Efficacy and safety of antimicrobial stewardship prospective audit and feedback in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (COVASP): a pragmatic, cluster-randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increased antimicrobial use despite low rates of bacterial co-infection. Prospective audit and feedback is recommended to optimise antibiotic prescribing, but high-quality evidence supporting its use for COVID-19 is absent. We aimed to study the efficacy and safety of prospective audit and feedback in patients admitted to hospital for the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: COVASP was a prospective, pragmatic, non-inferiority, small-unit, cluster-randomised trial comparing prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care with standard of care alone in adults admitted to three hospitals in Edmonton, AB, Canada, with COVID-19 pneumonia. All patients aged at least 18 years who were admitted from the community to a designated study bed with microbiologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 14 days were included if they had an oxygen saturation of 94% or lower on room air, required supplemental oxygen, or had chest-imaging findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were excluded if they were transferred in from another acute care centre, enrolled in another clinical trial that involved antibiotic therapy, expected to progress to palliative care or death within 48 h of hospital admission, or managed by any member of the research team within 30 days of enrolment. COVID-19 unit and critical care unit beds were stratified and randomly assigned (1:1) to the prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care group or the standard of care group. Patients were masked to their bed assignment but the attending physician and study team were not. The primary outcome was clinical status on postadmission day 15, measured using a seven-point ordinal scale. We used a non-inferiority margin of 0·5. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04896866, and is now closed. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and Oct 29, 2021, 1411 patients were screened and 886 were enrolled: 457 into the prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care group, of whom 429 completed the study, and 429 into the standard of care group, of whom 404 completed the study. Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups, with an overall mean age of 56·7 years (SD 17·3) and a median baseline ordinal scale of 4·0 (IQR 4·0-5·0). 301 audit and feedback events were recorded in the intervention group and 215 recommendations were made, of which 181 (84%) were accepted. Despite lower antibiotic use in the intervention group than in the control group (length of therapy 364·9 vs 384·2 days per 1000 patient days), clinical status at postadmission day 15 was non-inferior (median ordinal score 2·0 [IQR 2·0-3·0] vs 2·0 [IQR 2·0-4·0]; p=0·37, Mann-Whitney U test). Neutropenia was uncommon in both the intervention group (13 [3%] of 420 patients) and the control group (20 [5%] of 396 patients), and acute kidney injury occurred at a similar rate in both groups (74 [18%] of 421 patients in the intervention group and 76 [19%] of 399 patients in the control group). No intervention-related deaths were recorded. INTERPRETATION: This cluster-randomised clinical trial shows that prospective audit and feedback is safe and effective in optimising and reducing antibiotic use in adults admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Despite many competing priorities during the COVID-19 pandemic, antimicrobial stewardship should remain a priority to mitigate the overuse of antibiotics in this population. FUNDING: None.

Effect of prospective audit and feedback on inpatient fluoroquinolone use and appropriateness of prescribing.

We report the effect of prospective audit and feedback (PAF) on inpatient fluoroquinolone (FQN) prescriptions. During the PAF period, FQN use decreased from 39.19 to 29.58 days of therapy per 1,000 patient days (P < .001) and appropriateness improved from 68% to 88% (P < .001). High-yield indications to target included noninfectious urinary tract and respiratory presentations.

Impact of an Unsolicited, Standardized Form-Based Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention to Improve Guideline Adherence in the Management of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) improve Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) management. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the effect of unsolicited prospective audit and feedback (PAF) using a standardized SAB bundle form on the management of SAB. METHODS: Multicenter, pre-post quasi-experimental study of inpatients with SAB. The ASP developed an evidence-based SAB management bundle that included recommendations for infectious diseases consultation, blood culture clearance, appropriate empiric and definitive therapy, echocardiography, adequate treatment duration, and source control where applicable. ASP pharmacists performed PAF using a standardized form outlining bundle components. The primary outcome was bundle component adherence. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, and in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients were included (preintervention group, 62; intervention group, 137). Bundle implementation with PAF resulted in significant improvements in infectious diseases consultation (56.5% in preintervention vs 93.4% in intervention group), appropriate definitive antibiotic therapy (83.9% vs 99.3%), ordering echocardiography (72.6% vs 95.6%), and adequate treatment duration (87.0% vs 100%) (all P < .001). Overall bundle adherence increased by 43.8% (P < .001). Readmission and 30-day mortality rates decreased, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Unsolicited PAF using a standardized SAB management bundle significantly improved adherence to evidence-based recommendations. This simple yet effective ASP-driven intervention can ensure consistent management of a highly morbid infection.