptoms attributed to long COVID-19. The majority were satisfied with the quality of care (82.3 %) and overall experience (76.0 %) in the infusion clinic. After adjusting for gender, comorbidity score, and WHO severity scale, the predicted costs for the groups were $16,544 (inpatient) and $9,097 (outpatient) per patient (difference of $7,447; p < .01). An estimate of 1,077 hospital bed-days were made available to other patients as a result of this transition to outpatient. CONCLUSION: An outpatient remdesivir program that allowed for early dismissal was perceived favorably by patients. The program resulted in significant cost and resource savings, the latter in terms of the availability of hospital beds for other patients needing critical services.

Use of the DMAIC Lean Six Sigma quality improvement framework to improve beta-lactam antibiotic adequacy in the critically ill.

Beta-lactam antibiotics are widely used in the intensive care unit due to their favorable effectiveness and safety profiles. Beta-lactams given to patients with sepsis must be delivered as soon as possible after infection recognition (early), treat the suspected organism (appropriate), and be administered at a dose that eradicates the infection (adequate). Early and appropriate antibiotic delivery occurs in >90% of patients, but less than half of patients with sepsis achieve adequate antibiotic exposure. This project aimed to address this quality gap and improve beta-lactam adequacy using the Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control Lean Six Sigma quality improvement framework. A multidisciplinary steering committee was formed, which completed a stakeholder analysis to define the gap in practice. An Ishikawa cause and effect (Fishbone) diagram was used to identify the root causes and an impact/effort grid facilitated prioritization of interventions. An intervention that included bundled education with the use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM; i.e. drug-level testing) was projected to have the highest impact relative to the amount of effort and selected to address beta-lactam inadequacy in the critically ill. The education and TDM intervention were deployed through a Plan, Do, Study, Act cycle. In the 3 months after "go-live," 54 episodes of beta-lactam TDM occurred in 41 unique intensive care unit patients. The primary quality metric of beta-lactam adequacy was achieved in 94% of individuals after the intervention. Ninety-four percent of clinicians gauged the education provided as sufficient. The primary counterbalance of antimicrobial days of therapy, a core antimicrobial stewardship metric, was unchanged over time (favorable result; P = .73). Application of the Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control Lean Six Sigma quality improvement framework effectively improved beta-lactam adequacy in critically ill patients. The approach taken in this quality improvement project is widely generalizable to other drugs, drug classes, or settings to increase the adequacy of drug exposure.

Association of renal function with mortality among hospitalized patients treated with remdesivir for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Renal dysfunction is associated with poor outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In an effort to improve outcomes, intravenous remdesivir has been broadly used for the treatment of COVID-19 even in patients with low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Our study assessed the residual risk of outcomes of patients with low eGFR despite treatment with remdesivir for COVID-19, during a timeframe prior to the expanded label across all levels of renal function. METHODS: We conducted an observational, retrospective, multi-site cohort study of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 treated with at least one dose of remdesivir between November 6, 2020, and November 5, 2021. Electronic medical records were reviewed to obtain patient characteristics, related laboratory data, and outcomes. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality by day 28. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate association between groups. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 3024 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and treated with remdesivir. The median age was 67 [IQR 55, 77] years; 42.7% were women, and 88.6% were white. The median eGFR was 76.6 mL/min/1.73 m2 [IQR 52.5, 95.2]; the majority (67.2%) of patients had an eGFR ≥ 60, while 9% had an eGFR <30. All-cause mortality by day 28 was 8.7%. All-cause mortality rates were significantly higher among patients with impaired renal function (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.63 for patients with eGFR 30-59; OR 1.46 for eGFR 15-29; OR 2.42 for eGFR <15 and OR 5.44 for patients on dialysis) compared to patients with eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73m2. CONCLUSIONS: Lower eGFR remains an independent risk factor for mortality in COVID-19 even in patients treated with remdesivir.

Pharmacotherapeutic Considerations in the Treatment of Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Infections: A Primer for Clinicians.

Nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) can cause a variety of infections, including serious pulmonary disease. Treatment encompasses polypharmacy, with a targeted regimen of 2-5 active medications, depending on site of infection, species, and clinical characteristics. Medications may include oral, intravenous, and inhalational routes. Medication acquisition can be challenging for numerous reasons, including investigational status, limited distribution models, and insurance prior authorization. Additionally, monitoring and managing adverse reactions and drug interactions is a unique skill set. While NTM is primarily medically managed, clinicians may not be familiar with the intricacies of medication selection, procurement, and monitoring. This review offers insights into the pharmacotherapeutic considerations of this highly complex disease state, including regimen design, medication acquisition, safety monitoring, relevant drug-drug interactions, and adverse drug reactions.

Correction: Adema et al. Heartbreaking Decisions: The Dogma and Uncertainties of Antimicrobial Therapy in Infective Endocarditis. Pathogens 2023, 12, 703.

There was an error in the original publication [...].

Comparable outcomes of outpatient remdesivir and sotrovimab among high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 during the omicron BA.1 surge.

Studies conducted prior to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron demonstrated that sotrovimab and remdesivir reduced hospitalization among high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. However, their effectiveness has not been directly compared. This study examined all high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 who received either remdesivir or sotrovimab at Mayo Clinic during the Omicron BA.1 surge from January to March 2022. COVID-19-related hospitalization or death within 28 days were compared between the two treatment groups. Among 3257 patients, 2158 received sotrovimab and 1099 received remdesivir. Patients treated with sotrovimab were younger and had lower comorbidity but were more likely to be immunocompromised than remdesivir-treated patients. The majority (89%) had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19-related hospitalization (1.5% and 1.0% in remdesivir and sotrovimab, respectively, p = .15) and mortality within 28 days (0.4% in both groups, p = .82) were similarly low. A propensity score weighted analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the outcomes between the two groups. We demonstrated favorable outcomes that were not significantly different between patients treated with remdesivir or sotrovimab.

We Shape Our Tools and Then Our Tools Shape Us: OPAT and the EHR.

A commentary on Canterino et al. (2024) and Munsiff et al. (2024), articles where clinicians from two large OPAT programs.

Impact of hypoalbuminemia on clinical outcomes among patients with obesity treated with ceftriaxone.

The use of ceftriaxone, a highly protein-bound drug, in the setting of hypoalbuminemia may result in suboptimal drug exposure. Patients with obesity also exhibit higher absolute drug clearance. We aimed to evaluate the impact of hypoalbuminemia on clinical success among hospitalized adults with obesity who were treated with ceftriaxone. This retrospective review included adult inpatients with weight >100 kg or body mass index >40 kg/m2 who received ceftriaxone 2 g intravenously every 12 hours for at least 72 hours. The primary outcome was clinical success, a composite of clinical cure and microbiologic cure. Secondary outcomes included clinical cure, microbiologic cure, length of stay, ICU length of stay, mortality, 30-day readmission, and adverse events. In all, 137 patients were included, 34 of whom had a serum albumin of ≤2.5 g/dL. In a propensity-score-weighted analysis, clinical success was significantly more common among those without hypoalbuminemia (91.2%) as compared to those with hypoalbuminemia (77.8%) (P = 0.038). Death within 30 days (13.7% vs 0%, P < 0.001) and 30-day readmission (31.6% vs 12.0%, P = 0.008) were more common in the hypoalbuminemia group. In a univariate analysis, serum albumin and indication for ceftriaxone use were found to be predictors of clinical success. Hypoalbuminemia was associated with a lower rate of clinical success among patients with obesity who were treated with ceftriaxone 2 g every 12 hours.