A Multidisciplinary Evaluation of Prescribing Practices for Prophylactic Antibiotics in Operative and Nonoperative Facial Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supports short-term perioperative prophylaxis for facial fractures. It is unknown, however, whether there is any professional consensus on how to manage these injuries. No multidisciplinary evaluation of the prophylactic antibiotic prescribing patterns for neither operative nor nonoperative facial fractures has been performed. AIM: To evaluate the prophylactic antibiotic prescribing patterns of multiple specialties in operative and nonoperative facial fractures. METHODS: A 14 question anonymous online-based survey was distributed to members of the American Society of Maxillofacial Surgeons (ASMS) and the American Association of Facial Plastic Surgeons to evaluate current practices. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: 205 respondents, including 89 plastic surgeons, 98 otolaryngologists, 12 oral and maxillofacial surgeons, and 7 with double board certification practicing throughout the United States with ranging experience from 11 to 30 years. As expected, preoperative, perioperative, or postoperative prophylactic antibiotics are either "always" or "sometimes" prescribed, 100% of the time with more varied practice upon further inspection. A total of 85.1% either "always" or "sometimes" use antibiotics while awaiting surgery. Dentate segment fractures are the most frequent type of facial fractures to receive prophylactic antibiotics for both operative (90.5%) and nonoperative (84.1%) fractures. Duration of antibiotic use is more varied with the majority providing 3 to 7 days despite current evidence. First generation cephalosporins alone are prescribed by 49% of respondents, which may not adequately cover oral flora. There is no multidisciplinary consensus for prophylactic antibiotics for specific operative fracture types or nonoperative facial fractures, an area with little published evidence.

Bamlanivimab Reduces ED Returns and Hospitalizations and May Reduce COVID-19 Burden on Low-resource Border Hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the effectiveness of bamlanivimab at reducing return emergency department (ED) visits in primarily Latinx/Hispanic patients with mild or moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Secondary aims were to evaluate the prevention of subsequent hospitalizations and deaths in a resource-limited United States (U.S.)-Mexico border hospital. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, open-label interventional study on 270 eligible adult patients diagnosed with mild-moderate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection who met criteria for receiving bamlanivimab from November 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021. The main outcomes of 14-day return visits to the ED and hospitalizations due to COVID-19 were compared between two groups - those who received bamlanivimab (exposed group) and those who did not receive bamlanivimab (unexposed group). Outcomes were analyzed through chi-square tests followed by multivariate regression modeling to adjust for patient demographics, characteristics, and comorbidities. RESULTS: There were 136 COVID-19 patients who received bamlanivimab in the ED prior to discharge and an unexposed group of 134 COVID-19 patients who were evaluated and discharged from the ED without receiving bamlanivimab. Overall, mean age was 61.7 (S.D. +/-13.9) years, mean body mass index (BMI) 31.0 (S.D. +/-6.6) kg/m2, 91.5% identified as Latinx/Hispanic, 51.9% male, and 80.7% reported at least one comorbidity. Most commonly reported comorbidities were obesity (22.6%), hypertension (59.6%), and diabetes (41.1%). The bamlanivimab group had a 22.8% (mean estimate = 0.7717, 95% CI [0.6482, 0.8611]) risk reduction or 84.4% (0.3030, 95% CI = 0.166, 0.554, p=.0001) absolute reduction of ED return visits within 14 days compared to controls after adjusting for chronic kidney disease. The bamlanivimab group had 19.0% (mean estimate=0.8097, 95% CI [0.6451, 0.9087]) risk reduction or 96.2% (0.235, 95% CI 0.100, 0.550, p=0.0008) absolute reduction of subsequent hospitalizations compared to unexposed patients after adjusting for diabetes status. CONCLUSION: Bamlanivimab infusions for high-risk COVID-19 patients in the ED substantially reduced the risk of return visits to the ED and hospitalizations in our primarily Latinx/Hispanic population. Monoclonal antibody infusions may help reduce hospital utilization during COVID-19 surges at U.S.-Mexico border hospitals.