The Effect of COVID-19 Vaccination on Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing in Older Adults: A Self-Controlled Risk-Interval Study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination has been associated with reduced outpatient antibiotic prescribing among older adults with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on outpatient antibiotic prescribing in the broader population of older adults, regardless of SARS-CoV-2 infection status. METHODS: We included adults aged ≥65 years who received their first, second, and/or third COVID-19 vaccine dose from December 2020 to December 2022. We used a self-controlled risk-interval design and included cases who received an antibiotic prescription 2-6 weeks before vaccination (pre-vaccination or control interval) or after vaccination (post-vaccination or risk interval). We used conditional logistic regression to estimate the odds of being prescribed (1) any antibiotic, (2) a typical "respiratory" infection antibiotic, or (3) a typical "urinary tract" infection antibiotic (negative control) in the post-vaccination interval versus the pre-vaccination interval. We accounted for temporal changes in antibiotic prescribing using background monthly antibiotic prescribing counts. RESULTS: 469 923 vaccine doses met inclusion criteria. The odds of receiving any antibiotic or a respiratory antibiotic prescription were lower in the post-vaccination versus pre-vaccination interval (aOR, .973; 95% CI, .968-.978; aOR, .961; 95% CI, .953-.968, respectively). There was no association between vaccination and urinary antibiotic prescriptions (aOR, .996; 95% CI, .987-1.006). Periods with high (>10%) versus low (<5%) SARS-CoV-2 test positivity demonstrated greater reductions in antibiotic prescribing (aOR, .875; 95% CI, .845-.905; aOR, .996; 95% CI, .989-1.003, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination was associated with reduced outpatient antibiotic prescribing in older adults, especially during periods of high SARS-CoV-2 circulation.

Association between infectious diseases consultation and mortality in hospitalized patients with Gram-negative bloodstream infection: a retrospective population-wide cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Data supporting routine infectious diseases (ID) consultation in Gram-negative bloodstream infection (GN-BSI) are limited. We evaluated the association between ID consultation and mortality in patients with GN-BSI in a retrospective population-wide cohort study in Ontario using linked health administrative databases. METHODS: Hospitalized adult patients with GN-BSI between April 2017 and December 2021 were included. The primary outcome was time to all-cause mortality censored at 30 days, analyzed using a mixed effects Cox proportional hazards model with hospital as a random effect. ID consultation 1-10 days after the first positive blood culture was treated as a time-varying exposure. RESULTS: Of 30,159 patients with GN-BSI across 53 hospitals, 11,013 (36.5%) received ID consultation. Median prevalence of ID consultation for patients with GN-BSI across hospitals was 35.0% with wide variability (range 2.7-76.1%, interquartile range 19.6-41.1%). 1041 (9.5%) patients who received ID consultation died within 30 days, compared to 1797 (9.4%) patients without ID consultation. In the fully-adjusted multivariable model, ID consultation was associated with mortality benefit (adjusted HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.77-0.88, p < 0.0001; translating to absolute risk reduction of -3.8% or NNT of 27). Exploratory subgroup analyses of the primary outcome showed that ID consultation could have greater benefit in patients with high-risk features (nosocomial infection, polymicrobial or non-Enterobacterales infection, antimicrobial resistance, or non-urinary tract source). CONCLUSIONS: Early ID consultation was associated with reduced mortality in patients with GN-BSI. If resources permit, routine ID consultation for this patient population should be considered to improve patient outcomes.

Epidemiology and clinical relevance of persistent bacteraemia in patients with Gram-negative bloodstream infection: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The risk factors and outcomes associated with persistent bacteraemia in Gram-negative bloodstream infection (GN-BSI) are not well described. We conducted a follow-on analysis of a retrospective population-wide cohort to characterize persistent bacteraemia in patients with GN-BSI. METHODS: We included all hospitalized patients >18 years old with GN-BSI between April 2017 and December 2021 in Ontario who received follow-up blood culture (FUBC) 2-5 days after the index positive blood culture. Persistent bacteraemia was defined as having a positive FUBC with the same Gram-negative organism as the index blood culture. We identified variables independently associated with persistent bacteraemia in a multivariable logistic regression model. We evaluated whether persistent bacteraemia was associated with increased odds of 30- and 90-day all-cause mortality using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: In this study, 8807 patients were included; 600 (6.8%) had persistent bacteraemia. Having a permanent catheter, antimicrobial resistance, nosocomial infection, ICU admission, respiratory or skin and soft tissue source of infection, and infection by a non-fermenter or non-Enterobacterales/anaerobic organism were associated with increased odds of having persistent bacteraemia. The 30-day mortality was 17.2% versus 9.6% in those with and without persistent bacteraemia (aOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.29-2.11), while 90-day mortality was 25.5% versus 16.9%, respectively (aOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.24-1.89). Prevalence and odds of developing persistent bacteraemia varied widely depending on causative organism. CONCLUSIONS: Persistent bacteraemia is uncommon in GN-BSI but is associated with poorer outcomes. A validated risk stratification tool may be useful to identify patients with persistent bacteraemia.

Quality of life and cost-effectiveness of convalescent plasma compared to standard care for hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the CONCOR-1 trial.

BACKGROUND: The CONvalescent Plasma for Hospitalized Adults With COVID-19 Respiratory Illness (CONCOR-1) trial was a multicenter randomized controlled trial assessing convalescent plasma in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of convalescent plasma and its impact on quality-of-life to provide insight into its potential as an alternative treatment in resource-constrained settings. METHODS: Individual patient data on health outcomes and resource utilization from the CONCOR-1 trial were used to conduct the analysis from the Canadian public payer's perspective with a time horizon of 30 days post-randomization. Baseline and 30-day EQ-5D-5L were measured to calculate quality-adjusted survival. All costs are presented in 2021 Canadian dollars. The base case assessed the EQ-5D-5L scores of hospitalized inpatients reporting at both timepoints, and a utility score of 0 was assigned for patients who died within 30 days. Costs for all patients enrolled were used. The sensitivity analysis utilizes EQ-5D-5L scores from the same population but only uses costs from this population. RESULTS: 940 patients were randomized: 627 received CCP and 313 received standard care. The total costs were $28,716 (standard deviation, $25,380) and $24,258 ($22,939) for the convalescent plasma and standard care arms respectively. EQ-5D-5L scores were 0.61 in both arms (p = .85) at baseline. At 30 days, EQ-5D-5L scores were 0.63 and 0.64 for patients in the convalescent plasma and standard care arms, respectively (p = .46). The incremental cost was $4458 and the incremental quality-adjusted life day was -0.078. DISCUSSION: Convalescent plasma was less effective and more costly than standard care in treating hospitalized COVID-19.

Association of delayed adequate antimicrobial treatment and organ dysfunction in pediatric bloodstream infections.

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are associated with significant mortality and morbidity, including multiple organ dysfunction. We explored if delayed adequate antimicrobial treatment for children with BSIs is associated with change in organ dysfunction as measured by PELOD-2 scores. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of critically ill children <18 years old with BSIs. The primary outcome was change in PELOD-2 score between days 1 (index blood culture) and 5. The exposure variable was delayed administration of adequate antimicrobial therapy by ≥3 h from blood culture collection. We compared PELOD-2 score changes between those who received early and delayed treatment. RESULTS: Among 202 children, the median (interquartile range) time to adequate antimicrobial therapy was 7 (0.8-20.1) hours; 124 (61%) received delayed antimicrobial therapy. Patients who received early and delayed treatment had similar baseline characteristics. There was no significant difference in PELOD-2 score changes from days 1 and 5 between groups (PELOD-2 score difference -0.07, 95% CI -0.92 to 0.79, p = 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find an association between delayed adequate antimicrobial therapy and PELOD-2 score changes between days 1 and 5 from detection of BSI. PELOD-2 score was not sensitive for clinical effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment. IMPACT: In critically ill children with bloodstream infections, there was no significant change in organ dysfunction as measured by PELOD-2 scores between patients who received adequate antimicrobial therapy within 3 h of their initial positive blood culture and those who started after 3 h. Higher PELOD-2 scores on day 1 were associated with larger differences in PELOD-2 scores between days 1 and 5 from index positive blood cultures. Further study is required to determine if PELOD-2 or alternative measures of organ dysfunction could be used as primary outcome measures in trials of antimicrobial interventions in pediatric critical care research.

Utility of Differential Time to Positivity in Diagnosing Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Differential time to positivity (DTP), defined as pathogen growth at least 2 hours earlier from catheter versus paired peripheral blood cultures, is sometimes used to diagnose central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs). Previous studies assessing DTP, however, have been small, provided conflicting results, and did not assess heterogeneity across important subgroups. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the diagnostic characteristics of DTP for CLABSI using MEDLINE, Embase, WoS, CINAHL, LILACS, AMED, and the Cochrane database. Studies were included if they reported sensitivities, specificities, predictive values, likelihood ratios, or 2 × 2 tables of DTP for diagnosing CLABSI. Extracted data were analyzed by using forest plots, bivariate model meta-analysis, and QUADAS-2 quality assessment. RESULTS: We identified 274 records, of which 23 met the criteria for meta-analysis. Among 2526 suspected CLABSIs, DTP demonstrated a summary sensitivity of 81.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 72.8%-87.7%), specificity of 91.8% (95% CI: 84.5%-95.8%), positive likelihood ratio of 9.89 (95% CI: 5.14-19.00), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.20 (95% CI: .14-.30). Covariate analysis based on catheter duration, study design, and patient immune status demonstrated no significant differences. However, DTP performed worse for Staphylococcus aureus (low sensitivity but high specificity) and Candida (high sensitivity but low specificity) compared to other organisms. CONCLUSIONS: DTP performs well in ruling CLABSIs in or out. Obtaining paired catheter and peripheral blood cultures for DTP when the infectious source is unclear may prevent unnecessary line removal and diagnostic tests. However, this must be balanced against higher contamination rates from catheter cultures.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination Is Associated With Reduced Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing in Older Adults With Confirmed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2: A Population-Wide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are frequently prescribed unnecessarily in outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We sought to evaluate factors associated with antibiotic prescribing in outpatients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. METHODS: We performed a population-wide cohort study of outpatients aged ≥66 years with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021 in Ontario, Canada. We determined rates of antibiotic prescribing within 1 week before (prediagnosis) and 1 week after (postdiagnosis) reporting of the positive SARS-CoV-2 result, compared to a self-controlled period (baseline). We evaluated predictors of prescribing, including a primary-series COVID-19 vaccination, in univariate and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: We identified 13 529 eligible nursing home residents and 50 885 eligible community-dwelling adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the nursing home and community residents, 3020 (22%) and 6372 (13%), respectively, received at least 1 antibiotic prescription within 1 week of a SARS-CoV-2 positive result. Antibiotic prescribing in nursing home and community residents occurred, respectively, at 15.0 and 10.5 prescriptions per 1000 person-days prediagnosis and 20.9 and 9.8 per 1000 person-days postdiagnosis, higher than the baseline rates of 4.3 and 2.5 prescriptions per 1000 person-days. COVID-19 vaccination was associated with reduced prescribing in nursing home and community residents, with adjusted postdiagnosis incidence rate ratios (95% confidence interval) of 0.7 (0.4-1) and 0.3 (0.3-0.4), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prescribing was high and with little or no decline following SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis but was reduced in COVID-19-vaccinated individuals, highlighting the importance of vaccination and antibiotic stewardship in older adults with COVID-19.

Antibiotic-Induced Neutropenia in Patients Receiving Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Therapy: a Retrospective Cohort Study.

Our research objective was to describe the incidence and management of antibiotic-induced neutropenia in patients receiving outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) at our institution over a 7-year period. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients followed by the OPAT clinic from 1 July 2016 to 30 March 2022 who developed antibiotic-induced neutropenia (defined as an absolute neutrophil count of ≤1.5 × 109/L). Patients receiving vancomycin in the OPAT clinic received weekly laboratory monitoring, while those receiving other antibiotics received laboratory monitoring at week 3 of therapy. Out of the 2,513 treatment courses, 55 cases of antibiotic-induced neutropenia were identified, resulting in an incidence of 2.2 cases per 100 treatment courses (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7 to 2.9). Of the 45 cases for which a sole cause was identified, the three most common intravenous antibiotic culprits were vancomycin (21/541; 3.9%), ceftriaxone (10/490; 2.0%), and cloxacillin (2/103; 1.9%). Five (9.1%) patients had symptoms accompanying neutropenia that warranted hospital admission. There were no deaths, and all patients recovered their neutrophil count after antibiotic discontinuation or completion. In nine cases (16.3%), the culprit beta-lactam antibiotic was changed to another beta-lactam agent containing a structurally different side chain, with successful recovery of the neutrophil count in 9/9 (100%). The highest risk of antibiotic-induced neutropenia was associated with vancomycin, ceftriaxone, and cloxacillin in our cohort. With standardized outpatient monitoring during the third week of OPAT, cases of neutropenia can be detected early and managed without hospitalization. Data from our study also support the safety of switching to alternate beta-lactams with structurally different side chains.

Population-based evaluation of the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for reducing hospital admissions and mortality from COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: A randomized controlled trial involving a high-risk, unvaccinated population that was conducted before the Omicron variant emerged found that nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was effective in preventing progression to severe COVID-19. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in preventing severe COVID-19 while Omicron and its subvariants predominate. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study in Ontario that included all residents who were older than 17 years of age and had a positive polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 between Apr. 4 and Aug. 31, 2022. We compared patients treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir with patients who were not treated and measured the primary outcome of hospital admission from COVID-19 or all-cause death at 1-30 days, and a secondary outcome of all-cause death. We used weighted logistic regression to calculate weighted odds ratios (ORs) with confidence intervals (CIs) using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to control for confounding. RESULTS: The final cohort included 177 545 patients, 8876 (5.0%) who were treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and 168 669 (95.0%) who were not treated. The groups were well balanced with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics after applying stabilized IPTW. We found that the occurrence of hospital admission or death was lower in the group given nirmatrelvir-ritonavir than in those who were not (2.1% v. 3.7%; weighted OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47-0.67). For death alone, the weighted OR was 0.49 (95% CI 0.39-0.62). Our findings were similar across strata of age, drug-drug interactions, vaccination status and comorbidities. The number needed to treat to prevent 1 case of severe COVID-19 was 62 (95% CI 43-80), which varied across strata. INTERPRETATION: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was associated with significantly reduced odds of hospital admission and death from COVID-19, which supports use to treat patients with mild COVID-19 who are at risk for severe disease.

Moving from intervention management to disease management: a qualitative study exploring a systems approach to health technology assessment in Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Health technology assessment (HTA) traditionally informs decision making for single health technologies, which could lead to ill-informed decisions, suboptimal care, and system inefficiencies. We explored opportunities for conceptualizing the decision space in HTA as a disease management question versus an intervention management question. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted between April 2022 and October 2022 with purposefully selected individuals from national and provincial HTA agencies and related organizations in Canada. We conducted manual line by line coding of data informed by our interview guide and sensitizing concepts from the literature. One author coded the data, and findings were independently verified by a second author who coded a subset of transcripts. RESULTS: Twenty-four invitations were distributed, and eighteen individuals agreed to participate. A disease management approach to HTA was differentiated from traditional approaches as being disease-based, multi-interventional, and dynamic. There was general support for an explicit care pathway approach to HTA by informing discussions around patient choice and suboptimal care, creating a space where decision makers can collaborate on shared objectives, and in setting up a platform for open dialogue about managing high-cost and high-severity diseases. There are opportunities for a care pathway approach to be implemented that build on the strengths of the existing HTA system in Canada. CONCLUSIONS: A disease management approach may enhance the impact of HTA by supporting dynamic decision making that could better inform a proactive, resilient, and sustainable healthcare system in Canada.

Introducing the Escalation Antibiogram: A Simple Tool to Inform Changes in Empiric Antimicrobials in the Nonresponding Patient.

BACKGROUND: Hospital antibiograms guide initial empiric antibiotic treatment selections, but do not directly inform escalation of treatment among nonresponding patients. METHODS: Using gram-negative bacteremia as an exemplar condition, we sought to introduce the concept of an escalation antibiogram. Among episodes of gram-negative bacteremia between 2017 and 2020 from 6 hospitals in the Greater Toronto Area, we generated escalation antibiograms for each of 12 commonly used agents. Among organisms resistant to that antibiotic, we calculated the likelihood of susceptibility to each of the other 11 agents. In subgroup analyses, we examined escalation antibiograms across study years, individual hospitals, community versus hospital onset, and pathogen type. RESULTS: Among 6577 gram-negative bacteremia episodes, the likelihood of coverage was ampicillin 31.8%, cefazolin 62.7%, ceftriaxone 67.1%, piperacillin-tazobactam 72.5%, ceftazidime 74.1%, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 74.4%, ciprofloxacin 77.1%, tobramycin 88.3%, gentamicin 88.8%, ertapenem 91.0%, amikacin 97.5%, and meropenem 98.2%. The escalation antibiograms revealed marked shifts in likelihood of coverage by the remaining 11 agents. For example, among ceftriaxone-resistant isolates, piperacillin-tazobactam susceptibility (21.2%) was significantly lower than trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (54.2%, P < .0001), ciprofloxacin (63.0%, P < .0001), ertapenem (73.4%, P < .0001), tobramycin (80.1%, P < .0001), gentamicin (82.8%, P < .0001), meropenem (94.3%, P < .0001), and amikacin (97.1%, P < .0001). Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was the second-ranked agent in the meropenem escalation antibiogram (49.6%) and first in the amikacin escalation antibiogram (86.0%). Escalation antibiograms were consistent across 4 study years and 6 hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Escalation antibiograms can be generated to inform empiric treatment changes in nonresponding patients. These tools can yield important insights such as avoiding the common maneuver of escalating from ceftriaxone to piperacillin-tazobactam in suspected gram-negative bacteremia.

Increased Household Secondary Attacks Rates With Variant of Concern Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Index Cases.

We compared secondary attack rates in households with B.1.1.7 variant of concern (VOC) versus non-VOC index cases in a matched cohort in Ontario, Canada. The secondary attack rate for VOC index cases was 1.31 times higher than non-VOC index cases. This increase was particularly accentuated for asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases.

The Staphylococcus aureus Network Adaptive Platform Trial Protocol: New Tools for an Old Foe.

Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream (SAB) infection is a common and severe infectious disease, with a 90-day mortality of 15%-30%. Despite this, <3000 people have been randomized into clinical trials of treatments for SAB infection. The limited evidence base partly results from clinical trials for SAB infections being difficult to complete at scale using traditional clinical trial methods. Here we provide the rationale and framework for an adaptive platform trial applied to SAB infections. We detail the design features of the Staphylococcus aureus Network Adaptive Platform (SNAP) trial that will enable multiple questions to be answered as efficiently as possible. The SNAP trial commenced enrolling patients across multiple countries in 2022 with an estimated target sample size of 7000 participants. This approach may serve as an exemplar to increase efficiency of clinical trials for other infectious disease syndromes.

Prevalence and Mortality Associated with Bloodstream Organisms: a Population-Wide Retrospective Cohort Study.

Bloodstream infections (BSIs) represent a substantial mortality risk, yet most studies are limited to select pathogens or populations. The aim of this study was to describe the population-wide prevalence of BSIs and examine the associated mortality risk for the responsible microorganisms. We conducted a population-wide retrospective cohort study of BSIs in Ontario in 2017. Blood culture data was collected from almost all microbiology laboratories in Ontario and linked to data sets of patient characteristics. For each organism, we determined the prevalence and crude mortality risk, and using logistic regression models, the adjusted odds of 30-day mortality was calculated relative to patients with negative blood cultures and matched patients without blood culture testing. From 531,065 blood cultures, we identified 22,935 positive BSI episodes in 19,326 patients, for an incidence of 150 per 100,000 population. The most frequently isolated organisms were Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, Klebsiella species, and Enterococcus species with 40.2, 22.4, 12.1, 11.1, and 7.1 episodes per 100,000 population respectively. BSI episodes were associated with 17.0% mortality at 30 days. Compared to patients with negative cultures, the adjusted 30-day mortality risk for positive BSIs was 1.47 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.41 to 1.54) and compared to matched patients without blood culture testing was 2.62 (95% CI, 2.52 to 2.73). Clostridium species were associated with the highest adjusted odds of mortality compared to that of negative cultures (adjusted odds ratio, 5.81; 95% CI, 4.00 to 8.44). Among high incidence pathogens, Staphylococcus aureus had the highest odds ratio of mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.94 to 2.36). BSIs are associated with increased mortality risk, varying across organisms.

Post-acute health care burden after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The post-acute burden of health care use after SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. We sought to quantify the post-acute burden of health care use after SARS-CoV-2 infection among community-dwelling adults in Ontario by comparing those with positive and negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results for SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving community-dwelling adults in Ontario who had a PCR test between Jan. 1, 2020, and Mar. 31, 2021. Follow-up began 56 days after PCR testing. We matched people 1:1 on a comprehensive propensity score. We compared per-person-year rates for health care encounters at the mean and 99th percentiles, and compared counts using negative binomial models, stratified by sex. RESULTS: Among 531 702 matched people, mean age was 44 (standard deviation [SD] 17) years and 51% were female. Females who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had a mean of 1.98 (95% CI 1.63 to 2.29) more health care encounters overall per-person-year than those who had a negative test result, with 0.31 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.56) more home care encounters to 0.81 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.93) more long-term care days. At the 99th percentile per-person-year, females who tested positive had 6.48 more days of hospital admission and 28.37 more home care encounters. Males who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had 0.66 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.99) more overall health care encounters per-person-year than those who tested negative, with 0.14 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.21) more outpatient encounters and 0.48 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.60) long-term care days, and 0.43 (95% CI -0.67 to -0.21) fewer home care encounters. At the 99th percentile, they had 8.69 more days in hospital per-person-year, with fewer home care (-27.31) and outpatient (-0.87) encounters. INTERPRETATION: We found significantly higher rates of health care use after a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test in an analysis that matched test-positive with test-negative people. Stakeholders can use these findings to prepare for health care demand associated with post-COVID-19 condition (long COVID).

Remdesivir for the treatment of patients in hospital with COVID-19 in Canada: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of remdesivir in the treatment of patients in hospital with COVID-19 remains ill defined in a global context. The World Health Organization Solidarity randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated remdesivir in patients across many countries, with Canada enrolling patients using an expanded data collection format in the Canadian Treatments for COVID-19 (CATCO) trial. We report on the Canadian findings, with additional demographics, characteristics and clinical outcomes, to explore the potential for differential effects across different health care systems. METHODS: We performed an open-label, pragmatic RCT in Canadian hospitals, in conjunction with the Solidarity trial. We randomized patients to 10 days of remdesivir (200 mg intravenously [IV] on day 0, followed by 100 mg IV daily), plus standard care, or standard care alone. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included changes in clinical severity, oxygen- and ventilator-free days (at 28 d), incidence of new oxygen or mechanical ventilation use, duration of hospital stay, and adverse event rates. We performed a priori subgroup analyses according to duration of symptoms before enrolment, age, sex and severity of symptoms on presentation. RESULTS: Across 52 Canadian hospitals, we randomized 1282 patients between Aug. 14, 2020, and Apr. 1, 2021, to remdesivir (n = 634) or standard of care (n = 648). Of these, 15 withdrew consent or were still in hospital, for a total sample of 1267 patients. Among patients assigned to receive remdesivir, in-hospital mortality was 18.7%, compared with 22.6% in the standard-of-care arm (relative risk [RR] 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 1.03), and 60-day mortality was 24.8% and 28.2%, respectively (95% CI 0.72 to 1.07). For patients not mechanically ventilated at baseline, the need for mechanical ventilation was 8.0% in those assigned remdesivir, and 15.0% in those receiving standard of care (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.75). Mean oxygen-free and ventilator-free days at day 28 were 15.9 (± standard deviation [SD] 10.5) and 21.4 (± SD 11.3) in those receiving remdesivir and 14.2 (± SD 11) and 19.5 (± SD 12.3) in those receiving standard of care (p = 0.006 and 0.007, respectively). There was no difference in safety events of new dialysis, change in creatinine, or new hepatic dysfunction between the 2 groups. INTERPRETATION: Remdesivir, when compared with standard of care, has a modest but significant effect on outcomes important to patients and health systems, such as the need for mechanical ventilation. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04330690.

Antimicrobial treatment duration for uncomplicated bloodstream infections in critically ill children: a multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) cause significant morbidity and mortality in critically ill children but treatment duration is understudied. We describe the durations of antimicrobial treatment that critically ill children receive and explore factors associated with treatment duration. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study in six pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) across Canada. Associations between treatment duration and patient-, infection- and pathogen-related characteristics were explored using multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: Among 187 critically ill children with BSIs, the median duration of antimicrobial treatment was 15 (IQR 11-25) days. Median treatment durations were longer than two weeks for all subjects with known sources of infection: catheter-related 16 (IQR 11-24), respiratory 15 (IQR 11-26), intra-abdominal 20 (IQR 14-26), skin/soft tissue 17 (IQR 15-33), urinary 17 (IQR 15-35), central nervous system 33 (IQR 15-46) and other sources 29.5 (IQR 15-55) days. When sources of infection were unclear, the median duration was 13 (IQR 10-16) days. Treatment durations varied widely within and across PICUs. In multivariable linear regression, longer treatment durations were associated with severity of illness (+ 0.4 days longer [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.1 to 0.7, p = 0.007] per unit increase in PRISM-IV) and central nervous system infection (+ 17 days [95% CI, 6.7 to 27.4], p = 0.001). Age and pathogen type were not associated with treatment duration. CONCLUSIONS: Most critically ill children with BSIs received at least two weeks of antimicrobial treatment. Further study is needed to determine whether shorter duration therapy would be effective for selected critically ill children.

Using Virtual Care to Facilitate Direct Hospital Admissions in Outpatients with Worsening COVID-19 Infection.

Recognizing emergency department overcrowding during the COVID-19 pandemic, a pathway to facilitate direct admissions for outpatients with worsening COVID-19 infection was created using the COVID-19 expansion to outpatients (COVIDEO) virtual care program. Outpatients appropriate for direct admission had oxygen saturations consistently <92% without severe respiratory distress. Pulse oximeters were proactively delivered to high-risk patients, and patients contacted the program in the event of worsening symptoms or desaturation persistently <92%. Over a 15-month period, 9,116 outpatients were managed by the program, 164 of whom were hospitalized, and 83 of those hospitalized (50.6%) were directly admitted through this pathway. Of those directly admitted, 10 (12.0%) patients required ICU admission, occurring a median of 4 days from hospital admission. The mortality rate among directly admitted patients was 3.6% (3/83). Implementation of a virtual care program to facilitate direct admissions in outpatients with COVID-19 created a safe, efficient, and patient-centered pathway of care.

Using Prior Culture Results to Improve Initial Empiric Antibiotic Prescribing: An Evaluation of a Simple Clinical Heuristic.

BACKGROUND: A patient's prior cultures can inform the subsequent risk of infection from resistant organisms, yet prescribers often fail to incorporate these results into their empiric antibiotic selection. Given that timely initiation of adequate antibiotics has been associated with improved outcomes, there is an urgent need to address this gap. METHODS: In order to better incorporate prior culture results in the selection of empiric antibiotics, we performed a pragmatic, prospective, hospital-wide intervention: (1) empiric antibiotic prescriptions were assessed for clinically significant discordance with the most recent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) surveillance swab, previous cultures for extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs), and the most recent culture for a Gram-negative (GN) organism; and (2) if discordant, an antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist provided recommendations for alternative therapy. The impact was analyzed using a quasi-experimental design comparing two 9-month periods (pre- and postintervention) at a large academic, tertiary care institution. RESULTS: Clinically significant discordance was identified 99 times in the preintervention period and 86 times in the intervention period. The proportion of patients that received concordant therapy increased from 73% (72/99) in the control group to 88% (76/86) in the intervention group (P = .01). The median time to concordant therapy was shorter in the intervention group than the control group (25 vs 55 hrs, respectively; P < .001; adjusted hazard ratio = 1.95 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.37-2.77; P < .001]). The median duration of unnecessary vancomycin therapy was reduced by 1.1 days (95% CI, .5-1.6 days; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This intervention improved prescribing, with a shorter time to concordant therapy and an increased proportion of patients receiving empiric therapy concordant with prior culture results. The use of unnecessary vancomycin was also reduced.

Metronidazole-associated Neurologic Events: A Nested Case-control Study.

BACKGROUND: Case reports have described instances of peripheral and central nervous system toxicity during treatment with metronidazole; however, no large-scale studies have examined this association. METHODS: We conducted a population-based nested case-control study of adults aged 66 years or older living in Ontario, Canada, between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2017. Cases were individuals who attended hospital for any of cerebellar dysfunction, encephalopathy, or peripheral neuropathy within 100 days of a prescription for either metronidazole or clindamycin. We matched each case patient with up to 10 event-free control subjects who also received metronidazole or clindamycin. We used conditional logistic regression to test the association between metronidazole exposure and neurologic events, with clindamycin as the reference exposure. RESULTS: We identified 1212 cases with recent use of either metronidazole or clindamycin and 12 098 controls. Neurologic adverse events were associated with an increased odds of metronidazole exposure compared to clindamycin (odds ratio [OR], 1.72 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.53-1.94]), which persisted after accounting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and other medication exposures (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.43 [95% CI, 1.26-1.63]). We found a consistent association limited to either central (aOR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.27-1.68]) or peripheral (aOR, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.02-1.76]) nervous system events. Among metronidazole recipients, the overall incidence of neurologic events at 100 days was approximately 0.25%. CONCLUSIONS: Metronidazole is associated with an increased risk of adverse peripheral and central nervous system events relative to clindamycin. Clinicians and patients should be aware of these rare but potentially serious adverse events.