Adjuvant intra-articular vancomycin for recalcitrant Staphylococcal prosthetic joint infections of the knee.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic prosthetic joint infection patients who fail conventional two-stage revision surgery are an especially difficult to treat patient population. Consequently, the objective of this study was to investigate the safety and long-term effectiveness of adjuvant intra-articular vancomycin therapy in conjunction with two-stage revision knee arthroplasties for recalcitrant Staphylococcal prosthetic joint infections. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of twelve patients with recalcitrant Staphylococcal prosthetic joint infections of the knee which had failed previous revision surgeries. Each patient subsequently underwent two-stage revision with placement of Hickman catheters to deliver intra-articular vancomycin therapy. In addition, systemic antibiotic therapy was administered for 6 weeks, and long-term follow-up was evaluated then for 5 years. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of the cohort have had no recurrence of their infections at 5 years. Two patients formed fistulas requiring above the knee amputations, and three patients had acute kidney injury. All patients had maximum measurable serum vancomycin trough levels that ranged from 6.1 to 93.6 mcg/mL. CONCLUSION: The aggressive protocol used in this cohort with repeat two-stage revision surgery, intra-articular vancomycin and systemic antibiotics was able to prevent recurrence of infection in most patients, but higher than expected rates of acute kidney injury were observed in this study. Therefore, while intra-articular vancomycin therapy may have some effectiveness in treating recalcitrant prosthetic joint infections, its ability to eradicate all bacterial niduses is unproven, and clinicians should be cognizant of potential adverse events that can occur with this therapy.

Improving Sepsis Outcomes in the Era of Pay-for-Performance and Electronic Quality Measures: A Joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIDP Position Paper.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced the Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) as a pay-for-reporting measure in 2015 and is now planning to make it a pay-for-performance measure by incorporating it into the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program. This joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIPD position paper highlights concerns with this change. Multiple studies indicate that SEP-1 implementation was associated with increased broad-spectrum antibiotic use, lactate measurements, and aggressive fluid resuscitation for patients with suspected sepsis but not with decreased mortality rates. Increased focus on SEP-1 risks further diverting attention and resources from more effective measures and comprehensive sepsis care. We recommend retiring SEP-1 rather than using it in a payment model and shifting instead to new sepsis metrics that focus on patient outcomes. CMS is developing a community-onset sepsis 30-day mortality electronic clinical quality measure (eCQM) that is an important step in this direction. The eCQM preliminarily identifies sepsis using systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, antibiotic administrations or diagnosis codes for infection or sepsis, and clinical indicators of acute organ dysfunction. We support the eCQM but recommend removing SIRS criteria and diagnosis codes to streamline implementation, decrease variability between hospitals, maintain vigilance for patients with sepsis but without SIRS, and avoid promoting antibiotic use in uninfected patients with SIRS. We further advocate for CMS to harmonize the eCQM with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Adult Sepsis Event surveillance metric to promote unity in federal measures, decrease reporting burden for hospitals, and facilitate shared prevention initiatives. These steps will result in a more robust measure that will encourage hospitals to pay more attention to the full breadth of sepsis care, stimulate new innovations in diagnosis and treatment, and ultimately bring us closer to our shared goal of improving outcomes for patients.

Comparison of Adjuvant Clindamycin vs Linezolid for Severe Invasive Group A Streptococcus Skin and Soft Tissue Infections.

Background: Linezolid may be an option for severe group A Streptococcus (GAS) infections based on its potent in vitro activity and antitoxin effects, but clinical data supporting its use over clindamycin are limited. This study evaluated treatment outcomes in patients with severe GAS skin and soft tissue infections who received either linezolid or clindamycin. Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study examined patients with GAS isolated from blood and/or tissue cultures with invasive soft tissue infection or necrotizing fasciitis who underwent surgical debridement and received linezolid or clindamycin for at least 48 hours. The primary outcome was percentage change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score from baseline through 72 hours of hospitalization. Results: After adjustment for time to first surgical intervention among patients with a baseline SOFA score >0 (n = 23 per group), there was no difference in reduction of SOFA score over the first 72 hours in patients receiving clindamycin vs linezolid. In the entire cohort (n = 26, clindamycin; n = 29, linezolid), there was no difference in inpatient mortality (2% vs 1%) or any secondary outcomes, including duration of vasopressor therapy, intensive care unit length of stay, and antibiotic-associated adverse drug events. Conclusions: There was no difference in reduction of critical illness as measured by SOFA score between baseline and 72 hours among patients treated with clindamycin vs linezolid. Given its more favorable side effect profile, linezolid may be a viable option for the treatment of serious GAS infections and should be further studied.

Considerations for long-acting antiretroviral therapy in older persons with HIV.

People with HIV (PWH) can now enjoy longer, healthier lives due to safe and highly effective antiretroviral therapy (ART), and improved care and prevention strategies. New drug formulations such as long-acting injectables (LAI) may overcome some limitations and issues with oral antiretroviral therapy and strengthen medication adherence. However, challenges and questions remain regarding their use in aging populations. Here, we review unique considerations for LAI-ART for the treatment of HIV in older PWH, including benefits, risks, pharmacological considerations, implementation challenges, knowledge gaps, and identify factors that may facilitate uptake of LA-ART in this population.

Crossroads of Antimicrobial and Diagnostic Stewardship: Assessing Risks to Develop Clinical Decision Support to Combat Multidrug-Resistant Pseudomonas.

Background: Early detection of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MDRP) remains challenging. Existing risk prediction tools are difficult to translate to bedside application. The goal of this study was to develop a simple electronic medical record (EMR)-integrated tool for prediction of MDRP infection. Methods: This was a mixed-methods study. We conducted a split-sample cohort study of adult critical care patients with P aeruginosa infections. Two previously published tools were validated using c-statistic. A subset of variables based on strength of association and ease of EMR extraction was selected for further evaluation. A simplified tool was developed using multivariable logistic regression. Both c-statistic and theoretical trade-off of over- versus underprescribing of broad-spectrum MDRP therapy were assessed in the validation cohort. A qualitative survey of frontline clinicians assessed understanding of risks for MDRP and potential usability of an EMR-integrated tool to predict MDRP. Results: The 2 previous risk prediction tools demonstrated similar accuracy in the derivation cohort (c-statistic of 0.76 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .69-.83] and 0.73 [95% CI, .66-.8]). A simplified tool based on 4 variables demonstrated reasonable accuracy (c-statistic of 0.71 [95% CI, .57-.85]) without significant overprescribing in the validation cohort. The risk factors were prior MDRP infection, ≥4 antibiotics prior to culture, infection >3 days after admission, and dialysis. Fourteen clinicians completed the survey. An alert providing context regarding individual patient risk factors for MDRP was preferred. Conclusions: These results can be used to develop a local EMR-integrated tool to improve timeliness of effective therapy in those at risk of MDRP infections.

Improving the Efficiency of Antimicrobial Stewardship Action in Acute Care Facilities.

Inpatient antimicrobial stewardship (AS) programs are quality improvement programs tasked with improving antibiotic practices by augmenting frontline providers' antibiotic prescription. Prospective audit and feedback (PAF) and preauthorization (PRA) are essential activities in the hospital that can be resource intensive for AS teams. Improving efficiency in AS activities is needed when there are limited resources or when programs are looking to expand tasks beyond PAF and PRA, such as broad education or guideline development. Guidance on the creation and maintenance of alerts for the purpose of PAF reviews, modifications of antibiotic restrictions for PRA polices, and overall initiative prioritization strategies are reviewed. In addition, daily prioritization tools, such as the tiered approach, scoring systems, and regression modeling, are available for stewards to prioritize their daily workflow. Using these tools and guidance, AS programs can be productive and impactful in the face of resource limitation or competing priorities in the hospital.

The UTH-UMB Global Health Education Collaboration: Building a Bidirectional Exchange Based on Equity and Reciprocity.

The global health exchange program between the University Teaching Hospitals (UTH) of Lusaka, Zambia and the University of Maryland, Baltimore (UMB) has been operating since 2015. As trainees and facilitators of this exchange program, we describe our experiences working in Lusaka and Baltimore, and strengths and challenges of the partnership. Since 2015, we have facilitated rotations for 71 UMB trainees, who spent four weeks on the Infectious Disease (ID) team at UTH. Since 2019 with funding from UMB, nine UTH ID trainee physicians spent up to six weeks each rotating on various ID consult services at University of Maryland Medical Center (UMMC). Challenges in global health rotations can include inadequate preparation or inappropriate expectations among high-income country trainees, low-value experiences for low- and middle-income country trainees, lack of appropriate mentorship at sites, and power imbalances in research collaborations. We try to mitigate these issues by ensuring pre-departure and on-site orientation for UMB trainees, cross-cultural mentored experiences for all trainees, and intentional sharing of authorship and credit on scientific collaborations. We present a description of our medical education collaboration as a successful model for building equitable and reciprocal collaborations between low- and middle-income countries and high-income countries, and offer suggestions for future program initiatives to enhance global health education equity among participants and organizations.

What Is Left to Tackle in Inpatient Antimicrobial Stewardship Practice and Research.

Despite widespread uptake of antimicrobial stewardship in acute care hospitals, there is ongoing need for innovation and optimization of ASPs. This article discusses current antimicrobial stewardship practice challenges and ways to improve current antimicrobial stewardship workflows. Additionally, we propose new workflows that further engage front line clinicians in optimizing their own antibiotic decision making.

Clinical, contextual and hospital-level factors associated with escalation and de-escalation of empiric Gram-negative antibiotics among US inpatients.

Background: Empiric Gram-negative antibiotics are frequently changed in response to new information. To inform antibiotic stewardship, we sought to identify predictors of antibiotic changes using information knowable before microbiological test results. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study. Survival-time models were used to evaluate clinical factors associated with antibiotic escalation and de-escalation (defined as an increase or decrease, respectively, in the spectrum or number of Gram-negative antibiotics within 5 days of initiation). Spectrum was categorized as narrow, broad, extended or protected. Tjur's D statistic was used to estimate the discriminatory power of groups of variables. Results: In 2019, 2 751 969 patients received empiric Gram-negative antibiotics at 920 study hospitals. Antibiotic escalation occurred in 6.5%, and 49.2% underwent de-escalation; 8.8% were changed to an equivalent regimen. Escalation was more likely when empiric antibiotics were narrow-spectrum (HR 19.0 relative to protected; 95% CI: 17.9-20.1), broad-spectrum (HR 10.3; 95% CI: 9.78-10.9) or extended-spectrum (HR 3.49; 95% CI: 3.30-3.69). Patients with sepsis present on admission (HR 1.94; 95% CI: 1.91-1.96) and urinary tract infection present on admission (HR 1.36; 95% CI: 1.35-1.38) were more likely to undergo antibiotic escalation than patients without these syndromes. De-escalation was more likely with combination therapy (HR 2.62 per additional agent; 95% CI: 2.61-2.63) or narrow-spectrum empiric antibiotics (HR 1.67 relative to protected; 95% CI: 1.65-1.69). Choice of empiric regimen accounted for 51% and 74% of the explained variation in antibiotic escalation and de-escalation, respectively. Conclusions: Empiric Gram-negative antibiotics are frequently de-escalated early in hospitalization, whereas escalation is infrequent. Changes are primarily driven by choice of empiric therapy and presence of infectious syndromes.

Early initiation of three-drug combinations for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii among COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who received three-drug combination regimens for treatment of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) infections during a single-centre outbreak. Our objective was to describe the clinical outcomes and molecular characteristics and in vitro synergy of antibiotics against CRAB isolates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted between April and July 2020 with CRAB infections were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical success was defined as resolution of signs/symptoms of infection without need for additional antibiotics. Representative isolates underwent whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and in vitro synergy of two- or three-drug combinations was assessed by checkerboard and time-kill assays, respectively. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with CRAB pneumonia or bacteraemia were included. Treatment regimens included high-dose ampicillin-sulbactam, meropenem, plus polymyxin B (SUL/MEM/PMB; 72%), SUL/PMB plus minocycline (MIN; 17%) or other combinations (12%). Clinical resolution was achieved in 50% of patients and 30-day mortality was 22% (4/18). Seven patients had recurrent infections, during which further antimicrobial resistance to SUL or PMB was not evident. PMB/SUL was the most active two-drug combination by checkerboard. Paired isolates collected before and after treatment with SUL/MEM/PMB did not demonstrate new gene mutations or differences in the activity of two- or three-drug combinations. CONCLUSIONS: Use of three-drug regimens for severe CRAB infections among COVID-19 resulted in high rates of clinical response and low mortality relative to previous studies. The emergence of further antibiotic resistance was not detected phenotypically or through WGS analysis. Additional studies are needed to elucidate preferred antibiotic combinations linked to the molecular characteristics of infecting strains.

Dexamethasone mitigates remdesivir-induced liver toxicity in human primary hepatocytes and COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic that has caused more than 600 million cases and over six million deaths worldwide. Despite the availability of vaccination, COVID-19 cases continue to grow making pharmacological interventions essential. Remdesivir (RDV) is an FDA-approved antiviral drug for treatment of both hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients, albeit with potential for hepatotoxicity. This study characterizes the hepatotoxicity of RDV and its interaction with dexamethasone (DEX), a corticosteroid often co-administered with RDV for inpatient treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: Human primary hepatocytes and HepG2 cells were used as in vitro models for toxicity and drug-drug interaction studies. Real-world data from hospitalized COVID-19 patients were analyzed for drug-induced elevation of serum ALT and AST. RESULTS: In cultured hepatocytes, RDV markedly reduced the hepatocyte viability and albumin synthesis, while it increased the cleavage of caspase-8 and caspase-3, phosphorylation of histone H2AX, and release of ALT and AST in a concentration-dependent manner. Importantly, co-treatment with DEX partially reversed RDV-induced cytotoxic responses in human hepatocytes. Moreover, data from COVID-19 patients treated with RDV with and without DEX co-treatment suggested that among 1037 patients matched by propensity score, receiving the drug combination was less likely to result in elevation of serum AST and ALT levels (≥ 3 × ULN) compared to the RDV alone treated patients (OR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.22-0.92, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Our findings obtained from in vitro cell-based experiments and patient data analysis provide evidence suggesting combination of DEX and RDV holds the potential to reduce the likelihood of RDV-induced liver injury in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Defining the Optimal Duration of Therapy for Hospitalized Patients With Complicated Urinary Tract Infections and Associated Bacteremia.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available to guide effective antibiotic durations for hospitalized patients with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). METHODS: We conducted an observational study of patients ≥18 years at 24 US hospitals to identify the optimal treatment duration for patients with cUTI. To increase the likelihood patients experienced true infection, eligibility was limited to those with associated bacteremia. Propensity scores were generated for an inverse probability of treatment weighted analysis. The primary outcome was recurrent infection with the same species ≤30 days of completing therapy. RESULTS: 1099 patients met eligibility criteria and received 7 (n = 265), 10 (n = 382), or 14 (n = 452) days of therapy. There was no difference in the odds of recurrent infection for patients receiving 10 days and those receiving 14 days of therapy (aOR: .99; 95% CI: .52-1.87). Increased odds of recurrence was observed in patients receiving 7 days versus 14 days of treatment (aOR: 2.54; 95% CI: 1.40-4.60). When limiting the 7-day versus 14-day analysis to the 627 patients who remained on intravenous beta-lactam therapy or were transitioned to highly bioavailable oral agents, differences in outcomes no longer persisted (aOR: .76; 95% CI: .38-1.52). Of 76 patients with recurrent infections, 2 (11%), 2 (10%), and 10 (36%) in the 7-, 10-, and 14-day groups, respectively, had drug-resistant infections (P = .10). CONCLUSIONS: Seven days of antibiotics appears effective for hospitalized patients with cUTI when antibiotics with comparable intravenous and oral bioavailability are administered; 10 days may be needed for all other patients.

Patterns, Predictors, and Intercenter Variability in Empiric Gram-Negative Antibiotic Use Across 928 United States Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Empiric antibiotic use among hospitalized adults in the United States (US) is largely undescribed. Identifying factors associated with broad-spectrum empiric therapy may inform antibiotic stewardship interventions and facilitate benchmarking. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults discharged in 2019 from 928 hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database. "Empiric" gram-negative antibiotics were defined by administration before day 3 of hospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression models with random effects by hospital were used to evaluate associations between patient and hospital characteristics and empiric receipt of broad-spectrum, compared to narrow-spectrum, gram-negative antibiotics. RESULTS: Of 8 017 740 hospitalized adults, 2 928 657 (37%) received empiric gram-negative antibiotics. Among 1 781 306 who received broad-spectrum therapy, 30% did not have a common infectious syndrome present on admission (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, sepsis, or bacteremia), surgery, or an intensive care unit stay in the empiric window. Holding other factors constant, males were 22% more likely (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.22 [95% confidence interval, 1.22-1.23]), and all non-White racial groups 6%-13% less likely (aOR range, 0.87-0.94), to receive broad-spectrum therapy. There were significant prescribing differences by region, with the highest adjusted odds of broad-spectrum therapy in the US West South Central division. Even after model adjustment, there remained substantial interhospital variability: Among patients receiving empiric therapy, the probability of receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics varied as much as 34+ percentage points due solely to the admitting hospital (95% interval of probabilities: 43%-77%). CONCLUSIONS: Empiric gram-negative antibiotic use is highly variable across US regions, and there is high, unexplained interhospital variability. Sex and racial disparities in the receipt of broad-spectrum therapy warrant further investigation.

Antimicrobials in Animal Agriculture in the United States: A Multidisciplinary Overview of Regulation and Utilization to Foster Collaboration: On Behalf Of the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists.

Given the complexity of antimicrobial resistance and the dire implications of misusing antimicrobials, it is imperative to identify accurate and meaningful ways to understand and communicate the realities, challenges, and opportunities associated with antimicrobial utilization and measurement in all sectors, including in animal agriculture. The objectives of this article are to (i) describe how antimicrobials are regulated and used in US animal agriculture and (ii) highlight realities, challenges, and opportunities to foster multidisciplinary understanding of the common goal of responsible antimicrobial use. Recognition of the realities of medicine, practice, and policy in the agricultural setting is critical to identify realistic opportunities for improvement and collaboration.

Real-world Antimicrobial Stewardship Experience in a Large Academic Medical Center: Using Statistical and Machine Learning Approaches to Identify Intervention "Hotspots" in an Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Program.

Background: Prospective audit with feedback (PAF) is an impactful strategy for antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) activities. However, because PAF requires reviewing large numbers of antimicrobial orders on a case-by-case basis, PAF programs are highly resource intensive. The current study aimed to identify predictors of ASP intervention (ie, feedback) and to build models to identify orders that can be safely bypassed from review, to make PAF programs more efficient. Methods: We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study of inpatient antimicrobial orders reviewed by the University of Maryland Medical Center's PAF program between 2017 and 2019. We evaluated the relationship between antimicrobial and patient characteristics with ASP intervention using multivariable logistic regression models. Separately, we built prediction models for ASP intervention using statistical and machine learning approaches and evaluated performance on held-out data. Results: Across 17 503 PAF reviews, 4219 (24%) resulted in intervention. In adjusted analyses, a clinical pharmacist on the ordering unit or receipt of an infectious disease consult were associated with 17% and 56% lower intervention odds, respectively (adjusted odds ratios [aORs], 0.83 and 0.44; P ≤ .001 for both). Fluoroquinolones had the highest adjusted intervention odds (aOR, 3.22 [95% confidence interval, 2.63-3.96]). A machine learning classifier (C-statistic 0.76) reduced reviews by 49% while achieving 78% sensitivity. A "workflow simplified" regression model that restricted to antimicrobial class and clinical indication variables, 2 strong machine learning-identified predictors, reduced reviews by one-third while achieving 81% sensitivity. Conclusions: Prediction models substantially reduced PAF review caseloads while maintaining high sensitivities. Our results and approach may offer a blueprint for other ASPs.

A Cross-sectional Analysis of Linezolid in Combination with Methadone or Buprenorphine as a Cause of Serotonin Toxicity.

Background: Serotonin toxicity (also referred to as serotonin syndrome) results from medications that affect the neurotransmitter serotonin. The antibiotic linezolid and the opioids methadone and buprenorphine are all reported to cause serotonin toxicity, but the degree of risk with use of linezolid in combination with methadone or buprenorphine is unknown. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of adult patients hospitalized from November 2015 to October 2019 who were administered linezolid in combination with methadone and/or buprenorphine within 24 hours and a subgroup that received the combination for ≥3 days. Cases of serotonin toxicity were identified from the clinical notes in the electronic medical record and were classified as possible or definite based on the clinical record. The Hunter diagnostic criteria were retrospectively applied. Results: There were 494 encounters in which linezolid was administered concurrently with methadone and buprenorphine. The mean patient age was 42.5 years, and 52.4% of encounters were of female patients. The mean duration of concurrent administration was 1.9 days. There were 106 encounters with a duration of concurrent administration ≥3 days (mean, 5.4 days). Two cases of possible serotonin toxicity and 0 cases of definite serotonin toxicity occurred; neither possible case met the Hunter criteria from the available information. Possible cases occurred in 0.40% of all encounters and 1.89% of encounters with ≥3 days of overlap (upper 1-sided 95% CI, 0.87% and 4.06%). Conclusions: Serotonin toxicity occurring during the administration of linezolid in combination with methadone and/or buprenorphine occurred rarely among 494 hospital encounters, including 106 encounters with ≥3 days of overlap. Limitations include potential missed diagnoses of serotonin toxicity and short durations of overlap. Further study evaluating the short-term risk of this combination is needed.

Does calculation method matter for targeting vancomycin area under the curve?

OBJECTIVES: To assess differences in vancomycin AUC estimates from two common, clinically applied first-order pharmacokinetic equation methods compared with Bayesian estimates. METHODS: A cohort of patients who received vancomycin and therapeutic drug monitoring was studied. First-order population pharmacokinetic equations were used to guide initial empirical dosing. After receipt of the first dose, patients had peak and trough serum levels drawn and steady-state AUC was estimated using first-order pharmacokinetic equations as standard care. We subsequently created a Bayesian model and used individual Empirical Bayes Estimates to precisely calculate vancomycin AUC24-48, AUC48-72 and AUC72-96 in this cohort. AUC at steady state (AUCSS) differences from the first-order methods were compared numerically and categorically (i.e. below, within or above 400-600 mg·h/L) to Bayesian AUCs, which served as the gold standard. RESULTS: A total of 65 adult inpatients with 409 plasma samples were included in this analysis. A two-compartment intravenous infusion model with first-order elimination fit the data well. The mean of Bayesian AUC24-48 was not significantly different from AUC estimates from the two first-order pharmacokinetic equation methods (P = 0.68); however, Bayesian AUC48-72 and Bayesian AUC72-96 were both significantly different when compared with both first-order pharmacokinetic equation methods (P < 0.01 for each). At the patient level, categorical classifications of AUC estimates from the two first-order pharmacokinetic equation methods differed from categorizations derived from the Bayesian calculations. Categorical agreement was ∼50% between first-order and Bayesian calculations, with declining categorical agreement observed with longer treatment courses. Differences in categorical agreement between calculation methods could potentially result in different dose recommendations for the patient. CONCLUSIONS: Bayesian-calculated AUCs between 48-72 and 72-96 h intervals were significantly different from first-order pharmacokinetic method-estimated AUCs at steady state. The various calculation methods resulted in different categorical classification, which could potentially lead to erroneous dosing adjustments in approximately half of the patients.

Selection by design: Using job analysis to guide the selection of postgraduate pharmacy residents.

PURPOSE: To help ensure that we were accurately and consistently evaluating applicants to our postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) pharmacy residency program, we performed a job analysis to inform a redesign of our selection process. SUMMARY: A diverse panel of subject matter experts from our program was convened to develop a task inventory; a list of knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics necessary for success in our program; and behavioral snapshots representing especially strong or weak resident performance (ie, critical incidents). After achieving a priori thresholds of consensus, these items were used to augment our application screening instrument (eg, development of anchored rating scales), build an online supplemental application consisting of a personality test and situational judgment test, develop a work sample consisting of a patient case presentation, and enhance the structure of our interviews (eg, by asking a consistent pattern of questions for all candidates). Preceptors reported that the redesigned process was more organized, easier to complete, and facilitated greater rating consistency. CONCLUSION: Job analysis represents an approach to designing selection processes that are more valid, reliable, transparent, and fair. Based on our experiences, recommendations for those who are considering changes to their selection process are provided.