RESUMEN
Antimicrobial use data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network's Antimicrobial Use and Resistance Module between January 2019 and July 2022 were analyzed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on inpatient antimicrobial use.
Asunto(s)
Antiinfecciosos , COVID-19 , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Humanos , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Pacientes Internos , PandemiasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data on mixed mould infection with COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) and COVID-19-associated pulmonary mucormycosis (CAPM) are sparse. OBJECTIVES: To ascertain the prevalence of co-existent CAPA in CAPM (mixed mould infection) and whether mixed mould infection is associated with early mortality (≤7 days of diagnosis). METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the data collected from 25 centres across India on COVID-19-associated mucormycosis. We included only CAPM and excluded subjects with disseminated or rhino-orbital mucormycosis. We defined co-existent CAPA if a respiratory specimen showed septate hyphae on smear, histopathology or culture grew Aspergillus spp. We also compare the demography, predisposing factors, severity of COVID-19, and management of CAPM patients with and without CAPA. Using a case-control design, we assess whether mixed mould infection (primary exposure) were associated with early mortality in CAPM. RESULTS: We included 105 patients with CAPM. The prevalence of mixed mould infection was 20% (21/105). Patients with mixed mould infection experienced early mortality (9/21 [42.9%] vs. 15/84 [17.9%]; p = 0.02) and poorer survival at 6 weeks (7/21 [33.3] vs. 46/77 [59.7%]; p = 0.03) than CAPM alone. On imaging, consolidation was more commonly encountered with mixed mould infections than CAPM. Co-existent CAPA (odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 19.1 [2.62-139.1]) was independently associated with early mortality in CAPM after adjusting for hypoxemia during COVID-19 and other factors. CONCLUSION: Coinfection of CAPA and CAPM was not uncommon in our CAPM patients and portends a worse prognosis. Prospective studies from different countries are required to know the impact of mixed mould infection.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Coinfección , Mucormicosis , Humanos , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/mortalidad , Mucormicosis/mortalidad , Mucormicosis/epidemiología , Mucormicosis/complicaciones , Masculino , Femenino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevalencia , Coinfección/mortalidad , Coinfección/epidemiología , Coinfección/microbiología , India/epidemiología , Adulto , Aspergilosis Pulmonar/complicaciones , Aspergilosis Pulmonar/mortalidad , Aspergilosis Pulmonar/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Anciano , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Enfermedades Pulmonares Fúngicas/mortalidad , Enfermedades Pulmonares Fúngicas/complicaciones , Enfermedades Pulmonares Fúngicas/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
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
INTRODUCTION: Racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately affected by end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). ESKD patients on dialysis are at increased risk for Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections, but racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities associated with this outcome are not well described. METHODS: Surveillance data from the 2020 National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) and the 2017-2020 Emerging Infections Program (EIP) were used to describe bloodstream infections among patients on hemodialysis (hemodialysis patients) and were linked to population-based data sources (CDC/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry [ATSDR] Social Vulnerability Index [SVI], United States Renal Data System [USRDS], and U.S. Census Bureau) to examine associations with race, ethnicity, and social determinants of health. RESULTS: In 2020, 4,840 dialysis facilities reported 14,822 bloodstream infections to NHSN; 34.2% were attributable to S. aureus . Among seven EIP sites, the S. aureus bloodstream infection rate during 2017-2020 was 100 times higher among hemodialysis patients (4,248 of 100,000 person-years) than among adults not on hemodialysis (42 of 100,000 person-years). Unadjusted S. aureus bloodstream infection rates were highest among non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) and Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) hemodialysis patients. Vascular access via central venous catheter was strongly associated with S. aureus bloodstream infections (NHSN: adjusted rate ratio [aRR] = 6.2; 95% CI = 5.7-6.7 versus fistula; EIP: aRR = 4.3; 95% CI = 3.9-4.8 versus fistula or graft). Adjusting for EIP site of residence, sex, and vascular access type, S. aureus bloodstream infection risk in EIP was highest in Hispanic patients (aRR = 1.4; 95% CI = 1.2-1.7 versus non-Hispanic White [White] patients), and patients aged 18-49 years (aRR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.5-1.9 versus patients aged ≥65 years). Areas with higher poverty levels, crowding, and lower education levels accounted for disproportionately higher proportions of hemodialysis-associated S. aureus bloodstream infections. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE: Disparities exist in hemodialysis-associated S. aureus infections. Health care providers and public health professionals should prioritize prevention and optimized treatment of ESKD, identify and address barriers to lower-risk vascular access placement, and implement established best practices to prevent bloodstream infections.
Asunto(s)
Fallo Renal Crónico , Sepsis , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Staphylococcus aureus , Diálisis Renal/efectos adversos , Etnicidad , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Fallo Renal Crónico/etiología , Sepsis/etiología , Signos Vitales , Disparidades en Atención de SaludRESUMEN
Sepsis, life-threatening organ dysfunction secondary to infection, contributes to at least 1.7 million adult hospitalizations and at least 350,000 deaths annually in the United States. Sepsis care is complex, requiring the coordination of multiple hospital departments and disciplines. Sepsis programs can coordinate these efforts to optimize patient outcomes. The 2022 National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) annual survey evaluated the prevalence and characteristics of sepsis programs in acute care hospitals. Among 5,221 hospitals, 3,787 (73%) reported having a committee that monitors and reviews sepsis care. Prevalence of these committees varied by hospital size, ranging from 53% among hospitals with 0-25 beds to 95% among hospitals with >500 beds. Fifty-five percent of all hospitals provided dedicated time (including assigned protected time or job description requirements) for leaders of these committees to manage a program and conduct daily activities, and 55% of committees reported involvement with antibiotic stewardship programs. These data highlight opportunities, particularly in smaller hospitals, to improve the care and outcomes of patients with sepsis in the United States by ensuring that all hospitals have sepsis programs with protected time for program leaders, engagement of medical specialists, and integration with antimicrobial stewardship programs. CDC's Hospital Sepsis Program Core Elements provides a guide to assist hospitals in developing and implementing effective sepsis programs that complement and facilitate the implementation of existing clinical guidelines and improve patient care. Future NHSN annual surveys will monitor uptake of these sepsis core elements.
Asunto(s)
Instituciones de Salud , Sepsis , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto , Humanos , Hospitales , Sepsis/epidemiología , Sepsis/terapia , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Atención a la SaludRESUMEN
Nursing home residents are at risk for becoming infected with and experiencing severe complications from respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). Fall 2023 is the first season during which vaccines are simultaneously available to protect older adults in the United States against all three of these respiratory viruses. Nursing homes are required to report COVID-19 vaccination coverage and can voluntarily report influenza and RSV vaccination coverage among residents to CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network. The purpose of this study was to assess COVID-19, influenza, and RSV vaccination coverage among nursing home residents during the current 2023-24 respiratory virus season. As of December 10, 2023, 33.1% of nursing home residents were up to date with vaccination against COVID-19. Among residents at 20.2% and 19.4% of facilities that elected to report, coverage with influenza and RSV vaccines was 72.0% and 9.8%, respectively. Vaccination varied by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services region, social vulnerability index level, and facility size. There is an urgent need to protect nursing home residents against severe outcomes of respiratory illnesses by continuing efforts to increase vaccination against COVID-19 and influenza and discussing vaccination against RSV with eligible residents during the ongoing 2023-24 respiratory virus season.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Virus Sincitial Respiratorio Humano , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Anciano , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Casas de Salud , Vacunación , Atención a la SaludRESUMEN
Introduction: Racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately affected by end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). ESKD patients on dialysis are at increased risk for Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections, but racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities associated with this outcome are not well described. Methods: Surveillance data from the 2020 National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) and the 2017-2020 Emerging Infections Program (EIP) were used to describe bloodstream infections among patients on hemodialysis (hemodialysis patients) and were linked to population-based data sources (CDC/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry [ATSDR] Social Vulnerability Index [SVI], United States Renal Data System [USRDS], and U.S. Census Bureau) to examine associations with race, ethnicity, and social determinants of health. Results: In 2020, 4,840 dialysis facilities reported 14,822 bloodstream infections to NHSN; 34.2% were attributable to S. aureus. Among seven EIP sites, the S. aureus bloodstream infection rate during 2017-2020 was 100 times higher among hemodialysis patients (4,248 of 100,000 person-years) than among adults not on hemodialysis (42 of 100,000 person-years). Unadjusted S. aureus bloodstream infection rates were highest among non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) and Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) hemodialysis patients. Vascular access via central venous catheter was strongly associated with S. aureus bloodstream infections (NHSN: adjusted rate ratio [aRR] = 6.2; 95% CI = 5.7-6.7 versus fistula; EIP: aRR = 4.3; 95% CI = 3.9-4.8 versus fistula or graft). Adjusting for EIP site of residence, sex, and vascular access type, S. aureus bloodstream infection risk in EIP was highest in Hispanic patients (aRR = 1.4; 95% CI = 1.2-1.7 versus non-Hispanic White [White] patients), and patients aged 18-49 years (aRR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.5-1.9 versus patients aged ≥65 years). Areas with higher poverty levels, crowding, and lower education levels accounted for disproportionately higher proportions of hemodialysis-associated S. aureus bloodstream infections. Conclusions and implications for public health practice: Disparities exist in hemodialysis-associated S. aureus infections. Health care providers and public health professionals should prioritize prevention and optimized treatment of ESKD, identify and address barriers to lower-risk vascular access placement, and implement established best practices to prevent bloodstream infections.
Asunto(s)
Fallo Renal Crónico , Sepsis , Infecciones Estafilocócicas , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Diálisis Renal/efectos adversos , Staphylococcus aureus , Etnicidad , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/epidemiología , Fallo Renal Crónico/epidemiología , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Fallo Renal Crónico/etiología , Sepsis/etiología , Signos Vitales , Disparidades en Atención de SaludRESUMEN
We described bacterial/fungal coinfections and antibiotic-resistant infections among inpatients with a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and compared findings in those with a diagnosis of influenza like illness. Less than 10% of inpatients with COVID-19 had bacterial/fungal coinfection. Longer lengths of stay, critical care stay, and mechanical ventilation contribute to increased incidence of hospital-onset infections among inpatients with COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Coinfección , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Coinfección/epidemiología , Hospitales , Humanos , Pacientes Internos , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Identifying asymptomatic individuals early through serial testing is recommended to control coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in nursing homes, both in response to an outbreak ("outbreak testing" of residents and healthcare personnel) and in facilities without outbreaks ("nonoutbreak testing" of healthcare personnel). The effectiveness of outbreak testing and isolation with or without nonoutbreak testing was evaluated. METHODS: Using published SARS-CoV-2 transmission parameters, the fraction of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions prevented through serial testing (weekly, every 3 days, or daily) and isolation of asymptomatic persons compared with symptom-based testing and isolation was evaluated through mathematical modeling using a Reed-Frost model to estimate the percentage of cases prevented (ie, "effectiveness") through either outbreak testing alone or outbreak plus nonoutbreak testing. The potential effect of simultaneous decreases (by 10%) in the effectiveness of isolating infected individuals when instituting testing strategies was also evaluated. RESULTS: Modeling suggests that outbreak testing could prevent 54% (weekly testing with 48-hour test turnaround) to 92% (daily testing with immediate results and 50% relative sensitivity) of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Adding nonoutbreak testing could prevent up to an additional 8% of SARS-CoV-2 infections (depending on test frequency and turnaround time). However, added benefits of nonoutbreak testing were mostly negated if accompanied by decreases in infection control practice. CONCLUSIONS: When combined with high-quality infection control practices, outbreak testing could be an effective approach to preventing COVID-19 in nursing homes, particularly if optimized through increased test frequency and use of tests with rapid turnaround.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Casas de Salud , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) promote the principle of de-escalation: moving from broad- to narrow-spectrum agents and stopping antibiotics when no longer indicated. A standard, objective definition of de-escalation applied to electronic data could be useful for ASP assessments. METHODS: We derived an electronic definition of antibiotic de-escalation and performed a retrospective study among 5 hospitals. Antibiotics were ranked into 4 categories: narrow-spectrum, broad-spectrum, extended-spectrum, and agents targeted for protection. Eligible adult patients were cared for on inpatient units, had antibiotic therapy for at least 2 days, and were hospitalized for at least 3 days after starting antibiotics. Number of antibiotics and rank were assessed at 2 time points: day of antibiotic initiation and either day of discharge or day 5. De-escalation was defined as reduction in either the number of antibiotics or rank. Escalation was an increase in either number or rank. Unchanged was either no change or discordant directions of change. We summarized outcomes among hospitals, units, and diagnoses. RESULTS: Among 39â 226 eligible admissions, de-escalation occurred in 14â 138 (36%), escalation in 5129 (13%), and antibiotics were unchanged in 19â 959 (51%). De-escalation varied among hospitals (median, 37%; range, 31-39%, Pâ <â .001). Diagnoses with lower de-escalation rates included intra-abdominal (23%) and skin and soft tissue (28%) infections. Critical care had higher rates of both de-escalation and escalation compared with wards. CONCLUSIONS: Our electronic de-escalation metric demonstrated variation among hospitals, units, and diagnoses. This metric may be useful for assessing stewardship opportunities and impact.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos , Adulto , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Electrónica , Humanos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Residents and staff members of long-term care facilities (LTCFs), because they live and work in congregate settings, are at increased risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1,2). In particular, skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), LTCFs that provide skilled nursing care and rehabilitation services for persons with complex medical needs, have been documented settings of COVID-19 outbreaks (3). In addition, residents of LTCFs might be at increased risk for severe outcomes because of their advanced age or the presence of underlying chronic medical conditions (4). As a result, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices has recommended that residents and staff members of LTCFs be offered vaccination in the initial COVID-19 vaccine allocation phase (Phase 1a) in the United States (5). In December 2020, CDC launched the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program* to facilitate on-site vaccination of residents and staff members at enrolled LTCFs. To evaluate early receipt of vaccine during the first month of the program, the number of eligible residents and staff members in enrolled SNFs was estimated using resident census data from the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) and staffing data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Payroll-Based Journal.§ Among 11,460 SNFs with at least one vaccination clinic during the first month of the program (December 18, 2020-January 17, 2021), an estimated median of 77.8% of residents (interquartile range [IQR] = 61.3%- 93.1%) and a median of 37.5% (IQR = 23.2%- 56.8%) of staff members per facility received ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine through the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program. The program achieved moderately high coverage among residents; however, continued development and implementation of focused communication and outreach strategies are needed to improve vaccination coverage among staff members in SNFs and other long-term care settings.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Farmacia/organización & administración , Asociación entre el Sector Público-Privado , Instituciones de Cuidados Especializados de Enfermería/organización & administración , Cobertura de Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Humanos , Cuidados a Largo Plazo , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
During the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, nursing homes were identified as congregate settings at high risk for outbreaks of COVID-19 (1,2). Their residents also are at higher risk than the general population for morbidity and mortality associated with infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in light of the association of severe outcomes with older age and certain underlying medical conditions (1,3). CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) launched nationwide, facility-level COVID-19 nursing home surveillance on April 26, 2020. A federal mandate issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), required nursing homes to commence enrollment and routine reporting of COVID-19 cases among residents and staff members by May 25, 2020. This report uses the NHSN nursing home COVID-19 data reported during May 25-November 22, 2020, to describe COVID-19 rates among nursing home residents and staff members and compares these with rates in surrounding communities by corresponding U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) region.* COVID-19 cases among nursing home residents increased during June and July 2020, reaching 11.5 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks (calculated as the total number of occupied beds on the day that weekly data were reported) (week of July 26). By mid-September, rates had declined to 6.3 per 1,000 resident-weeks (week of September 13) before increasing again, reaching 23.2 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks by late November (week of November 22). COVID-19 cases among nursing home staff members also increased during June and July (week of July 26 = 10.9 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks) before declining during August-September (week of September 13 = 6.3 per 1,000 resident-weeks); rates increased by late November (week of November 22 = 21.3 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks). Rates of COVID-19 in the surrounding communities followed similar trends. Increases in community rates might be associated with increases in nursing home COVID-19 incidence, and nursing home mitigation strategies need to include a comprehensive plan to monitor local SARS-CoV-2 transmission and minimize high-risk exposures within facilities.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , Personal de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Casas de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Humanos , Incidencia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratio (SAAR) is a risk-adjusted metric of antimicrobial use (AU) developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2015 as a tool for hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) to track and compare AU with a national benchmark. In 2018, CDC updated the SAAR by expanding the locations and antimicrobial categories for which SAARs can be calculated and by modeling adult and pediatric locations separately. METHODS: We identified eligible patient-care locations and defined SAAR antimicrobial categories. Predictive models were developed for eligible adult and pediatric patient-care locations using negative binomial regression applied to nationally aggregated AU data from locations reportingâ ≥9 months of 2017 data to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). RESULTS: 2017 Baseline SAAR models were developed for 7 adult and 8 pediatric SAAR antimicrobial categories using data reported from 2156 adult and 170 pediatric locations across 457 hospitals. The inclusion of step-down units and general hematology-oncology units in adult 2017 baseline SAAR models and the addition of SAARs for narrow-spectrum B-lactam agents, antifungals predominantly used for invasive candidiasis, antibacterial agents posing the highest risk for Clostridioides difficile infection, and azithromycin (pediatrics only) expand the role SAARs can play in ASP efforts. Final risk-adjusted models are used to calculate predicted antimicrobial days, the denominator of the SAAR, for 40 SAAR types displayed in NHSN. CONCLUSIONS: SAARs can be used as a metric to prompt investigation into potential overuse or underuse of antimicrobials and to evaluate the effectiveness of ASP interventions.
Asunto(s)
Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos , Informe de Investigación , Adulto , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Azitromicina , Niño , Atención a la Salud , Humanos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To use a standardized tool for a multicenter assessment of antibiotic appropriateness in ICUs and identify local antibiotic stewardship improvement opportunities. DESIGN: Pilot point prevalence conducted on October 5, 2016; point prevalence survey conducted on March 1, 2017. SETTING: ICUs in 12 U.S. acute care hospitals with median bed size 563. PATIENTS: Receiving antibiotics on participating units on March 1, 2017. INTERVENTIONS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tool for the Assessment of Appropriateness of Inpatient Antibiotics was made actionable by an expert antibiotic stewardship panel and implemented across hospitals. Data were collected by antibiotic stewardship program personnel at each hospital, deidentified and submitted in aggregate for benchmarking. hospital personnel identified most salient reasons for inappropriate use by category and agent. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty-seven ICUs participated. Most hospitals (83%) identified as teaching with median licensed ICU beds of 70. On March 1, 2017, 362 (54%) of 667 ICU patients were on antibiotics (range, 8-81 patients); of these, 112 (31%) were identified as inappropriate and administered greater than 72 hours among all 12 hospitals (range, 9-82%). Prophylactic antibiotic regimens and PICU patients demonstrated a statistically significant risk ratio of 1.76 and 1.90 for inappropriate treatment, respectively. Reasons for inappropriate use included unnecessarily broad spectrum (29%), no infection or nonbacterial syndrome (22%), and duration longer than necessary (21%). Of patients on inappropriate antibiotic therapy in surgical ICUs, a statistically significant risk ratio of 2.59 was calculated for noninfectious or nonbacterial reasons for inappropriate therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter point prevalence study, 31% of ICU antibiotic regimens were inappropriate; prophylactic regimens were often inappropriate across different ICU types, particularly in surgical ICUs. Engaging intensivists in antibiotic stewardship program efforts is crucial to sustain the efficacy of antibiotics and quality of infectious diseases care in critical care settings. This study underscores the value of standardized assessment tools and benchmarking to be shared with local leaders for targeted antibiotic stewardship program interventions.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Prescripción Inadecuada/prevención & control , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos/métodos , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Prescripción Inadecuada/estadística & datos numéricos , Proyectos Piloto , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Background: Randomized trials demonstrate no benefit from antibiotic treatment exceeding the shortest effective duration. Objective: To examine predictors and outcomes associated with excess duration of antibiotic treatment. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: 43 hospitals in the Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium. Patients: 6481 general care medical patients with pneumonia. Measurements: The primary outcome was the rate of excess antibiotic treatment duration (excess days per 30-day period). Excess days were calculated by subtracting each patient's shortest effective (expected) treatment duration (based on time to clinical stability, pathogen, and pneumonia classification [community-acquired vs. health care-associated]) from the actual duration. Negative binomial generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were used to calculate rate ratios to assess predictors of 30-day rates of excess duration. Patient outcomes, assessed at 30 days via the medical record and telephone calls, were evaluated using logit GEEs that adjusted for patient characteristics and probability of treatment. Results: Two thirds (67.8% [4391 of 6481]) of patients received excess antibiotic therapy. Antibiotics prescribed at discharge accounted for 93.2% of excess duration. Patients who had respiratory cultures or nonculture diagnostic testing, had a longer stay, received a high-risk antibiotic in the prior 90 days, had community-acquired pneumonia, or did not have a total antibiotic treatment duration documented at discharge were more likely to receive excess treatment. Excess treatment was not associated with lower rates of any adverse outcomes, including death, readmission, emergency department visit, or Clostridioides difficile infection. Each excess day of treatment was associated with a 5% increase in the odds of antibiotic-associated adverse events reported by patients after discharge. Limitation: Retrospective design; not all patients could be contacted to report 30-day outcomes. Conclusion: Patients hospitalized with pneumonia often receive excess antibiotic therapy. Excess antibiotic treatment was associated with patient-reported adverse events. Future interventions should focus on whether reducing excess treatment and improving documentation at discharge improves outcomes. Primary Funding Source: Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) and Blue Care Network as part of the BCBSM Value Partnerships program.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Hospitalización , Neumonía Bacteriana/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/tratamiento farmacológico , Duración de la Terapia , Femenino , Humanos , Prescripción Inadecuada , Masculino , Michigan , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
A multicenter quasi-experimental study of a provider-driven antibiotic "time-out" in 3470 antibiotic courses showed no difference in antibiotic use before and after implementation, but did show a decrease in inappropriate therapy (45% vs 31%, P < .05). Single time-outs without input from antibiotic stewardship teams are insufficient to optimize prescribing.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Infecciones Bacterianas/tratamiento farmacológico , Farmacorresistencia Microbiana , Utilización de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Prescripción Inadecuada/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos/métodos , Infecciones Bacterianas/microbiología , Niño , Esquema de Medicación , Registros Electrónicos de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Hospitalización , Hospitales , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Masculino , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is an important pathogen associated with significant morbidity and mortality. U.S. guidelines for the treatment of hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia recommend the use of two antipseudomonal drugs for high-risk patients to ensure that ≥95% of patients receive active empirical therapy. We evaluated the utility of combination antibiograms in identifying optimal anti-P.aeruginosa drug regimens. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the antimicrobial susceptibility of all nonduplicate P.aeruginosa blood and respiratory isolates collected between 1 October 2016 and 30 September 2017 from 304 U.S. hospitals in the BD Insights Research Database. Combination antibiograms were used to determine in vitro rates of susceptibility to potential anti-P.aeruginosa combination regimens consisting of a backbone antibiotic (an extended-spectrum cephalosporin, carbapenem, or piperacillin-tazobactam) plus an aminoglycoside or fluoroquinolone. Single-agent susceptibility rates for the 11,701 nonduplicate P.aeruginosa isolates ranged from 72.7% for fluoroquinolones to 85.0% for piperacillin-tazobactam. Susceptibility rates were higher for blood isolates than for respiratory isolates (P < 0.05). Antibiotic combinations resulted in increased susceptibility rates but did not achieve the goal of 95% antibiotic coverage. Adding an aminoglycoside resulted in higher susceptibility rates than adding a fluoroquinolone; piperacillin-tazobactam plus an aminoglycoside resulted in the highest susceptibility rate (93.3%). Intensive care unit (ICU) isolates generally had lower susceptibility rates than non-ICU isolates. Commonly used antipseudomonal drugs, either alone or in combination, did not achieve 95% coverage against U.S. hospital P.aeruginosa isolates, suggesting that new drugs are needed to attain this goal. Local institutional use of combination antibiograms has the potential to optimize empirical therapy of infections caused by difficult-to-treat pathogens.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones por Pseudomonas/tratamiento farmacológico , Pseudomonas aeruginosa/efectos de los fármacos , Carbapenémicos/uso terapéutico , Cefalosporinas/uso terapéutico , Infección Hospitalaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Infección Hospitalaria/microbiología , Estudios Transversales , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana Múltiple/efectos de los fármacos , Hospitales , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana/métodos , Combinación Piperacilina y Tazobactam/uso terapéutico , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador/microbiología , Infecciones por Pseudomonas/microbiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Background: Previous studies suggest that duration of antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) often exceeds national recommendations and might represent an important opportunity to improve antibiotic stewardship nationally. Our objective was to determine the average length of antibiotic therapy (LOT) for patients treated for uncomplicated CAP in US hospitals and the proportion of patients with excessive durations. Methods: Records of retrospective cohorts of patients aged 18-64 years with private insurance and aged ≥65 years with Medicare hospitalized for CAP in 2012-2013 were used. Inpatient LOT was estimated as a function of length of stay. Outpatient LOT was based on prescriptions filled post discharge based on data from outpatient pharmacy files. Excessive duration was defined as outpatient LOT >3 days. Results: Inclusion criteria were met for 22128 patients aged 18-64 years across 2100 hospitals and 130746 patients aged ≥65 years across 3227 hospitals. Median total LOT was 9.5 days. LOT exceeded recommended duration for 74% of patients aged 18-64 years and 71% of patients aged ≥65 years. Patients aged 18-64 years had a median (quartile 1-quartile 3) 6 (3-7) days outpatient LOT and those aged ≥65 years had 5 (3-7) days. Conclusions: In this nationwide sample of patients hospitalized for CAP, median total LOT was just under 10 days, with more than 70% of patients having likely excessive treatment duration. Better adherence to recommended CAP therapy duration by improving prescribing at hospital discharge may be an important target for antibiotic stewardship programs.