A multicenter evaluation of antibacterial use in hospitalized patients through the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic waves.

BACKGROUND: Excessive use of antibiotics has been reported during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We evaluated trends in antibiotic use and culture positive Gram-negative (GN)/Gram-positive (GP) pathogens in US hospitalized patients before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective study included patients from 271 US facilities with > 1-day inpatient admission with discharge or death between July 1, 2019, and October 30, 2021, in the BD Insights Research Database. We evaluated microbiological testing data, antibacterial use, defined as antibacterial use ≥ 24 h in admitted patients, and duration of antibacterial therapy. RESULTS: Of 5,518,744 patients included in the analysis, 3,729,295 (67.6%) patients were hospitalized during the pandemic with 2,087,774 (56.0%) tested for SARS-CoV-2 and 189,115 (9.1%) testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. During the pre-pandemic period, 36.2% were prescribed antibacterial therapy and 9.3% tested positive for select GN/GP pathogens. During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, antibacterial therapy (57.8%) and positive GN/GP culture (11.9%) were highest in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients followed by SARS-CoV-2-negative patients (antibacterial therapy, 40.1%; GN/GP, pathogens 11.0%), and SARS-CoV-2 not tested (antibacterial therapy 30.4%; GN/GP pathogens 7.2%). Multivariate results showed significant decreases in antibacterial therapy and positive GN/GP cultures for both SARS-CoV-2-positive and negative patients during the pandemic, but no significant overall changes from the pre-pandemic period to the pandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: There was a decline in both antibacterial use and positive GN/GP pathogens in patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. However, overall antibiotic use was similar prior to and during the pandemic. These data may inform future efforts to optimize antimicrobial stewardship and prescribing.

Association of SARS-CoV-2 status and antibiotic-resistant bacteria with inadequate empiric therapy in hospitalized patients: a US multicenter cohort evaluation (July 2019 - October 2021).

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic usage and antibiotic resistance (ABR) patterns changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inadequate empiric antibiotic therapy (IET) is a significant public health problem and contributes to ABR. We evaluated factors associated with IET before and during the COVID-19 pandemic to determine the impact of the pandemic on antibiotic management. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective cohort analysis included hospitalized US adults who had a positive bacterial culture (specified gram-positive or gram-negative bacteria) from July 2019 to October 2021 in the BD Insights Research Database. IET was defined as antibacterial therapy within 48 h that was not active against the bacteria. ABR results were based on susceptibility testing and reports from local facilities. Multivariate analysis was used to identify risk factors associated with IET in patients with any positive bacterial culture and ABR-positive cultures, including multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria. RESULTS: Of 278,344 eligible patients in 269 hospitals, 56,733 (20.4%) received IET; rates were higher in patients with ABR-positive (n = 93,252) or MDR-positive (n = 39,000) cultures (34.9% and 45.0%, respectively). Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-positive patients had significantly higher rates of IET (25.9%) compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative (20.3%) or not tested (19.7%) patients overall and in the ABR and MDR subgroups. Patients with ABR- or MDR-positive cultures had more days of therapy and longer lengths of stay. In multivariate analyses, ABR, MDR, SARS-CoV-2-positive status, respiratory source, and prior admissions were identified as key IET risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: IET remained a persistent problem during the COVID-19 pandemic and occurred at higher rates in patients with ABR/MDR bacteria or a co-SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Morbidity and mortality of hospitalised patients with candidemia during the various severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic waves: A multicentre evaluation of 248 US hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating outcomes of COVID-19 patients with candidemia are limited and have only evaluated a single timepoint during the pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To compare the prevalence and outcomes associated with candidemia in patients based on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) status and through the various pandemic waves (1 March 2020-5 March 2022). PATIENTS/METHODS: Multicentre, retrospective cohort analysis of data from 248 US medical facilities using the BD Insights Research Database (Becton, Dickinson and Company, Franklin Lakes, New Jersey, USA). Eligible patients were adults aged ≥18 years who were hospitalised for >1 day, had a SARS-CoV-2 test and a positive blood culture for Candida spp. RESULTS: During the study time frame, there were 2,402,879 hospital admissions; 234,903 (9.7%) and 2,167,976 (90.3%) patients were SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative, respectively. A significantly higher rate of candidemia/1000 admissions was observed in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients compared to SARS-CoV-2-negative patients (3.18 vs. 0.99; p < .001). The highest candidemia rate for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients was observed during the Alpha SARS-CoV-2 wave (June 2020-August 2020) with the lowest candidemia rate during the Omicron wave. Hospital mortality was significantly higher in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients compared to SARS-CoV-2-negative patients with candidemia (59.6% vs. 30.8%; p < .001). When evaluating the mortality rate through the various pandemic waves, the rate for the overall population did not change. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates high morbidity and mortality for hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and candidemia which was consistent throughout the pandemic. Patients with COVID-19 are at an increased risk for candidemia; importantly, the magnitude of which may differ based on the circulating variant.

Epidemiology and outcomes of culture-positive bloodstream pathogens prior to and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: a multicenter evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. We evaluate incidence of community- and hospital-onset BSI rates and outcomes before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study evaluating patients who were hospitalized for ≥ 1 day with discharge or death between June 1, 2019, and September 4, 2021, across 271 US health care facilities. Community- and hospital-onset BSI and related outcomes before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, including intensive care admission rates, and overall and ICU-specific length of stay (LOS) was evaluated. Bivariate correlations were calculated between the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods overall and by SARS-CoV-2 testing status. RESULTS: Of 5,239,692 patient admissions, there were 20,113 community-onset BSIs before the pandemic (11.2/1000 admissions) and 39,740 (11.5/1000 admissions) during the pandemic (P ≤ 0.0062). Corresponding rates of hospital-onset BSI were 2,771 (1.6/1000 admissions) and 6,864 (2.0/1000 admissions; P < 0.0062). Compared to the pre-pandemic period, rates of community-onset BSI were higher in patients who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (15.8/1000 admissions), compared with 9.6/1000 BSI admissions among SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. Compared with patients in the pre-pandemic period, SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with community-onset BSI experienced greater ICU admission rates (36.6% vs 32.8%; P < 0.01), greater ventilator use (10.7% vs 4.7%; P < 0.001), and longer LOS (12.2 d vs 9.1 d; P < 0.001). Rates of hospital-onset BSI were higher in the pandemic vs the pre-pandemic period (2.0 vs 1.5/1000; P < 0.001), with rates as high a 7.3/1000 admissions among SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. Compared to the pre-pandemic period, SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with hospital-onset BSI had higher rates of ICU admission (72.9% vs 55.4%; P < 0.001), LOS (34.8 d vs 25.5 d; P < 0.001), and ventilator use (52.9% vs 21.5%; P < 0.001). Enterococcus species, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Candida albicans were more frequently detected in the pandemic period. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This nationally representative study found an increased risk of both community-onset and hospital-onset BSI during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic period, with the largest increased risk in hospital-onset BSI among SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. SARS-CoV-2 positivity was associated with worse outcomes.

A multicenter analysis of the clinical microbiology and antimicrobial usage in hospitalized patients in the US with or without COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Past respiratory viral epidemics suggest that bacterial infections impact clinical outcomes. There is minimal information on potential co-pathogens in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in the US. We analyzed pathogens, antimicrobial use, and healthcare utilization in hospitalized US patients with and without severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included patients with > 1 day of inpatient admission and discharge/death between March 1 and May 31, 2020 at 241 US acute care hospitals in the BD Insights Research Database. We assessed microbiological testing data, antimicrobial utilization in admitted patients with ≥24 h of antimicrobial therapy, and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: A total of 141,621 patients were tested for SARS-CoV-2 (17,003 [12.0%] positive) and 449,339 patients were not tested. Most (> 90%) patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 had additional microbiologic testing performed compared with 41.9% of SARS-CoV-2-untested patients. Non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogen rates were 20.9% for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients compared with 21.3 and 27.9% for SARS-CoV-2-negative and -untested patients, respectively. Gram-negative bacteria were the most common pathogens (45.5, 44.1, and 43.5% for SARS-CoV-2-positive, -negative, and -untested patients). SARS-CoV-2-positive patients had higher rates of hospital-onset (versus admission-onset) non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogens compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative or -untested patients (42.4, 22.2, and 19.5%, respectively), more antimicrobial usage (68.0, 45.2, and 25.1% of patients), and longer hospital LOS (mean [standard deviation (SD)] of 8.6 [11.4], 5.1 [8.9], and 4.2 [8.0] days) and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS (mean [SD] of 7.8 [8.5], 3.6 [6.2], and 3.6 [5.9] days). For all groups, the presence of a non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogen was associated with increased hospital LOS (mean [SD] days for patients with versus without a non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogen: 13.7 [15.7] vs 7.3 [9.6] days for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, 8.2 [11.5] vs 4.3 [7.9] days for SARS-CoV-2-negative patients, and 7.1 [11.0] vs 3.9 [7.4] days for SARS-CoV-2-untested patients). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar rates of non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogens in SARS-CoV-2-positive, -negative, and -untested patients, SARS-CoV-2 was associated with higher rates of hospital-onset infections, greater antimicrobial usage, and extended hospital and ICU LOS. This finding highlights the heavy burden of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare systems and suggests possible opportunities for diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship.

Antibiotics and adverse events: the role of antimicrobial stewardship programs in 'doing no harm'.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global threat worldwide, with deaths associated with AMR infections projected to exceed 10 million per year by the year 2050. The overuse and misuse of antibiotics is the primary driver of this resistance, with up to 50% of antibiotics prescribed in the hospital setting being either unnecessary or inappropriate. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs (ASPs) can mitigate some of this resistance, with the benefits well recognized; however, if we are to truly advance the state of AMS, the principles and practices should align with patient safety. RECENT FINDINGS: In a recent evaluation, among 1488 adult patients receiving systemic antibiotic therapy, 298 (20%) experienced at least one antibiotic-associated adverse drug event (ADE). Fifty-six (20%) nonclinically indicated antibiotic regimens were associated with an ADE. It is also well recognized that besides ADEs, the inappropriate use of antibiotics is associated the development of multidrug-resistant infections and Clostridium difficile infection. SUMMARY: Currently, there is a significant gap in ASPs correlating initiatives with patient safety goals, including reductions in antibiotic-associated ADEs and multidrug-resistant infections. Therefore, in this article, we provide the rationale for why ASPs are best suited to lead a collaborative effort to prevent antibiotic-associated ADEs and multidrug-resistant infections.

Eight Habits of Highly Effective Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs to Meet the Joint Commission Standards for Hospitals.

In an effort to decrease antimicrobial resistance and inappropriate antibiotic use, The Joint Commission (TJC) recently issued new antimicrobial stewardship standards, consisting of 8 elements of performance, applicable to hospitals effective January 1, 2017. These standards coincide with those recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology (SHEA) guidelines. Little guidance exists on the "how" from these guidance documents. We review the 8 standards and provide real-world experience from established antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) on how institutions can comply with these guidelines to reduce inappropriate antibiotic usage, decrease antimicrobial resistance, and optimize patient outcomes. TJC antimicrobial stewardship standards demonstrate actions being taken at the national level to make quality and patient safety a priority.

An Automated, Pharmacist-Driven Initiative Improves Quality of Care for Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia.

BACKGROUND: Infectious diseases (ID) consultation and antimicrobial stewardship intervention have been shown to improve the management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB). As the workload of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) continues to increase, ASPs must find a way to maximize the efficiency of the program while optimizing patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of incorporating health informatics into the management of SAB via a pharmacist-driven initiative. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center quasi-experimental study of hospitalized patients with SAB. During the intervention period, pharmacists were alerted to patients with SAB via a patient scoring tool integrated into the electronic medical record. Pharmacists utilized the scoring tool and the institution's evidence-based practice guideline to make standardized recommendations to promote adherence to SAB quality-of-care measures and encourage ID consultation. The primary outcome was overall compliance along with adherence to individual quality-of-care components. Secondary clinical outcomes were also analyzed. RESULTS: In sum, 84 patients were identified for study inclusion, 45 in the pre-intervention and 39 in the intervention group. As a whole, all 4 quality-of-care components for the management of SAB were significantly more frequently adhered to in the intervention group (68.9% vs 92.3%; P = .008). The incidence of ID consult improved significantly by almost 20% in the intervention group (75.6% vs 94.9%, P = .015). No statistically significant differences in duration of bacteremia, length-of-stay, infection-related length-of-stay, or readmission were observed between the groups. The incidence of all-cause mortality was 6-fold higher in the pre- intervention group compared to the intervention group (15.6% vs 2.6%, P = .063). CONCLUSION: An automated, pharmacist-driven intervention for the management of patients with SAB demonstrated a significant improvement in patients receiving an ID consult, targeted antimicrobial therapy, and adherence to all SAB quality-of-care measures. As antimicrobial stewardship becomes a mandatory aspect of healthcare in all hospitals in the United States, ASPs will be forced to find ways to provide more efficient, impactful, disease state-based patient care. Our study provides the framework for and data to support this intervention in one of the most clinically important infectious diseases.

Efficacy and Safety of a Colistin Loading Dose, High-Dose Maintenance Regimen in Critically Ill Patients With Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Pneumonia.

INTRODUCTION: Emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) gram-negative (GN) pathogens and lack of novel antibiotics have increased the use of colistin, despite unknown optimal dosing. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a colistin loading dose, high-dose (LDHD) maintenance regimen in patients with MDR-GN pneumonia. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed comparing critically ill patients with MDR-GN pneumonia pre- and postimplementation of a colistin LDHD guideline with a primary outcome of clinical cure. Safety was assessed using incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) based on RIFLE (risk, injury, failure, loss, end-stage renal disease) criteria. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients met the inclusion criteria (42 preimplementation and 30 postimplementation). Clinical cure was achieved in 23 (55%) patients in the preimplementation group and 20 (67%) patients in the postimplementation group ( P = .31). AKI occurred in 50% of the patients during the preimplementation period and 58% during the postimplementation period ( P = .59) with no difference in initiation rates of renal replacement therapy. CONCLUSION: The increased clinical cure rate after implementation of the colistin LDHD guideline did not reach statistical significance. The LDHD guideline, however, was not associated with an increased incidence of AKI, despite higher intravenous colistin doses. Opportunity exists to optimize colistin dosage while balancing toxicity, but larger studies are warranted.

Impact of the NAP-1 strain on disease severity, mortality, and recurrence of healthcare-associated Clostridium difficile infection.

OBJECTIVES: Studies are conflicting regarding the association of the North American pulsed-field gel electrophoresis type 1 (NAP1) strain in Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) and outcomes. We evaluated the association of NAP1 with healthcare-associated CDI disease severity, mortality, and recurrence at our academic medical center. METHODS: Healthcare-associated CDI cases were identified from November 1, 2011 through January 31, 2013. Multivariable regression models were used to evaluate the associations of NAP1 with severe disease (based on the Hines VA severity score index), mortality, and recurrence. RESULTS: Among 5424 stool specimens submitted to the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, 292 (5.4%) were positive for C. difficile by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on or after hospital day 4; 70 (24%) of these specimens also tested positive for NAP1. During the study period, 247 (85%) patients had non-severe disease and 45 (15%) patients had severe disease. Among patients with non-severe disease, 65 (26%) had NAP1 and among patients with severe disease, 5 (11%) had NAP1. After controlling for potential confounders, NAP1 was not associated with an increased likelihood of severe disease (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-0.93), in-hospital mortality (aOR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.53-1.96), or recurrence (aOR = 1.16, 95% CI, 0.36-3.77). CONCLUSIONS: The NAP1 strain did not increase disease severity, mortality, or recurrence in this study, although the incidence of NAP1-positive healthcare associated-CDI was low. The role of strain typing in outcomes and treatment selection in patients with healthcare-associated CDI remains uncertain.

Correlation of Checkerboard Synergy Testing with Time-Kill Analysis and Clinical Outcomes of Extensively Drug-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Respiratory Infections.

We tested 76 extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Acinetobacter baumannii isolates by the checkerboard method using only wells containing serum-achievable concentrations (SACs) of drugs. Checkerboard results were correlated by time-kill assay and clinical outcomes. Minocycline-colistin was the best combination in vitro, as it inhibited growth in one or more SAC wells in all isolates. Patients who received a combination that inhibited growth in one or more SAC wells demonstrated better microbiological clearance than those who did not (88% versus 30%; P = 0.025). The checkerboard platform may have clinical utility for XDR A. baumannii infections.

Bad bugs need old drugs: a stewardship program's evaluation of minocycline for multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii infections.

BACKGROUND: Minocycline is an "old-drug" with Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of infection due to Acinetobacter species. The purpose of this study is to describe an Antimicrobial Stewardship Program's evaluation of minocycline for the treatment of patients with multidrug resistant A. baumannii (MDR-AB) infections. METHODS: This study evaluated hospitalized adult patients (September 2010 through March 2013) who received minocycline intravenously (IV) for a MDR-AB infection. Clinical and microbiological outcomes were analyzed. Secondary outcomes included infection-related mortality, length of hospital stay (LOS), infection-related LOS, intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, mechanical ventilation days, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients received minocycline. Median age was 56 (23-85) years, 65% were male with an APACHE II score of 21 (4-41). Clinical success was achieved in 40/55 (73%) patients treated with minocycline monotherapy (n = 3) or in combination with a second active agent (n = 52). Overall 43 (78%) patients demonstrated documented or presumed microbiologic eradication. Infection-related mortality was 25%. Hospital LOS was 31 (5-132) and infection-related LOS was 16 (2-43) days. Forty-seven (85%) patients were admitted to the ICU for a LOS of 18 (2-78) days. Thirty-nine (71%) patients required mechanical ventilation for 6 (2-29) days. One patient had a 30-day readmission. CONCLUSIONS: The response rate to minocycline monotherapy or in combination for the treatment of MDR-AB infections is encouraging as therapeutic options are limited. Prospective studies in patients with MDR-AB infections will help establish the role of minocycline alone or in combination with other antimicrobials.

Review of rapid diagnostic tests used by antimicrobial stewardship programs.

Rapid microbiologic tests provide opportunities for antimicrobial stewardship programs to improve antimicrobial use and clinical and economic outcomes. Standard techniques for identification of organisms require at least 48-72 hours for final results, compared with rapid diagnostic tests that provide final organism identification within hours of growth. Importantly, rapid microbiologic tests are considered "game changers" and represent a significant advancement in the management of infectious diseases. This review focuses on currently available rapid diagnostic tests and, importantly, the impact of rapid testing in combination with antimicrobial stewardship on patient outcomes.

Point-of-care testing for infectious diseases: opportunities, barriers, and considerations in community pharmacy.

OBJECTIVES To identify opportunities to perform point-of-care (POC) testing and/or screening for infectious diseases in community pharmacies, provide an overview of such tests and how they are used in current practice, discuss how the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) affect pharmacists performing POC testing, and identify and discuss barriers and provide recommendations for those wanting to establish POC testing for infectious diseases services in community pharmacies. DATA SOURCES PubMed and Google Scholar were searched from November 2012 through May 2013 and encompassed the years 2000 and beyond for the narrative review section of this article using the search terms rapid diagnostic tests, POC testing and infectious diseases, pharmacy services, CLIA waiver, and collaborative drug therapy management. All state boards of pharmacy in the United States were contacted and their regulatory and legislative websites accessed in 2012 and January 2013 to review relevant pharmacy practice laws. DATA SYNTHESIS POC testing for infectious diseases represents a significant opportunity to expand services in community pharmacies. Pharmacist education and training are addressing knowledge deficits in good laboratory practices and test performance and interpretation. Federal regulations do not define the qualifications for those who perform CLIA-waived tests, yet few pharmacists perform such services. Fewer than 20% of states address POC testing in their statutes and regulations governing pharmacy. CONCLUSION POC testing for infectious diseases could benefit patients and society and represents an opportunity to expand pharmacy services in community pharmacies. Existing barriers to the implementation of such services in community pharmacies, including deficits in pharmacist training and education along with state regulatory and legislative variance and vagueness in statutes governing pharmacy, are not insurmountable.

Activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam, imipenem/relebactam and ceftazidime/avibactam against clinical Gram-negative isolates-SMART United States 2019-21.

Background: Ongoing national and international surveillance efforts are critical components of antimicrobial stewardship, resistance monitoring, and drug development programs. In this report, we summarize the results of ceftolozane/tazobactam, imipenem/relebactam, ceftazidime/avibactam and comparator agent testing against 10 509 Enterobacterales and 2524 Pseudomonas aeruginosa collected by USA clinical laboratories in 2019-21 as part of the SMART global surveillance programme. Methods: MICs were determined by CLSI broth microdilution and interpreted using 2023 CLSI M100 breakpoints. Results: Most Enterobacterales were ceftazidime/avibactam susceptible (>99%), meropenem susceptible (99%) and ceftolozane/tazobactam susceptible (94%). Non-Morganellaceae Enterobacterales were also highly susceptible to imipenem/relebactam (99%). Ceftolozane/tazobactam inhibited 94% of Escherichia coli and 89% of Klebsiella pneumoniae with ceftriaxone non-susceptible/non-carbapenem-resistant phenotypes. Against P. aeruginosa, ceftolozane/tazobactam (97% susceptible) was more active than ceftazidime/avibactam (95%) and imipenem/relebactam (91%). MDR and difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) phenotypes were identified in 13% and 7% of P. aeruginosa isolates, respectively. Ceftolozane/tazobactam remained active against 78% of MDR P. aeruginosa (13% and 23% higher than ceftazidime/avibactam and imipenem/relebactam, respectively) and against 74% of DTR P. aeruginosa (24% and 37% higher than ceftazidime/avibactam and imipenem/relebactam, respectively). Length of hospital stay at the time of specimen collection, ward type and infection type resulted in percent susceptible value differences of >5% across isolate demographic strata for some antimicrobial agent/pathogen combinations. Conclusions: We conclude that in the USA, in 2019-21, carbapenem (meropenem) resistance remained uncommon in Enterobacterales and ceftolozane/tazobactam was more active than both ceftazidime/avibactam and imipenem/relebactam against P. aeruginosa.

Extended-infusion cefepime reduces mortality in patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections.

In an era of escalating resistance and a lack of new antimicrobial discovery, stewardship programs must utilize knowledge of pharmacodynamics to achieve maximal exposure in the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. We evaluated the clinical and economic outcomes associated with extended-infusion cefepime in the treatment of P. aeruginosa infections. This single-center study compared inpatients who received cefepime for bacteremia and/or pneumonia admitted from 1 January 2008 through 30 June 2010 (a 30-min infusion of 2 g every 8 h) to those admitted from 1 July 2010 through 31 May 2011 (a 4-h infusion of 2 g every 8 h). The overall mortality was significantly lower in the group that received extended-infusion treatment (20% versus 3%; P = 0.03). The mean length of stay was 3.5 days less for patients who received extended infusion (P = 0.36), and for patients admitted to the intensive care unit the mean length of stay was significantly less in the extended-infusion group (18.5 days versus 8 days; P = 0.04). Hospital costs were $23,183 less per patient, favoring the extended-infusion treatment group (P = 0.13). We conclude that extended-infusion treatment with cefepime provides increased clinical and economic benefits in the treatment of invasive P. aeruginosa infections.

Antimicrobial surveillance: A 20-year history of the SMART approach to addressing global antimicrobial resistance into the future.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major global public health threat, particularly affecting patients in resource-poor settings. Comprehensive surveillance programmes are essential to reducing the high mortality and morbidity associated with AMR and are integral to informing treatment decisions and guidelines, appraising the effectiveness of intervention strategies, and directing development of new antibacterial agents. Various surveillance programmes exist worldwide, including those administered by government bodies or funded by the pharmaceutical industry. One of the largest and longest running industry-sponsored AMR surveillance programme is the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART), which recently completed its 20th year. The SMART database has grown to almost 500 000 isolates from over 200 sites in more than 60 countries, encompassing all major geographic regions and including many sites in low- and middle-income countries. The SMART surveillance programme has evolved in scope over time, including additional antibacterial agents, pathogens and infection sites, in line with changing epidemiology and medical need. Surveillance data from SMART and similar programmes have been used successfully to detect emerging resistance threats and AMR patterns in specific countries and regions, thus informing national and local clinical treatment guidelines. The SMART database can be accessed readily by physicians and researchers globally, which may be especially valuable to those from countries with limited healthcare resources, where surveillance and resistance data are rarely collected. Continued participation from as many sites as possible worldwide and maintenance of adequate funding are critical factors to fully realising the potential of large-scale AMR surveillance programmes into the future.

Is the "low-hanging fruit" worth picking for antimicrobial stewardship programs?

A new antimicrobial stewardship program can be overwhelmed at the breadth of interventions and education required to conduct a successful program. The expression "low-hanging fruit," in reference to stewardship, refers to selecting the most obtainable targets rather than confronting more complicated management issues. These targets include intravenous-to-oral conversions, batching of intravenous antimicrobials, therapeutic substitutions, and formulary restriction. These strategies require fewer resources and less effort than other stewardship activities; however, they are applicable to a variety of healthcare settings, including limited-resource hospitals, and have demonstrated significant financial savings. Our stewardship program found that staged and systematic interventions that focus on obvious areas of need, that is, low hanging fruit, provided early successes in our expanded program with a substantial cumulative cost savings of $832,590.