Opportunities to Enhance Diagnostic Testing and Antimicrobial Stewardship: A Qualitative Multinational Survey of Healthcare Professionals.

INTRODUCTION: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global public health challenge. Global efforts to decrease AMR through antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) initiatives include education and optimising the use of diagnostic technologies and antibiotics. Despite this, economic and societal challenges hinder AMS efforts. The objective of this study was to obtain insights from healthcare professionals (HCPs) on current challenges and identify opportunities for optimising diagnostic test utilisation and AMS efforts. METHODS: Three hundred HCPs from six countries (representing varied gross national incomes per capita, healthcare system structure, and AMR rates) were surveyed between November 2022 through January 2023. A targeted literature review and expert interviews were conducted to inform survey development. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise survey responses. RESULTS: These findings suggest that the greatest challenges to diagnostic test utilisation were economic in nature; many HCPs reported that AMS initiatives were lacking investment (32.3%) and resourcing (40.3%). High resistance rates were considered the greatest barriers to appropriate antimicrobial use (52.0%). Most HCPs found local and national guidelines to be very useful (≥ 51.0%), but areas for improvement were noted. The importance of AMS initiatives was confirmed; diagnostic practices were acknowledged to have a positive impact on decreasing AMR (70.3%) and improving patient outcomes (81.0%). CONCLUSION: AMS initiatives, including diagnostic technology utilisation, are pivotal to decreasing AMR rates. Interpretation of these survey results suggests that while HCPs consider diagnostic practices to be important in AMS efforts, several barriers to successful implementation still exist including patient/institutional costs, turnaround time of test results, resourcing, AMR burden, and education. While some barriers differ by country, these survey results highlight areas of opportunities in all countries for improved use of diagnostic technologies and broader AMS efforts, as perceived by HCPs. Greater investment, resourcing, education, and updated guidelines offer opportunities to further strengthen global AMS efforts.

Antimicrobials are medications used to treat infections caused by bacteria (e.g. antibiotics), viruses, parasites, and fungi. Over time, these microbes may become resistant to antimicrobials, limiting how well they work. This often happens as a result of overuse, using antimicrobials when there is not an infection, or using an inappropriate antimicrobial. Antimicrobial resistance is a growing global problem. Antimicrobial stewardship programs aim to improve appropriate use of antimicrobials. Diagnostic testing plays an important role in these programs by identifying the microbes responsible for infections so patients can be given the right treatment as quickly as possible. We aimed to obtain the perspective of healthcare professionals from six countries on the challenges of and ways to improve diagnostic testing and antimicrobial stewardship programs. We found that some of the greatest challenges were related to costs. Approximately one-third of participants said that antimicrobial stewardship initiatives were lacking investment (32.3%) and resourcing (40.3%). High rates of antimicrobial resistance were identified as the greatest barriers to appropriate antimicrobial use (52.0%). Participants said that diagnostic practices have a positive impact on decreasing antimicrobial resistance (70.3%) and improving patient outcomes (81.0%). Overall, we found that healthcare professionals consider diagnostic tests to be an important part of antimicrobial stewardship, but there are several barriers to their success, including patient/hospital costs, turnaround time of test results, resourcing, antimicrobial resistance, and education. To overcome these barriers, increased funding, education, and resourcing, regular guideline updates, and development of optimised testing algorithms may help to improve antimicrobial stewardship and ultimately decrease antimicrobial resistance.

Recommendations to Improve Quality of Probiotic Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses.

Importance: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses often report conflicting results when assessing evidence for probiotic efficacy, partially because of the lack of understanding of the unique features of probiotic trials. As a consequence, clinical decisions on the use of probiotics have been confusing. Objective: To provide recommendations to improve the quality and consistency of systematic reviews with meta-analyses on probiotics, so evidence-based clinical decisions can be made with more clarity. Evidence Review: For this consensus statement, an updated literature review was conducted (January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022) to supplement a previously published 2018 literature search to identify areas where probiotic systematic reviews with meta-analyses might be improved. An expert panel of 21 scientists and physicians with experience on writing and reviewing probiotic reviews and meta-analyses was convened and used a modified Delphi method to develop recommendations for future probiotic reviews. Findings: A total of 206 systematic reviews with meta-analysis components on probiotics were screened and representative examples discussed to determine areas for improvement. The expert panel initially identified 36 items that were inconsistently reported or were considered important to consider in probiotic meta-analyses. Of these, a consensus was reached for 9 recommendations to improve the quality of future probiotic meta-analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the expert panel reached a consensus on 9 recommendations that should promote improved reporting of probiotic systematic reviews with meta-analyses and, thereby, assist in clinical decisions regarding the use of probiotics.

Microbiome-Related and Infection Control Approaches to Primary and Secondary Prevention of Clostridioides difficile Infections.

Clostridioides difficile infections (CDIs) have decreased in the past years, but since 2021, some hospitals have reported an increase in CDI rates. CDI remains a global concern and has been identified as an urgent threat to healthcare. Although multiple treatment options are available, prevention strategies are more limited. As CDI is an opportunistic infection that arises after the normally protective microbiome has been disrupted, preventive measures aimed at restoring the microbiome have been tested. Our aim is to update the present knowledge on these various preventive strategies published in the past five years (2018-2023) to guide clinicians and healthcare systems on how to best prevent CDI. A literature search was conducted using databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, and clinicaltrials.gov) for phase 2-3 clinical trials for the primary or secondary prevention of CDI and microbiome and probiotics. As the main factor for Clostridium difficile infections is the disruption of the normally protective intestinal microbiome, strategies aimed at restoring the microbiome seem most rational. Some strains of probiotics, the use of fecal microbial therapy, and live biotherapeutic products offer promise to fill this niche; although, more large randomized controlled trials are needed that document the shifts in the microbiome population.

Lactobacillus Bacteremia and Probiotics: A Review.

Lactobacilli are widely found in nature, are commensal microbes in humans, and are commonly used as probiotics. Concerns about probiotic safety have arisen due to reports of bacteremia and other Lactobacillus-associated infections. We reviewed the literature for articles on the pathogenicity of Lactobacillus spp. bacteremia and reports of probiotics in these patients. Our aim is to review these articles and update the present knowledge on the epidemiology of Lactobacillus spp. bacteremia and determine the role of probiotics in Lactobacillus bacteremia. Lactobacillus bacteremia is infrequent but has a higher risk of mortality and risk factors, including severe underlying diseases, immune system suppression, admission to intensive care units, and use of central venous catheters. A variety of Lactobacillus species may cause bacteremia and may or may not be associated with probiotic exposure. To determine if oral probiotics are the source of these infections, the blood isolates and the oral probiotic strain(s) must be compared by sensitive identification methods. The prevalence of Lactobacillus bacteremia is infrequent but is more common in patients taking probiotics compared to those not taking probiotics. Three probiotics (Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, and Lacticaseibacillus paracasei) were directly linked with blood isolates from bacteremia patients using molecular identification assays.

Next-Generation Sequencing Supports Targeted Antibiotic Treatment for Culture Negative Orthopedic Infections.

The isolation of an infective pathogen can be challenging in some patients with active, clinically apparent infectious diseases. Despite efforts in the microbiology lab to improve the sensitivity of culture in orthopedic implant-associated infections, the clinically relevant information often falls short of expectations. The management of peri-prosthetic joint infections (PJI) provides an excellent example of the use and benefits of newer diagnostic technologies to supplement the often-inadequate yield of traditional culture methods as a substantial percentage of orthopedic infections are culture-negative. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) has the potential to improve upon this yield. Bringing molecular diagnostics into practice can provide critical information about the nature of the infective organisms and allow targeted therapy in these otherwise challenging situations. This review article describes the current state of knowledge related to the use and potential of NGS to diagnose infections, particularly in the setting of PJIs.

Demographic Representation Among Speakers and Program Committee Members at the IDWeek Conference, 2013-2021.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the IDWeek program committee was charged with ensuring gender equity in speaker sessions. Whether this charge also resulted in more opportunities for historically underrepresented speakers is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of trends in the demographic composition of IDWeek speakers and program committee members between 2013 and 2021. We used descriptive statistics to summarize data, χ2 tests to compare speaker demographics between 2013-2016 (before 2016) and 2017-2021 (after 2016), and Cochran-Armitage tests for trend. Each speaker slot was considered an independent event. RESULTS: A total of 5482 speaker slots were filled by 3389 individuals from 2013 to 2021. There was a linear increase in female speakers from 38.6% in 2013 to 58.4% in 2021 (P < .001). The proportion of white speakers decreased overall from 84.9% in 2013 to 63.5% in 2021. Compared with white speakers, more slots were filled by Asian speakers after 2016 versus before 2016 (20.1% vs 14.8%, respectively; P < .001). Program committee members from 2013-2021 were >80% non-Hispanic white; <5% of committee members identified as black, American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, or Hispanic. More program committee slots were filled by women after 2016 than before 2016 (52.7% vs 33.9%; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Intentional consideration of gender equity by the program committee was associated with equitable gender representation of invited speakers at IDWeek after 2016. Gradually, the proportions of IDWeek speakers from historically excluded racial/ethnic approached their respective proportions in the IDSA membership. White speakers remained overrepresented relative to membership proportions until 2021, and gaps in program committee racial/ethnic demographic representation highlights opportunities for continued inclusion, diversity, access, and equity at IDWeek.

Self-reported antibiotic stewardship and infection control measures from 57 intensive care units: An international ID-IRI survey.

We explored the self-reported antibiotic stewardship (AS), and infection prevention and control (IPC) activities in intensive care units (ICUs) of different income settings. A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online questionnaire to collect data about IPC and AS measures in participating ICUs. The study participants were Infectious Diseases-International Research Initiative (IDI-IR) members, committed as per their institutional agreement form. We analyzed responses from 57 ICUs in 24 countries (Lower-middle income (LMI), n = 13; Upper-middle income (UMI), n = 33; High-income (HI), n = 11). This represented (~5%) of centers represented in the ID-IRI. Surveillance programs were implemented in (76.9%-90.9%) of ICUs with fewer contact precaution measures in LMI ones (p = 0.02); (LMI:69.2%, UMI:97%, HI:100%). Participation in regional antimicrobial resistance programs was more significantly applied in HI (p = 0.02) (LMI:38.4%,UMI:81.8%,HI:72.2%). AS programs are implemented in 77.2% of institutions with AS champions in 66.7%. Infectious diseases physicians and microbiologists are members of many AS teams (59%&50%) respectively. Unqualified healthcare professionals(42.1%), and deficient incentives(28.1%) are the main barriers to implementing AS. We underscore the existing differences in IPC and AS programs' implementation, team composition, and faced barriers. Continuous collaboration and sharing best practices on APM is needed. The role of regional and international organizations should be encouraged. Global support for capacity building of healthcare practitioners is warranted.

Overcoming Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Resistance for a More Rational Therapeutic Approach.

Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is an underappreciated source of morbidity and mortality among gram-negative pathogens. Effective treatment options with acceptable toxicity profiles are limited. Phenotypic susceptibility testing via commercial automated test systems is problematic and no Food and Drug Administration breakpoints are approved for any of the first-line treatment options for S maltophilia. The lack of modern pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data for many agents impedes dose optimization, and the lack of robust efficacy and safety data limits their clinical utility. Levofloxacin has demonstrated similar efficacy to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, although rapid development of resistance is a concern. Minocycline demonstrates the highest rate of in vitro susceptibility, however, evidence to support its clinical use are scant. Novel agents such as cefiderocol have exhibited promising activity in preclinical investigations, though additional outcomes data are needed to determine its place in therapy for S maltophilia. Combination therapy is often employed despite the dearth of adequate supporting data.

Bringing Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to the Surface: Is There a Role for Fomites?

Understanding the contribution of routes of transmission, particularly the role of fomites in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission is important in developing and implementing successful public health infection prevention and control measures. This article will look at case reports, laboratory findings, animal studies, environmental factors, the need for disinfection, and differences in settings as they relate to SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Addressing and Inspiring Vaccine Confidence in Black, Indigenous, and People of Color During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we have witnessed profound health inequities suffered by Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC). These manifested as differential access to testing early in the pandemic, rates of severe disease and death 2-3 times higher than white Americans, and, now, significantly lower vaccine uptake compared with their share of the population affected by COVID-19. This article explores the impact of these COVID-19 inequities (and the underlying cause, structural racism) on vaccine acceptance in BIPOC populations, ways to establish trustworthiness of healthcare institutions, increase vaccine access for BIPOC communities, and inspire confidence in COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID-19 in Liver Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected over 93 million people worldwide as of January 14, 2021. Various studies have gathered data on liver transplant patients infected with COVID-19. Here, we discuss the presentation of COVID-19 in immunosuppressed patients with prior liver transplants. We also evaluate patient outcomes after infection. METHODS: We searched the PubMed database for all studies focused on liver transplant patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: We identified eight studies that evaluated COVID-19 infection in liver transplant patients (n=494). Hypertension was the most prevalent comorbidity in our cohort. Calcineurin inhibitors were the most common immunosuppressant medications in the entire cohort. The average time from liver transplant to COVID-19 infection in our cohort was 74.1 months. Fever and cough, at 70% and 62% respectively, were the most common symptoms in our review. In total, 50% of the patients received hydroxychloroquine as treatment for COVID-19. The next most prevalent treatment was azithromycin, given to 30% of patients in our cohort. In total, 80% of the patients were admitted to a hospital and 17% required intensive care unit-level care, with 21% having required mechanical ventilation. Overall mortality was 17% in our review. CONCLUSIONS: Given the immunocompromised status of liver transplant patients, more intensive surveillance is necessary for severe cases of COVID-19 infection. As liver transplantations have been restricted during the COVID-19 pandemic, further investigation is warranted for studying the risk of COVID-19 infection in liver transplant patients.

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ+) Communities and the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Call to Break the Cycle of Structural Barriers.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately impacted lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) communities. Many disparities mirror those of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/AIDS epidemic. These health inequities have repeated throughout history due to the structural oppression of LGBTQ+ people. We aim to demonstrate that the familiar patterns of LGBTQ+ health disparities reflect a perpetuating, deeply rooted cycle of injustice imposed on LGBTQ+ people. Here, we contextualize COVID-19 inequities through the history of the HIV/AIDS crisis, describe manifestations of LGBTQ+ structural oppression exacerbated by the pandemic, and provide recommendations for medical professionals and institutions seeking to reduce health inequities.

Profiles of multidrug-resistant organisms among patients with bacteremia in intensive care units: an international ID-IRI survey.

Evaluating trends in antibiotic resistance is a requisite. The study aimed to analyze the profile of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) among hospitalized patients with bacteremia in intensive care units (ICUs) in a large geographical area. This is a 1-month cross-sectional survey for blood-borne pathogens in 57 ICUs from 24 countries with different income levels: lower-middle-income (LMI), upper-middle-income (UMI), and high-income (HI) countries. Multidrug-resistant (MDR), extensively drug-resistant (XDR), or pan-drug-resistant isolates were searched. Logistic regression analysis determined resistance predictors among MDROs. Community-acquired infections were comparable to hospital-acquired infections particularly in LMI (94/202; 46.5% vs 108/202; 53.5%). Although MDR (65.1%; 502/771) and XDR (4.9%; 38/771) were common, no pan-drug-resistant isolate was recovered. In total, 32.1% of MDR were Klebsiella pneumoniae, and 55.3% of XDR were Acinetobacter baumannii. The highest MDR and XDR rates were in UMI and LMI, respectively, with no XDR revealed from HI. Predictors of MDR acquisition were male gender (OR, 12.11; 95% CI, 3.025-15.585) and the hospital-acquired origin of bacteremia (OR, 2.643; 95%CI, 1.462-3.894), and XDR acquisition was due to bacteremia in UMI (OR, 3.344; 95%CI, 1.189-5.626) and admission to medical-surgical ICUs (OR, 1.481; 95% CI, 1.076-2.037). We confirm the urgent need to expand stewardship activities to community settings especially in LMI, with more paid attention to the drugs with a higher potential for resistance. Empowering microbiology laboratories and reports to direct prescribing decisions should be prioritized. Supporting stewardship in ICUs, the mixed medical-surgical ones in particular, is warranted.

Antimicrobial resistance during the COVID-19 pandemic: the missing patient perspective.

While the use of antibiotics for secondary infections in COVID-19 has been described in scientific literature and guidelines have been issued for their appropriate use, the importance of listening to patients in a systematic manner has often been overlooked. To highlight this issue, we spoke with patients about their experiences with antibiotics as treatment for COVID-19 and their understanding of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). We found that there is a general lack of awareness of the risks of AMR, and even when patients are knowledgeable, fear of COVID-19 and pressure from healthcare providers often override considerations for appropriate use. We present case examples of three patients' experiences and provide recommendations for health systems, healthcare providers, and patients or caregivers on actions they can each take to reduce the risk of AMR during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. We also share ways that the patient community can be empowered to provide their voices to decision-making on both COVID-19 treatment protocols and prescriptions of antibiotics.

Randomized Prospective Open Label Study Shows No Impact on Clinical Outcome of Adding Losartan to Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients with Mild Hypoxemia.

INTRODUCTION: Despite considerable scientific debate, there have been no prospective clinical studies on the effects of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) on the course of COVID-19 infection. Losartan is the ARB that was chosen to be tested in this study. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 and mild hypoxia (receipt of ≤ 3 L/min O2 by nasal cannula) admitted to three hospitals were randomized in a 1:1 ratio within 72 h of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing confirmation to prospectively receive standard of care (SOC) alone or SOC plus losartan 12.5 mg orally every 12 h for 10 days or until hospital discharge, with the option to titrate upward dependent on blood pressure tolerability. Primary composite endpoint was receipt of mechanical ventilation or death before receiving ventilation. Subjects were followed until discharge to home or until an endpoint was met in the hospital. RESULTS: Sixteen subjects received an ARB plus SOC and 15 subjects received SOC alone. The median age was 53 years for both groups. Median time from hospital admission to study enrollment was 2 days (range 1-6) for the ARB group and 2 days (range 1-4) for the SOC group. Mean Charlson comorbidity index was 2 for both groups. One subject in each group achieved the composite endpoint. CONCLUSION: This small prospective randomized open-label study showed no clinically significant impacts of ARB therapy in mildly hypoxemic patients hospitalized with COVID-19 early in the pandemic. A larger prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial would be needed to confirm these findings or capture less pronounced effects and probably should focus on outpatients earlier in disease course. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov; March 27, 2020; NCT04340557.

Potential Roles for Probiotics in the Treatment of COVID-19 Patients and Prevention of Complications Associated with Increased Antibiotic Use.

Medical care for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 is an evolving process. Most COVID-19 inpatients (58-95%) received empiric antibiotics to prevent the increased mortality due to ventilator-associated pneumonia and other secondary infections observed in COVID-19 patients. The expected consequences of increased antibiotic use include antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI). We reviewed the literature (January 2020-March 2021) to explore strategies to reduce these consequences. Antimicrobial stewardship programs were effective in controlling antibiotic use during past influenza epidemics and have also been shown to reduce healthcare-associated rates of CDI. Another potential strategy is the use of specific strains of probiotics shown to be effective for the prevention of AAD and CDI prior to the pandemic. During 2020, there was a paucity of published trials using these two strategies in COVID-19 patients, but trials are currently ongoing. A multi-strain probiotic mixture was found to be effective in reducing COVID-19-associated diarrhea in one trial. These strategies are promising but need further evidence from trials in COVID-19 patients.

Cost-effectiveness of Universal Hepatitis C Screening in Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemiology has shifted from the baby-boomer generation to young women of childbearing age. The health benefits and cost-effectiveness (CE) of screening pregnant women remain controversial. AIM: To systematically review published studies evaluating the CE of screening pregnant women for HCV in the era of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search of CE studies evaluating the costs and benefits of screening pregnant women for HCV. Pertinent information including antiviral agent, drug costs, incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER), and infant care was collected. The authors' definition of the threshold price at which screening was deemed CE was also recorded. The quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reports Standards (CHEERS) checklist. RESULTS: We identified 5 studies that evaluated the ICER of screening pregnant women for HCV. Of these, 2 utilized all oral DAAs, with universal screening CE. The ICER of these 2 studies was $3000 and $41,000 per quality of life-years gained. The remaining studies were interferon-based regimens. Most studies did not include screening of infants. CONCLUSIONS: Universally screening pregnant women for HCV was CE in studies that utilized oral DAAs. Most pharmacoeconomic studies failed to incorporate the impact of vertical transmission on infants.