RESUMEN
Importance: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the second most common infection leading to hospitalization and is often associated with gram-negative multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Clinicians overuse extended-spectrum antibiotics although most patients are at low risk for MDRO infection. Safe strategies to limit overuse of empiric antibiotics are needed. Objective: To evaluate whether computerized provider order entry (CPOE) prompts providing patient- and pathogen-specific MDRO risk estimates could reduce use of empiric extended-spectrum antibiotics for treatment of UTI. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster-randomized trial in 59 US community hospitals comparing the effect of a CPOE stewardship bundle (education, feedback, and real-time and risk-based CPOE prompts; 29 hospitals) vs routine stewardship (n = 30 hospitals) on antibiotic selection during the first 3 hospital days (empiric period) in noncritically ill adults (≥18 years) hospitalized with UTI with an 18-month baseline (April 1, 2017-September 30, 2018) and 15-month intervention period (April 1, 2019-June 30, 2020). Interventions: CPOE prompts recommending empiric standard-spectrum antibiotics in patients ordered to receive extended-spectrum antibiotics who have low estimated absolute risk (<10%) of MDRO UTI, coupled with feedback and education. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was empiric (first 3 days of hospitalization) extended-spectrum antibiotic days of therapy. Secondary outcomes included empiric vancomycin and antipseudomonal days of therapy. Safety outcomes included days to intensive care unit (ICU) transfer and hospital length of stay. Outcomes were assessed using generalized linear mixed-effect models to assess differences between the baseline and intervention periods. Results: Among 127â¯403 adult patients (71â¯991 baseline and 55â¯412 intervention period) admitted with UTI in 59 hospitals, the mean (SD) age was 69.4 (17.9) years, 30.5% were male, and the median Elixhauser Comorbidity Index count was 4 (IQR, 2-5). Compared with routine stewardship, the group using CPOE prompts had a 17.4% (95% CI, 11.2%-23.2%) reduction in empiric extended-spectrum days of therapy (rate ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.77-0.89]; P < .001). The safety outcomes of mean days to ICU transfer (6.6 vs 7.0 days) and hospital length of stay (6.3 vs 6.5 days) did not differ significantly between the routine and intervention groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with routine stewardship, CPOE prompts providing real-time recommendations for standard-spectrum antibiotics for patients with low MDRO risk coupled with feedback and education significantly reduced empiric extended-spectrum antibiotic use among noncritically ill adults admitted with UTI without changing hospital length of stay or days to ICU transfers. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03697096.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos , Sistemas de Entrada de Órdenes Médicas , Infecciones Urinarias , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana Múltiple , Hospitales Comunitarios , Tiempo de Internación , Infecciones Urinarias/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
Importance: Pneumonia is the most common infection requiring hospitalization and is a major reason for overuse of extended-spectrum antibiotics. Despite low risk of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) infection, clinical uncertainty often drives initial antibiotic selection. Strategies to limit empiric antibiotic overuse for patients with pneumonia are needed. Objective: To evaluate whether computerized provider order entry (CPOE) prompts providing patient- and pathogen-specific MDRO infection risk estimates could reduce empiric extended-spectrum antibiotics for non-critically ill patients admitted with pneumonia. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster-randomized trial in 59 US community hospitals comparing the effect of a CPOE stewardship bundle (education, feedback, and real-time MDRO risk-based CPOE prompts; n = 29 hospitals) vs routine stewardship (n = 30 hospitals) on antibiotic selection during the first 3 hospital days (empiric period) in non-critically ill adults (≥18 years) hospitalized with pneumonia. There was an 18-month baseline period from April 1, 2017, to September 30, 2018, and a 15-month intervention period from April 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020. Intervention: CPOE prompts recommending standard-spectrum antibiotics in patients ordered to receive extended-spectrum antibiotics during the empiric period who have low estimated absolute risk (<10%) of MDRO pneumonia, coupled with feedback and education. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was empiric (first 3 days of hospitalization) extended-spectrum antibiotic days of therapy. Secondary outcomes included empiric vancomycin and antipseudomonal days of therapy and safety outcomes included days to intensive care unit (ICU) transfer and hospital length of stay. Outcomes compared differences between baseline and intervention periods across strategies. Results: Among 59 hospitals with 96â¯451 (51â¯671 in the baseline period and 44â¯780 in the intervention period) adult patients admitted with pneumonia, the mean (SD) age of patients was 68.1 (17.0) years, 48.1% were men, and the median (IQR) Elixhauser comorbidity count was 4 (2-6). Compared with routine stewardship, the group using CPOE prompts had a 28.4% reduction in empiric extended-spectrum days of therapy (rate ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.66-0.78]; P < .001). Safety outcomes of mean days to ICU transfer (6.5 vs 7.1 days) and hospital length of stay (6.8 vs 7.1 days) did not differ significantly between the routine and CPOE intervention groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Empiric extended-spectrum antibiotic use was significantly lower among adults admitted with pneumonia to non-ICU settings in hospitals using education, feedback, and CPOE prompts recommending standard-spectrum antibiotics for patients at low risk of MDRO infection, compared with routine stewardship practices. Hospital length of stay and days to ICU transfer were unchanged. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03697070.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos , Neumonía , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana Múltiple , Hospitalización , Sistemas de Entrada de Órdenes Médicas , Neumonía/tratamiento farmacológico , Neumonía Bacteriana/tratamiento farmacológico , Estados Unidos , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Detection and containment of hospital outbreaks currently depend on variable and personnel-intensive surveillance methods. Whether automated statistical surveillance for outbreaks of health care-associated pathogens allows earlier containment efforts that would reduce the size of outbreaks is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial in 82 community hospitals within a larger health care system. All hospitals followed an outbreak response protocol when outbreaks were detected by their infection prevention programs. Half of the hospitals additionally used statistical surveillance of microbiology data, which alerted infection prevention programs to outbreaks. Statistical surveillance was also applied to microbiology data from control hospitals without alerting their infection prevention programs. The primary outcome was the number of additional cases occurring after outbreak detection. Analyses assessed differences between the intervention period (July 2019 to January 2022) versus baseline period (February 2017 to January 2019) between randomized groups. A post hoc analysis separately assessed pre-coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and Covid-19 pandemic intervention periods. RESULTS: Real-time alerts did not significantly reduce the number of additional outbreak cases (intervention period versus baseline: statistical surveillance relative rate [RR]=1.41, control RR=1.81; difference-in-differences, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 1.52; P=0.46). Comparing only the prepandemic intervention with baseline periods, the statistical outbreak surveillance group was associated with a 64.1% reduction in additional cases (statistical surveillance RR=0.78, control RR=2.19; difference-in-differences, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.99). There was no similarly observed association between the pandemic versus baseline periods (statistical surveillance RR=1.56, control RR=1.66; difference-in-differences, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.92). CONCLUSIONS: Automated detection of hospital outbreaks using statistical surveillance did not reduce overall outbreak size in the context of an ongoing pandemic. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04053075. Support for HCA Healthcare's participation in the study was provided in kind by HCA.).
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Infección Hospitalaria , Brotes de Enfermedades , Humanos , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Infección Hospitalaria/prevención & control , Control de Infecciones/métodos , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitales ComunitariosRESUMEN
We described care received by hospitalized children with COVID-19 or multi-system inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) prior to the 2021 COVID-19 Omicron variant surge in the US. We identified hospitalized children <18 years of age with a COVID-19 or MIS-C diagnosis (COVID-19 not required), separately, from February 2020-September 2021 (n = 126 hospitals). We described high-risk conditions, inpatient treatments, and complications among these groups. Among 383,083 pediatric hospitalizations, 2,186 had COVID-19 and 395 had MIS-C diagnosis. Less than 1% had both COVID-19 and MIS-C diagnosis (n = 154). Over half were >6 years old (54% COVID-19, 70% MIS-C). High-risk conditions included asthma (14% COVID-19, 11% MIS-C), and obesity (9% COVID-19, 10% MIS-C). Pulmonary complications in children with COVID-19 included viral pneumonia (24%) and acute respiratory failure (11%). In reference to children with COVID-19, those with MIS-C had more hematological disorders (62% vs 34%), sepsis (16% vs 6%), pericarditis (13% vs 2%), myocarditis (8% vs 1%). Few were ventilated or died, but some required oxygen support (38% COVID-19, 45% MIS-C) or intensive care (42% COVID-19, 69% MIS-C). Treatments included: methylprednisolone (34% COVID-19, 75% MIS-C), dexamethasone (25% COVID-19, 15% MIS-C), remdesivir (13% COVID-19, 5% MIS-C). Antibiotics (50% COVID-19, 68% MIS-C) and low-molecular weight heparin (17% COVID-19, 34% MIS-C) were frequently administered. Markers of illness severity among hospitalized children with COVID-19 prior to the 2021 Omicron surge are consistent with previous studies. We report important trends on treatments in hospitalized children with COVID-19 to improve the understanding of real-world treatment patterns in this population.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Niño , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/terapia , SARS-CoV-2 , HospitalesRESUMEN
Importance: Non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia (NV-HAP) is a common and deadly hospital-acquired infection. However, inconsistent surveillance methods and unclear estimates of attributable mortality challenge prevention. Objective: To estimate the incidence, variability, outcomes, and population attributable mortality of NV-HAP. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study retrospectively applied clinical surveillance criteria for NV-HAP to electronic health record data from 284 US hospitals. Adult patients admitted to the Veterans Health Administration hospital from 2015 to 2020 and HCA Healthcare hospitals from 2018 to 2020 were included. The medical records of 250 patients who met the surveillance criteria were reviewed for accuracy. Exposures: NV-HAP, defined as sustained deterioration in oxygenation for 2 or more days in a patient who was not ventilated concurrent with abnormal temperature or white blood cell count, performance of chest imaging, and 3 or more days of new antibiotics. Main Outcomes and Measures: NV-HAP incidence, length-of-stay, and crude inpatient mortality. Attributable inpatient mortality by 60 days follow-up was estimated using inverse probability weighting, accounting for both baseline and time-varying confounding. Results: Among 6â¯022â¯185 hospitalizations (median [IQR] age, 66 [54-75] years; 1â¯829â¯475 [26.1%] female), there were 32â¯797 NV-HAP events (0.55 per 100 admissions [95% CI, 0.54-0.55] per 100 admissions and 0.96 per 1000 patient-days [95% CI, 0.95-0.97] per 1000 patient-days). Patients with NV-HAP had multiple comorbidities (median [IQR], 6 [4-7]), including congestive heart failure (9680 [29.5%]), neurologic conditions (8255 [25.2%]), chronic lung disease (6439 [19.6%]), and cancer (5,467 [16.7%]); 24â¯568 cases (74.9%) occurred outside intensive care units. Crude inpatient mortality was 22.4% (7361 of 32â¯797) for NV-HAP vs 1.9% (115â¯530 of 6â¯022â¯185) for all hospitalizations; 12â¯449 (8.0%) were discharged to hospice. Median [IQR] length-of-stay was 16 (11-26) days vs 4 (3-6) days. On medical record review, pneumonia was confirmed by reviewers or bedside clinicians in 202 of 250 patients (81%). It was estimated that NV-HAP accounted for 7.3% (95% CI, 7.1%-7.5%) of all hospital deaths (total hospital population inpatient death risk of 1.87% with NV-HAP events included vs 1.73% with NV-HAP events excluded; risk ratio, 0.927; 95% CI, 0.925-0.929). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, NV-HAP, which was defined using electronic surveillance criteria, was present in approximately 1 in 200 hospitalizations, of whom 1 in 5 died in the hospital. NV-HAP may account for up to 7% of all hospital deaths. These findings underscore the need to systematically monitor NV-HAP, define best practices for prevention, and track their impact.
Asunto(s)
Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador , Adulto , Humanos , Femenino , Anciano , Masculino , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Retrospectivos , Incidencia , Hospitales , ElectrónicaRESUMEN
AIM: Diabetes has been identified as a risk factor for poor outcomes in patients with COVID-19. We examined the association of hyperglycaemia, both in the presence and absence of pre-existing diabetes, with severity and outcomes in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Data from 74,148 COVID-19-positive inpatients with at least one recorded glucose measurement during their inpatient episode were analysed for presence of pre-existing diabetes diagnosis and any glucose values in the hyperglycaemic range (>180 mg/dl). RESULTS: Among patients with and without a pre-existing diabetes diagnosis on admission, mortality was substantially higher in the presence of high glucose measurements versus all measurements in the normal range (70-180 mg/dl) in both groups (non-diabetics: 21.7% vs. 3.3%; diabetics 14.4% vs. 4.3%). When adjusting for patient age, BMI, severity on admission and oxygen saturation on admission, this increased risk of mortality persisted and varied by diabetes diagnosis. Among patients with a pre-existing diabetes diagnosis, any hyperglycaemic value during the episode was associated with a substantial increase in the odds of mortality (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.52-2.07); among patients without a pre-existing diabetes diagnosis, this risk nearly doubled (OR: 3.07, 95% CI: 2.79-3.37). CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis identified hyperglycaemia in COVID-19 patients as an independent risk factor for mortality after adjusting for the presence of diabetes and other known risk factors. This indicates that the extent of glucose control could serve as a mechanism for modifying the risk of COVID-19 morality in the inpatient environment.
Asunto(s)
Glucemia , COVID-19/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Hiperglucemia/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , COVID-19/sangre , COVID-19/mortalidad , Diabetes Mellitus/sangre , Diabetes Mellitus/mortalidad , Femenino , Humanos , Hiperglucemia/sangre , Hiperglucemia/mortalidad , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has migrated to regions that were initially spared, and it is likely that different populations are currently at risk for illness. Herein, we present our observations of the change in characteristics and resource use of COVID-19 patients over time in a national system of community hospitals to help inform those managing surge planning, operational management, and future policy decisions.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/terapia , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , COVID-19/etnología , COVID-19/mortalidad , Femenino , Hispánicos o Latinos/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales Comunitarios , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Virginia/epidemiología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors for mortality among COVID-19 patients admitted to a system of community hospitals in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of patient data collected from the routine care of COVID-19 patients. SETTING: System of >180 acute-care facilities in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: All admitted patients with positive identification of COVID-19 and a documented discharge as of May 12, 2020. METHODS: Determination of demographic characteristics, vital signs at admission, patient comorbidities and recorded discharge disposition in this population to construct a logistic regression estimating the odds of mortality, particular for those patients characterized as not being critically ill at admission. RESULTS: In total, 6,180 COVID-19+ patients were identified as of May 12, 2020. Most COVID-19+ patients (4,808, 77.8%) were admitted directly to a medical-surgical unit with no documented critical care or mechanical ventilation within 8 hours of admission. After adjusting for demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and vital signs at admission in this subgroup, the largest driver of the odds of mortality was patient age (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.06-1.08; P < .001). Decreased oxygen saturation at admission was associated with increased odds of mortality (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.12; P < .001) as was diabetes (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.21-2.03; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The identification of factors observable at admission that are associated with mortality in COVID-19 patients who are initially admitted to non-critical care units may help care providers, hospital epidemiologists, and hospital safety experts better plan for the care of these patients.