Interventions to de-implement unnecessary antibiotic prescribing for ear infections (DISAPEAR Trial): protocol for a cluster-randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Watchful waiting management for acute otitis media (AOM), where an antibiotic is used only if the child's symptoms worsen or do not improve over the subsequent 2-3 days, is an effective approach to reduce antibiotic exposure for children with AOM. However, studies to compare the effectiveness of interventions to promote watchful waiting are lacking. The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness and implementation outcomes of two pragmatic, patient-centered interventions designed to facilitate use of watchful waiting in clinical practice. METHODS: This will be a cluster-randomized trial utilizing a hybrid implementation-effectiveness design. Thirty-three primary care or urgent care clinics will be randomized to one of two interventions: a health systems-level intervention alone or a health systems-level intervention combined with use of a shared decision-making aid. The health systems-level intervention will include engagement of a clinician champion at each clinic, changes to electronic health record antibiotic orders to facilitate delayed antibiotic prescriptions as part of a watchful waiting strategy, quarterly feedback reports detailing clinicians' use of watchful waiting individually and compared with peers, and virtual learning sessions for clinicians. The hybrid intervention will include the health systems-level intervention plus a shared decision-making aid designed to inform decision-making between parents and clinicians with best available evidence. The primary outcomes will be whether an antibiotic was ultimately taken by the child and parent satisfaction with their child's care. We will explore the differences in implementation effectiveness by patient population served, clinic type, clinical setting, and organization. The fidelity, acceptability, and perceived appropriateness of the interventions among different clinician types, patient populations, and clinical settings will be compared. We will also conduct formative qualitative interviews and surveys with clinicians and administrators, focus groups and surveys of parents of patients with AOM, and engagement of two stakeholder advisory councils to further inform the interventions. DISCUSSION: This study will compare the effectiveness of two pragmatic interventions to promote use of watchful waiting for children with AOM to reduce antibiotic exposure and increase parent satisfaction, thus informing national antibiotic stewardship policy development. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT06034080.

Your Outpatient has Coronavirus Disease 2019: What Are the Treatment Options in the Current Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Variant Climate?

Mutations accumulated by novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Omicron sublineages contribute to evasion of previously effective monoclonal antibodies for treatment or prevention of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Other authorized or approved antiviral drugs such as nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, remdesivir, and molnupiravir are, however, predicted to maintain activity against these sublineages and are key tools to reduce severe COVID-19 outcomes in vulnerable populations. A stepwise approach may be taken to target the appropriate antiviral drug to the appropriate patient, beginning with identifying whether a patient is at high risk for hospitalization or other complications of COVID-19. Among higher risk individuals, patient profile (including factors such as age, organ function, and comedications) and antiviral drug access inform suitable antiviral drug selection. When applied in targeted fashion, these therapies serve as a complement to vital ongoing nonpharmaceutical interventions and vaccination strategies that reduce morbidity and maximize protection against COVID-19.

Prescribing of Outpatient Antibiotics Commonly Used for Respiratory Infections Among Adults Before and During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have impacted outpatient antibiotic prescribing in low- and middle-income countries such as Brazil. However, outpatient antibiotic prescribing in Brazil, particularly at the prescription level, is not well-described. METHODS: We used the IQVIA MIDAS database to characterize changes in prescribing rates of antibiotics commonly prescribed for respiratory infections (azithromycin, amoxicillin-clavulanate, levofloxacin/moxifloxacin, cephalexin, and ceftriaxone) among adults in Brazil overall and stratified by age and sex, comparing prepandemic (January 2019-March 2020) and pandemic periods (April 2020-December 2021) using uni- and multivariate Poisson regression models. The most common prescribing provider specialties for these antibiotics were also identified. RESULTS: In the pandemic period compared to the prepandemic period, outpatient azithromycin prescribing rates increased across all age-sex groups (incidence rate ratio [IRR] range, 1.474-3.619), with the greatest increase observed in males aged 65-74 years; meanwhile, prescribing rates for amoxicillin-clavulanate and respiratory fluoroquinolones mostly decreased, and changes in cephalosporin prescribing rates varied across age-sex groups (IRR range, 0.134-1.910). For all antibiotics, the interaction of age and sex with the pandemic in multivariable models was an independent predictor of prescribing changes comparing the pandemic versus prepandemic periods. General practitioners and gynecologists accounted for the majority of increases in azithromycin and ceftriaxone prescribing during the pandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial increases in outpatient prescribing rates for azithromycin and ceftriaxone were observed in Brazil during the pandemic with prescribing rates being disproportionally different by age and sex. General practitioners and gynecologists were the most common prescribers of azithromycin and ceftriaxone during the pandemic, identifying them as potential specialties for antimicrobial stewardship interventions.

Excellence in Antibiotic Stewardship: A mixed methods study comparing High, Medium, and Low Performing Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Despite antibiotic stewardship programs existing in most acute care hospitals, there continues to be variation in appropriate antibiotic use. While existing research examines individual prescriber behavior, contextual reasons for variation are poorly understood. METHODS: We conducted an explanatory, sequential mixed methods study of a purposeful sample of 7 hospitals with varying discharge antibiotic overuse. For each hospital, we conducted surveys, document analysis, and semi-structured interviews with antibiotic stewardship and clinical stakeholders. Data were analyzed separately and mixed during the interpretation phase, where each hospital was examined as a case, with findings organized across cases using a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats framework to identify factors accounting for differences in antibiotic overuse across hospitals. RESULTS: Surveys included 85 respondents. Interviews included 90 respondents (31 hospitalists, 33 clinical pharmacists, 14 stewardship leaders, 12 hospital leaders). On surveys, clinical pharmacists at hospitals with lower antibiotic overuse were more likely to report feeling: respected by hospitalist colleagues (p=0.001), considered valuable team members (p=0.001), comfortable recommending antibiotic changes (p=0.02). Based on mixed-methods analysis, hospitals with low antibiotic overuse had four distinguishing characteristics: a) robust knowledge of and access to antibiotic stewardship guidance, b) high quality clinical pharmacist-physician relationships, c) tools and infrastructure to support stewardship, and d) highly engaged Infectious Diseases physicians who advocated stewardship principles. CONCLUSION: This mixed-method study demonstrates the importance of organizational context for high performance in stewardship and suggests improving antimicrobial stewardship requires attention to knowledge, interactions, and relationships between clinical teams and infrastructure that supports stewardship and team interactions.

Evaluation of the Infectious Diseases Society of America's Core Antimicrobial Stewardship Curriculum for Infectious Diseases Fellows.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship (AS) programs are required by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and should ideally have infectious diseases (ID) physician involvement; however, only 50% of ID fellowship programs have formal AS curricula. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a workgroup to develop a core AS curriculum for ID fellows. Here we study its impact. METHODS: ID program directors and fellows in 56 fellowship programs were surveyed regarding the content and effectiveness of their AS training before and after implementation of the IDSA curriculum. Fellows' knowledge was assessed using multiple-choice questions. Fellows completing their first year of fellowship were surveyed before curriculum implementation ("pre-curriculum") and compared to first-year fellows who complete the curriculum the following year ("post-curriculum"). RESULTS: Forty-nine (88%) program directors and 105 (67%) fellows completed the pre-curriculum surveys; 35 (64%) program directors and 79 (50%) fellows completed the post-curriculum surveys. Prior to IDSA curriculum implementation, only 51% of programs had a "formal" curriculum. After implementation, satisfaction with AS training increased among program directors (16% to 68%) and fellows (51% to 68%). Fellows' confidence increased in 7/10 AS content areas. Knowledge scores improved from a mean of 4.6 to 5.1 correct answers of 9 questions (P = .028). The major hurdle to curriculum implementation was time, both for formal teaching and for e-learning. CONCLUSIONS: Effective AS training is a critical component of ID fellowship training. The IDSA Core AS Curriculum can enhance AS training, increase fellow confidence, and improve overall satisfaction of fellows and program directors.

Antimicrobial stewardship in solid organ transplant recipients: Current challenges and proposed metrics.

BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are challenging populations for antimicrobial stewardship interventions due to a variety of reasons, including immunosuppression, consequent risk of opportunistic and donor-derived infections, high rates of infection with multi-drug resistant organisms (MDROs), Clostridioides difficile, and need for prolonged antimicrobial prophylaxis. Despite this, data on stewardship interventions and metrics that address the distinct needs of these patients are limited. METHODS: We performed a narrative review of the current state of antimicrobial stewardship in SOT recipients, existing interventions and metrics in this population, and considerations for implementation of transplant-specific stewardship programs. RESULTS: Antimicrobial stewardship metrics are evolving even in the general patient population. Data on metrics applicable to the SOT population are even more limited. Standard process, outcomes, and balancing metrics may not always apply to the SOT population. A successful stewardship program for SOT recipients requires reviewing existing data, applying general stewardship principles, and understanding the nuances of SOT patients. CONCLUSION: As antimicrobial stewardship interventions are being implemented in SOT recipients; new metrics are needed to assess their impact. In conclusion, SOT patients present a challenging but important opportunity for antimicrobial stewards. ABBREVIATIONS: SOT, antimicrobial stewardship program, MDRO, Clostridioides difficile infection, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Infectious Diseases Society of America, prospective audit and feedback, hematopoietic cell transplant, cytomegalovirus, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, surgical site infections, nucleic acid amplification testing, days of therapy, defined daily dose, and length of stay.

Empiric Antibacterial Therapy and Community-onset Bacterial Coinfection in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Multi-hospital Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Antibacterials may be initiated out of concern for bacterial coinfection in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We determined prevalence and predictors of empiric antibacterial therapy and community-onset bacterial coinfections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A randomly sampled cohort of 1705 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in 38 Michigan hospitals between 3/13/2020 and 6/18/2020. Data were collected on early (within 2 days of hospitalization) empiric antibacterial therapy and community-onset bacterial coinfections (positive microbiologic test ≤3 days). Poisson generalized estimating equation models were used to assess predictors. RESULTS: Of 1705 patients with COVID-19, 56.6% were prescribed early empiric antibacterial therapy; 3.5% (59/1705) had a confirmed community-onset bacterial infection. Across hospitals, early empiric antibacterial use varied from 27% to 84%. Patients were more likely to receive early empiric antibacterial therapy if they were older (adjusted rate ratio [ARR]: 1.04 [1.00-1.08] per 10 years); had a lower body mass index (ARR: 0.99 [0.99-1.00] per kg/m2), more severe illness (eg, severe sepsis; ARR: 1.16 [1.07-1.27]), a lobar infiltrate (ARR: 1.21 [1.04-1.42]); or were admitted to a for-profit hospital (ARR: 1.30 [1.15-1.47]). Over time, COVID-19 test turnaround time (returned ≤1 day in March [54.2%, 461/850] vs April [85.2%, 628/737], P < .001) and empiric antibacterial use (ARR: 0.71 [0.63-0.81] April vs March) decreased. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of confirmed community-onset bacterial coinfections was low. Despite this, half of patients received early empiric antibacterial therapy. Antibacterial use varied widely by hospital. Reducing COVID-19 test turnaround time and supporting stewardship could improve antibacterial use.

Investing in the Future: A Role for Professional Societies to Prepare the Next Generation of Healthcare Leaders Through Curriculum Development and Dissemination.

Professional societies serve many functions that benefit constituents; however, few professional societies have undertaken the development and dissemination of formal, national curricula to train the future workforce while simultaneously addressing significant healthcare needs. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has developed 2 curricula for the specific purpose of training the next generation of clinicians to ensure the future infectious diseases (ID) workforce is optimally trained to lead antimicrobial stewardship programs and equipped to meet the challenges of multidrug resistance, patient safety, and healthcare quality improvement. A core curriculum was developed to provide a foundation in antimicrobial stewardship for all ID fellows, regardless of career path. An advanced curriculum was developed for ID fellows specifically pursuing a career in antimicrobial stewardship. Both curricula will be broadly available in the summer of 2021 through the IDSA website.

The Impact of the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion on Racial/Ethnic and Sex Disparities in HIV Testing: National Findings from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

INTRODUCTION: Over half of Americans have not been tested for HIV in their lifetime, and over a third of all HIV diagnoses are made less than a year before progression to AIDS. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion of 2014 had potential to improve HIV and other health screenings. We assessed the differential impacts of Medicaid expansion on racial/ethnic and racial/ethnic-sex disparities in HIV testing. METHODS: Using Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from all 50 states and D.C., we sampled low-income (≤ 138% of the federal poverty level) adults ages 19-64 who were non-pregnant and non-disabled. Using a difference-in-differences (DD) and triple difference-in-differences (DDD) study design, we assessed differential impacts by race/ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, and other) and race/ethnicity-sex between 2011 and 2013 and 2014-2018. Outcomes were (1) ever having received an HIV test and (2) having received an HIV test in the last year. RESULTS: Overall, Medicaid expansion was associated with a significant increase in HIV testing (p = 0.003). White females and Black males appeared most likely to benefit from this increase (DD 4.5 and 4.8 percentage points; p = 0.001 and 0.130 respectively). However, despite having baseline higher rates of HIV diagnosis, Black and Hispanic females did not have increased rates of ever having HIV testing following Medicaid expansion (DD - 1.9 and 0.9 percentage points; p = 0.391 and 0.703, respectively), including when compared to a White male reference subgroup and across other race/ethnicity-sex subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion was associated with an increased overall probability of HIV testing among low-income, nonelderly adults, but certain groups including Black females were not more likely to benefit from this increase, despite being disproportionately affected by HIV at baseline. Targeted and culturally informed interventions to increase Medicaid enrollment and access to primary care may be needed to expand HIV testing in vulnerable groups.

Did Clostridioides difficile testing and infection rates change during the COVID-19 pandemic?

Testing for and incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) was examined at a single center before and during the first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic. Incidence of CDI remained stable but testing statistically significantly decreased during the first surge despite an increase in antibiotic use. There were no new CDI-focused antimicrobial stewardship interventions introduced during this time.

Is Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Therapy Non-Inferior to Antibiotic Therapy in Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Amid growing antimicrobial resistance, there is an increasing focus on antibiotic stewardship efforts to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. In this context, novel approaches for treating infections without antibiotics are being explored. One such strategy is the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs). Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the rates of symptom resolution and infectious complications in adult women with uncomplicated UTIs treated with antibiotics versus NSAIDs. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, CINHAL, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until January 13, 2020, for randomized controlled trials comparing NSAIDs with antibiotics for treatment of uncomplicated UTIs in adult women. Studies comparing symptom resolution between groups were eligible. Two authors screened all studies independently and in duplicate; data were abstracted using a standardized template. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. RESULTS: Five randomized trials that included 1309 women with uncomplicated UTI met inclusion criteria. Three studies (1130 patients) favored antibiotic therapy in terms of symptom resolution. Two studies (179 patients) found no difference between NSAIDs and antibiotics in terms of symptom resolution. Three studies reported rates of pyelonephritis, two of which found higher rates in patients treated with NSAIDs versus antibiotics. Between two studies that reported this outcome (747 patients), patients randomized to NSAIDs received fewer antibiotic prescriptions compared with those in the antibiotics group. Three studies were at low risk of bias, one had an unclear risk of bias, and one was at high risk of bias. DISCUSSION: For the outcomes of symptom resolution and complications in adult women with UTI, evidence favors antibiotics over NSAIDs. PROSPERO: CRD42018114133.

Quantitative Results of a National Intervention to Prevent Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection: A Pre-Post Observational Study.

Background: Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) remains prevalent in hospitals in the United States. Objective: To evaluate the impact of a multimodal intervention in hospitals with elevated rates of health care-associated infection. Design: Pre-post observational evaluation of a prospective, national, clustered, nonrandomized initiative of 3 cohorts of hospitals. Setting: Acute care, long-term acute care, and critical access hospitals, including intensive care units and medical/surgical wards. Participants: Target hospitals had a cumulative attributable difference above the first tertile of performance for Clostridioides difficile infection and another health care-associated infection (such as CLABSI). Some hospitals that did not meet these criteria also participated. Intervention: A multimodal intervention consisting of recommendations and tools for prioritizing and implementing evidence-based infection prevention strategies, on-demand educational videos, webinars led by content experts, and access to content experts. Measurements: Rates of CLABSI and device utilization ratio pre- and postintervention. Results: Between November 2016 and May 2018, 387 hospitals in 23 states and the District of Columbia participated. Monthly preimplementation CLABSI rates ranged from 0 to 71.4 CLABSIs per 1000 catheter-days. Over the study period, the unadjusted CLABSI rate was low and decreased from 0.88 to 0.80 CLABSI per 1000 catheter-days. Between the pre- and postintervention periods, device utilization decreased from 24.05 to 22.07 central line-days per 100 patient-days. However, a decreasing trend in device utilization was also observed during the preintervention period. Limitations: The intervention period was brief. Participation in and adherence to recommended interventions were not fully assessed. Rates of CLABSI were low. Patient characteristics could not be assessed. Conclusion: In hospitals with a disproportionate burden of health care-associated infection, a multimodal intervention did not reduce rates of CLABSI. Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Quantitative Results of a National Intervention to Prevent Hospital-Onset Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection: A Pre-Post Observational Study.

Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) remains one of the most common causes of health care-associated infection (HAI). Objective: To evaluate the effect of education and a tiered, evidence-based infection prevention strategy on rates of hospital-onset MRSA bloodstream infection (BSI). Design: Prospective, national, nonrandomized, interventional, 12-month, multiple cohort, pre-post observational quality improvement project. Setting: Acute care, long-term acute care, and critical access hospitals with a disproportionate burden of HAI. Patients: All patients admitted to participating facilities during the project period. Intervention: A multimodal infection prevention intervention consisting of recommendations and tools for prioritizing and implementing evidence-based infection prevention strategies, on-demand educational videos, Internet-based live educational presentations, and access to content experts. Measurements: Rates of hospital-onset MRSA BSI, overall and stratified by hospital type, during 12-month baseline and postintervention periods. Variation in outcomes across hospital types was examined. Results: Between November 2016 and May 2018, 387 hospitals in 23 states and the District of Columbia participated, 353 (91%) submitted MRSA data, and 172 (49%) indicated that MRSA prevention was a priority. Unadjusted overall rates of hospital-onset MRSA BSI were 0.075 (95% CI, 0.065 to 0.085) and 0.071 (CI, 0.063 to 0.080) per 1000 patient-days in the baseline and postintervention periods, respectively. Limitations: The intervention period was short. Participation and adherence to recommended interventions were not fully assessed. Baseline rates of hospital-onset MRSA BSI were relatively low. Prevention of MRSA was a priority in a minority of participating hospitals. Patient characteristics and other MRSA risk factors were not assessed. Conclusion: In hospitals with a disproportionate burden of HAIs, access to tools to assist with implementation of evidence-based prevention strategies and education resources alone may not be sufficient to prevent MRSA BSI. Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Environmental Panels as a Proxy for Nursing Facility Patients With Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus Colonization.

Background: Most nursing facilities (NFs) lack methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) surveillance programs due to limited resources and high costs. We investigated the utility of environmental screening of high-touch surfaces in patient rooms as a way to circumvent these challenges. Methods: We compared MRSA and VRE culture data from high-touch surfaces in patients' rooms (14450 samples from 6 NFs) and ranked each site's performance in predicting patient colonization (7413 samples). The best-performing sites were included in a MRSA- and a VRE-specific panel that functioned as a proxy for patient colonization. Molecular typing was performed to confirm available concordant patient-environment pairs. Results: We identified and validated a MRSA panel that consisted of the bed controls, nurse call button, bed rail, and TV remote control. The VRE panel included the toilet seat, bed controls, bed rail, TV remote control, and top of the side table. Panel colonization data tracked patient colonization. Negative predictive values were 89%-92% for MRSA and 82%-84% for VRE. Molecular typing confirmed a strong clonal type relationship in available concordant patient-environment pairs (98% for MRSA, 91% for VRE), pointing to common epidemiological patterns for environmental and patient isolates. Conclusions: Environmental panels used as a proxy for patient colonization and incorporated into facility surveillance protocols can guide decolonization strategies, improve awareness of MRSA and VRE burden, and inform efforts to reduce transmission. Targeted environmental screening may be a viable surveillance strategy for MRSA and VRE detection in NFs.

Antimicrobial Stewardship Training for Infectious Diseases Fellows: Program Directors Identify a Curriculum Need.

A needs assessment survey of infectious diseases (ID) training program directors identified gaps in educational resources for training and evaluating ID fellows in antimicrobial stewardship. An Infectious Diseases Society of America-sponsored core curriculum was developed to address that need.

National Survey of Practices to Prevent Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Multidrug-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the extent to which hospital characteristics, infection control practices, and compliance with prevention bundles impacted multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) infections in Thai hospitals. METHODS: From 1 January 2014 to 30 November 2014, we surveyed all Thai hospitals with an intensive care unit and ≥250 beds. Infection control practices for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (MDR-AB) were assessed. Linear regression was used to examine associations between hospital characteristics and prevention bundle compliance and changes in MDRO infection rates. RESULTS: A total of 212 of 245 (86.5%) eligible hospitals responded. Most hospitals regularly used several fundamental infection control practices for MRSA and MDR-AB (ie, contact precautions, private room/cohorting, hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and antibiotic stewardship); advanced infection control practices (ie, active surveillance, chlorhexidine bathing, decolonization for MRSA, and hydrogen peroxide vaporizer for MDR-AB) were used less commonly. Facilities with ≥75% compliance with the MRSA prevention bundle experienced a 17.4% reduction in MRSA rates (P = .03). Although the presence of environmental cleaning services (41.3% reduction, P = .01) and a microbiology laboratory (82.8% reduction, P = .02) were among characteristics associated with decreases in MDR-AB rates, greater compliance with the MDR-AB prevention bundle did not lead to reductions in MDR-AB rates. CONCLUSIONS: Although fundamental MRSA and MDR-AB control practices are used regularly in most Thai hospitals, compliance with more comprehensive bundled prevention approaches is suboptimal. Improving compliance with bundled infection prevention approaches and promoting the integration of certain hospital factors into infection control efforts may help reduce MDRO infections in Thai hospitals.