Infectious Diseases Specialty Intervention Is Associated With Better Outcomes Among Privately Insured Individuals Receiving Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) can be managed by specialists in infectious diseases (ID) or by other physicians. Better management of OPAT can reduce the likelihood of readmission or emergency department (ED) use. The relative success of ID specialists and other physicians in managing OPAT has received little study. METHODS: We analyzed a national database of insurance claims for privately insured individuals under age 65, locating inpatient acute-care stays in 2013 and 2014 that were followed by OPAT. Through propensity scoring, patients who received outpatient ID intervention (ID-led OPAT) were matched 1-to-1 with those who did not (Other OPAT). We estimated regression models of hospital and ED admissions and of total healthcare payments over the first 30 days after discharge. RESULTS: The final analytic sample of 8200 observations was well balanced on clinical and demographic characteristics. Soft-tissue infection and osteomyelitis were the most common infections in the index event, each affecting more than 40% of individuals. Relative to those with Other OPAT, people with ID-led OPAT had lower odds of an ED admission (odds ratio [OR] 0.449, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.311-0.645) or hospitalization (OR 0.661, 95% CI 0.557-0.791) over 30 days, and they accumulated $1488 less in total healthcare payments (95% CI -2 688.56--266.58). CONCLUSIONS: Among privately insured individuals below age 65, ID consultations during OPAT are associated with large and significant reductions in the rates of ED admission and hospital admission in the 30 days after index events, as well as lower total healthcare spending.

2018 Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy.

A panel of experts was convened by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) to update the 2004 clinical practice guideline on outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) [1]. This guideline is intended to provide insight for healthcare professionals who prescribe and oversee the provision of OPAT. It considers various patient features, infusion catheter issues, monitoring questions, and antimicrobial stewardship concerns. It does not offer recommendations on the treatment of specific infections. The reader is referred to disease- or organism-specific guidelines for such support.

2018 Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy.

A panel of experts was convened by the Infectious Diseases Society of America to update the 2004 clinical practice guideline on outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) [1]. This guideline is intended to provide insight for healthcare professionals who prescribe and oversee the provision of OPAT. It considers various patient features, infusion catheter issues, monitoring questions, and antimicrobial stewardship concerns. It does not offer recommendations on the treatment of specific infections. The reader is referred to disease- or organism-specific guidelines for such support.

Infectious diseases specialty intervention is associated with decreased mortality and lower healthcare costs.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies, largely based on chart reviews with small sample sizes, have demonstrated that infectious diseases (ID) specialists positively impact patient outcomes. We investigated how ID specialists impact mortality, utilization, and costs using a large claims dataset. METHODS: We used administrative fee-for-service Medicare claims to identify beneficiaries hospitalized from 2008 to 2009 with at least 1 of 11 infections. There were 101 991 stays with and 170 336 stays without ID interventions. Cohorts were propensity score matched for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics. Regression models compared ID versus non-ID intervention and early versus late ID intervention. Risk-adjusted outcomes included hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), mortality, readmissions, hospital charges, and Medicare payments. RESULTS: The ID intervention cohort demonstrated significantly lower mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], .83 to .91) and readmissions (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, .93 to .99) than the non-ID intervention cohort. Medicare charges and payments were not significantly different; the ID intervention cohort ICU LOS was 3.7% shorter (95% CI, -5.5% to -1.9%). Patients receiving ID intervention within 2 days of admission had significantly lower 30-day mortality and readmission, hospital and ICU length of stay, and Medicare charges and payments compared with patients receiving later ID interventions. CONCLUSIONS: ID interventions are associated with improved patient outcomes. Early ID interventions are also associated with reduced costs for Medicare beneficiaries with select infections.

Oritavancin Versus Daptomycin for Osteomyelitis Treatment After Surgical Debridement.

INTRODUCTION: Weekly intravenous (IV) oritavancin and daily daptomycin were compared in an outpatient setting following extensive surgical debridement for treating patients with osteomyelitis. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study of patients diagnosed with acute osteomyelitis. Exclusion criteria were the use of Gram-negative antibiotic therapy, use of antibiotics for more than 48 h prior to oritavancin or daptomycin or prior use of > 2 doses of oritavancin or more than 4 weeks of daptomycin. Clinical success was resolution or improvement of symptoms and no further treatment. Data were analyzed with Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Consecutive outpatients (n = 150) with acute osteomyelitis who were treated with oritavancin or daptomycin (1:1) following extensive surgical debridement were identified. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common pathogen (n = 117). No patient in either group received prior antibiotic therapy (previous 30 days) or was hospitalized within 90 days prior to surgical debridement. Twenty-one (28%) patients prescribed oritavancin had chronic kidney disease, seven of whom were receiving hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. Compared to oritavancin, patients prescribed daptomycin had higher rates of all-cause readmission [odds ratio (OR) 2.89; p < 0.001], more infection-related readmission (OR 3.19; p < 0.001), and greater likelihood of receiving antibiotics post-discontinuation of initial therapy (OR 2.13; p < 0.001). Repeat surgical debridement was required for 68.0% with daptomycin vs. 23.1% with oritavancin (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Oritavancin demonstrated a significantly higher rate of clinical success compared to daptomycin, with lower all-cause and infection-related readmissions, reduced need for repeat surgical debridement, and fewer additional antibiotic requirements.

The importance of long-term acute care hospitals in the regional epidemiology of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing Enterobacteriaceae are increasingly detected in clinical infections; however, the colonization burden of these organisms among short-stay and long-term acute care hospitals is unknown. METHODS: Short-stay acute care hospitals with adult intensive care units (ICUs) in the city of Chicago were recruited for 2 cross-sectional single-day point prevalence surveys (survey 1, July 2010-January 2011; survey 2, January-July 2011). In addition, all long-term acute care hospitals (LTACHs) in the Chicago region (Cook County) were recruited for a single-day point prevalence survey during January-May 2011. Swab specimens were collected from rectal, inguinal, or urine sites and tested for Enterobacteriaceae carrying blaKPC. RESULTS: We surveyed 24 of 25 eligible short-stay acute care hospitals and 7 of 7 eligible LTACHs. Among LTACHs, 30.4% (119 of 391) of patients were colonized with KPC-producing Enterobacteriaceae, compared to 3.3% (30 of 910) of short-stay hospital ICU patients (prevalence ratio, 9.2; 95% confidence interval, 6.3-13.5). All surveyed LTACHs had patients harboring KPC (prevalence range, 10%-54%), versus 15 of 24 short-stay hospitals (prevalence range, 0%-29%). Several patient-level covariates present at the time of survey-LTACH facility type, mechanical ventilation, and length of stay-were independent risk factors for KPC-producing Enterobacteriaceae colonization. CONCLUSIONS: We identified high colonization prevalence of KPC-producing Enterobacteriaceae among patients in LTACHs. Patients with chronic medical care needs in long-term care facilities may play an important role in the spread of these extremely drug-resistant pathogens.

Early Tocilizumab Dosing Is Associated With Improved Survival in Critically Ill Patients Infected With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2.

To identify the most efficacious timing for tocilizumab administration in critically ill patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2. DESIGN: Observational multicenter cohort study. SETTING: A total of 23 acute care hospitals in four states. PATIENTS: One-hundred eighteen patients admitted between March 13, 2020, and April 16, 2020. Eighty-one patients received tocilizumab, and 37 were untreated and served as a control group. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The main outcome was mortality and was analyzed by timing of tocilizumab dosing. Early dosing was defined as a tocilizumab dose administered prior to or within 1 day of intubation. Late dosing was defined as a dose administered greater than 1 day after intubation. A control group that was treated only with standard of care, and without tocilizumab, was used for comparison. Early tocilizumab therapy was associated with a statistically significant decrease in mortality as compared to patients who were untreated (p = 0.003). Dosing tocilizumab late was associated with an increased mortality compared with the untreated group (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Early tocilizumab administration was associated with decreased mortality in critically ill severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 patients, but a potential detriment was suggested by dosing later in a patient's course.

Tocilizumab as a Therapeutic Agent for Critically Ill Patients Infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Tocilizumab is an IL-6 receptor antagonist with the ability to suppress the cytokine storm in critically ill patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We evaluated patients treated with tocilizumab for a SARS-CoV-2 infection who were admitted between March 13, 2020, and April 16, 2020. This was a multicenter study with data collected by chart review both retrospectively and concurrently. Parameters evaluated included age, sex, race, use of mechanical ventilation (MV), usage of steroids and vasopressors, inflammatory markers, and comorbidities. Early dosing was defined as a tocilizumab dose administered prior to or within 1 day of intubation. Late dosing was defined as a dose administered > 1 day after intubation. In the absence of MV, the timing of the dose was related to the patient's date of admission only. We evaluated 145 patients. The average age was 58.1 years, 64% were men, 68.3% had comorbidities, and 60% received steroid therapy. Disposition of patients was 48.3% discharged and 29.3% died, of which 43.9% were African American. MV was required in 55.9%, of which 34.5% died. Avoidance of MV (P = 0.002) and increased survival (P < 0.001) was statistically associated with early dosing. Tocilizumab therapy was effective at decreasing mortality and should be instituted early in the management of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019) COVID-19).

Treatment of Acute Osteomyelitis with Once-Weekly Oritavancin: A Two-Year, Multicenter, Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Acute osteomyelitis is typically caused by Gram-positive pathogens, commonly antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus species. Standard antibiotic treatment is challenging due to required multiple daily doses, therapeutic drug monitoring, and parenteral administration for at least 4 weeks. Oritavancin is a long-acting lipoglycopeptide antibiotic approved as a single 1200 mg dose for the treatment of adult patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the real-world use, efficacy, and safety of oritavancin in adult patients with acute osteomyelitis. METHODS: This was a 2-year, multicenter, retrospective, descriptive study of patients treated for acute osteomyelitis with weekly doses of oritavancin. End of therapy evaluation (ETE) was defined as evaluation at 7-10 days after the last dose of oritavancin, and post-therapy assessment (PTE) was at 3 months and 6 months. At ETE and PTE, patients were interviewed via telephone for clinical outcomes, using a standard questionnaire. Electronic medical record review was also conducted. RESULTS: 134 patients were treated with oritavancin for acute osteomyelitis across 20 different Metro Infectious Disease Consultants infusion centers in six states. Of total positive cultures, 71.9% (92/128) were methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) from deep wounds, bone, or joint culture; an additional nine (6.7%) of 134 patients presented with concomitant MRSA bacteremia. Oritavancin was administered via intravenous catheter; patients received an initial treatment of 1200 mg and then 800 mg weekly thereafter for a total number of doses of four (n = 118) or five (n = 16). 118 patients (88.1%) of the baseline 134 patients achieved clinical success at the ETE timepoint. 130 patients were available for PTE at 3 months and 6 months. Overall, relapse or persistent infection was diagnosed in 13/134 (9.7%) patients. Nine (6.7%) of 134 patients were admitted to the hospital during the follow-up period but none for osteomyelitis. Adverse events were reported in five (3.7%) patients including hypoglycemia-related symptoms (three patients), tachycardia (one patient), and tachycardia with chest pain (one patient). None of these patients were hospitalized due to adverse events, and all patients eventually finished their treatment regimens. CONCLUSION: This is the largest real-world clinical study of adult patients treated with oritavancin for acute osteomyelitis. Use of oritavancin for acute osteomyelitis infection resulted in a high rate of positive clinical outcomes and a low incidence of adverse events, thereby providing potential for a convenient, effective, and safe therapeutic option. Future prospective and comparative studies are needed to validate these findings.

A Real-World Assessment of Clinical Outcomes and Safety of Eravacycline: A Novel Fluorocycline.

BACKGROUND: Eravacycline is a novel fluorocycline approved for treatment of intraabdominal infections, with a broad spectrum of activity against a range of pathogens including multidrug-resistant species, including ESBL- or KPC-producing isolates. It is approved for twice-daily dosing with no need for adjustment in renal dysfunction. In the concomitant administration with CYP 3A4-inducing drugs, eravacycline dosing should be modified. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of eravacycline in a range of infections such as intraabdominal infections, pneumonia and diabetic foot infections in seriously ill patients. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study using electronic patient records of 50 consecutive patients administered eravacycline during inpatient acute care admission or as part of outpatient antibiotic therapy (OPAT). RESULTS: Therapy of 1.5 mg/kg q24h was initiated in the hospital in most patients, although some of the less sick were managed in the office or OPAT setting. All patients concluded their management outside of the hospital. Of the 50 patients, 47 (94%) achieved clinical resolution of their infection and 3 (6%) clinical failures occurred. Only three (6%) patients did not have comorbidities, three had a single comorbidity (6%), and the majority (88%) of patients had two or more comorbidities. Most common infections were intraabdominal (36%), pneumonia (18%), diabetic foot (12%), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (8%) and empyema (8%). Almost half of infections had more than one pathogen isolated, and resistant isolates were frequent. The drug was well tolerated with only two reports of nausea, which did not result in treatment discontinuation, and in 30 days of post-eravacycline therapy only one case of Clostridiodes difficile. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world setting, eravacycline demonstrated a similar high level of clinical efficacy as seen in clinical trials, 94%, in a variety of infections, including against multidrug-resistant bacteria, and was well tolerated.

The value of infectious diseases specialists: non-patient care activities.

Recent developments in health care have focused efforts on both the national and local levels to reduce unnecessary health care costs and the number of hospital stays while increasing the quality of care, particularly in the context of hospital-associated infections. Infectious diseases specialists who contract to oversee infection-control and antibiotic-stewardship programs are uniquely positioned to play a pivotal role in helping hospitals to prosper in this new environment. This article will detail the available data supporting the value of infectious diseases specialists in their roles of directing antimicrobial-management and infection-control programs, maintaining health care workers' well-being, and minimizing exposure. The evidence in support of the influence of infectious diseases specialists to achieve cost-savings, decrease the length of hospital stays, and improve outcomes is robust and can be used as the framework for negotiating appropriate compensation from hospital management for these activities. Presenting this information in an amicable but definitive framework may be the linchpin to the overall success of the movement to improve quality of care while minimizing hospital costs and antimicrobial use. Developing this ability is critical to infectious diseases specialists' success as they redefine their role in the quality-of-care and risk-management arenas.

Value and Clinical Impact of an Infectious Disease-Supervised Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Therapy Program.

Background. Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) is a safe and effective modality for treating serious infections. This study was undertaken to define the value of OPAT in a multicentered infectious disease (ID) private practice setting. Methods. Over a period of 32 months, 6120 patients were treated using 19 outpatient ID offices in 6 states. Analysis included patient demographics, indications of OPAT, diagnoses, therapeutic agent, duration of therapy, and site of therapy initiation. Outcomes were stratified by therapeutic success, clinical relapse, therapeutic complications, and hospitalizations after initiating therapy. Statistical analysis included an ordinal logistic regression analysis. Results. Forty-three percent of patients initiated therapy in an outpatient office, and 57% began therapy in a hospital. Most common diagnoses treated were bone and joint (32.2%), abscesses (18.8%), cellulitis (18.5%), and urinary tract infection (10.8%). Ninety-four percent of patients were successfully treated, and only 3% were hospitalized after beginning therapy. Most common cause of treatment failure was a relapse of primary infection (60%), progression of primary infection (21%), and therapeutic complication (19%). Conclusions. An ID-supervised OPAT program is safe, efficient, and clinically effective. By maximizing the delivery of outpatient care, OPAT provides a tangible value to hospitals, payers, and patients. This program is a distinctive competency available to ID physicians who offer this service to patients.

The value of an infectious diseases specialist.

Infectious diseases (ID) specialists have played a major role in patient care, infection control, and antibiotic management for many years. With the rapidly changing nature of health care, it has become necessary for ID specialists to articulate their value to multiple audiences. This article summarizes the versatile attributes possessed by ID specialists and delineates their value to patients, hospitals, and other integral groups in the health care continuum.