Harvesting the low-hanging fruit? Comparative assessment of intravenous to oral route antimicrobial conversion policy implementation.

Policies that promote conversion of antibiotics from intravenous to oral route administration are considered "low hanging fruit" for hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs. We developed a simple metric based on digestive days of therapy divided by total days of therapy for targeted agents and a method for hospital comparisons. External comparisons may help identify opportunities for improving prospective implementation.

The Impact of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services SEP-1 Core Measure Implementation on Antibacterial Utilization: A Retrospective Multicenter Longitudinal Cohort Study With Interrupted Time-Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: Management Bundle (SEP-1) core measure on overall antibacterial utilization is unknown. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter longitudinal cohort study with interrupted time-series analysis to determine the impact of SEP-1 implementation on antibacterial utilization and patient outcomes. All adult patients admitted to 26 hospitals between 1 October 2014 and 30 September 2015 (SEP-1 preparation period) and between 1 November 2015 and 31 October 2016 (SEP-1 implementation period) were evaluated for inclusion. The primary outcome was total antibacterial utilization, measured as days of therapy (DOT) per 1000 patient-days. RESULTS: The study cohort included 701 055 eligible patient admissions and 4.2 million patient-days. Overall antibacterial utilization increased 2% each month during SEP-1 preparation (relative rate [RR], 1.02 per month [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.00-1.04]; P = .02). Cumulatively, the mean monthly DOT per 1000 patient-days increased 24.4% (95% CI, 18.0%-38.8%) over the entire study period (October 2014-October 2016). The rate of sepsis diagnosis/1000 patients increased 2% each month during SEP-1 preparation (RR, 1.02 per month [95% CI, 1.00-1.04]; P = .04). The rate of all-cause mortality rate per 1000 patients decreased during the study period (RR for SEP-1 preparation, 0.95 [95% CI, .92-.98; P = .001]; RR for SEP-1 implementation, .98 [.97-1.00; P = .01]). Cumulatively, the monthly mean all-cause mortality rate/1000 patients declined 38.5% (95% CI, 25.9%-48.0%) over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Announcement and implementation of the CMS SEP-1 process measure was associated with increased diagnosis of sepsis and antibacterial utilization and decreased mortality rate among hospitalized patients.

Core Recommendations for Antifungal Stewardship: A Statement of the Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium.

In recent years, the global public health community has increasingly recognized the importance of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in the fight to improve outcomes, decrease costs, and curb increases in antimicrobial resistance around the world. However, the subject of antifungal stewardship (AFS) has received less attention. While the principles of AMS guidelines likely apply to stewarding of antifungal agents, there are additional considerations unique to AFS and the complex field of fungal infections that require specific recommendations. In this article, we review the literature on AMS best practices and discuss AFS through the lens of the global core elements of AMS. We offer recommendations for best practices in AFS based on a synthesis of this evidence by an interdisciplinary expert panel of members of the Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium. We also discuss research directions in this rapidly evolving field. AFS is an emerging and important component of AMS, yet requires special considerations in certain areas such as expertise, education, interventions to optimize utilization, therapeutic drug monitoring, and data analysis and reporting.

Cost of invasive fungal infections in the era of new diagnostics and expanded treatment options.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the true institutional cost of treating invasive fungal infections in light of recent advances in diagnostic techniques and antifungal therapies for both treatment and prophylaxis of these infections. DESIGN: Economic analysis. SETTING: Academic medical center. PATIENTS: A total of 200 patients discharged from the hospital during 2004-2005 with a diagnosis of proven, probable, or possible aspergillosis, cryptococcosis, invasive candidiasis, or zygomycosis (cases). Patients were matched in a 1:1 fashion with patients having similar underlying disease states but no invasive fungal infections (controls). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data on demographic and clinical characteristics were collected from patients' medical records. In addition, information concerning each patient's hospitalization was recorded. Resource utilization data for a patient's entire hospitalization were collected from the hospital's charge databases and converted to costs. These data were compared between the cases and the controls. After adjusting for race-ethnicity, sex, age, and comorbid illnesses, mean total hospital cost for cases was $32,196 more than for controls (p<0.0001). Nonpharmacy costs accounted for the majority (63%) of this difference, and an additional $3996 was attributed to systemic antifungal drugs. The mean length of hospital stay was longer for cases than controls (25.8 vs 18.4 days). CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients with invasive fungal infections was associated with a significantly higher inpatient hospital cost compared with controls. However, due to new diagnostic techniques and effective antifungal therapy, the relative cost of these infections appears to be at least stable compared with the previous decade. These findings can help assess the utility of cost-avoidance strategies such as antifungal prophylaxis and application of appropriate treatment.

Antimicrobial stewardship: a matter of process or outcome?

The risk of antimicrobial resistance and superinfection is increasing alongside rates of hospital-acquired infection. Imprudent antibiotic use combined with few novel antimicrobials can speed resistance. Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) advocate for judicious use of available antimicrobials to preserve their usefulness. Decreased antibiotic expenditures was the backbone of early justification for ASPs, but the function of these programs has evolved into measuring the quality and appropriateness of antimicrobial use. Proper evaluation of an ASP helps to inform which methods work best for a particular institution and can help to define best practices at a more global level. Study design and duration limitations, however, can make it difficult to measure the impact of these programs. Process measures have been validated and can evaluate quality of care; however, they do not adequately describe the clinical impact of these programs at the patient level. Outcome measures also have limitations; they are not a direct measure of quality of care. Therefore, both process and outcome measures need to be defined and assessed when evaluating an ASP to confirm that goals of the intervention are attained and clinical objectives are met. Most available well-designed studies judging the effectiveness of ASPs use process measures alone. Adding improvements in clinical outcomes to process measures would theoretically attract the attention of a broader audience and provide additional support to expand current ASPs and develop novel ASPs.

Antifungal pharmacotherapy for invasive mould infections.

The incidence of invasive mould infections is increasing and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Among the most prevalent of these infections are those caused by Aspergillus and Fusarium species. Invasive disease caused by moulds frequently presents as a pulmonary infection, but haematogenous infection can occur. Some moulds cause cutaneous disease through either direct inoculation of the skin or secondary spread to the skin after dissemination from another body site. Early diagnosis can often be difficult and, unfortunately, diagnosis occurs late in the course of illness in many cases. Treatment options have historically been limited by the need for intravenous administration (amphotericin B), significant toxicities (amphotericin B), lack of reliable in vitro activity (e.g., amphotericin B in Fusarium and Scedosporium apiospermum infections) and relative lack of clinical experience with newer agents. The recent approval of voriconazole (Vfend, Pfizer) introduces a treatment option that demonstrates both in vitro and in vivo activity against a variety of moulds. With the recent development of the new echinocandin class of antifungal agents and newer broad-spectrum azole antifungal agents with in vitro mould activity, there is a renewed emphasis on fungal treatment strategies. Antimould therapy presents challenges in adverse effect avoidance and management, drug interactions and pharmacoeconomic considerations. Furthermore, combination therapy is being explored with these various new antifungal agents. The administration of an optimal fungicidal therapy early in the course of the illness and control of the underlying disease are vital to prevent complications and mortality from these tenacious mycoses.