Effectiveness of empiric carbapenem versus non-carbapenem therapy for extended-spectrum ß-lactamase producing Enterobacterales infections in non-intensive care unit patients: a real-world investigation in a hospital with high-prevalence of extended-spectrum ß-lactamase producing Enterobacterales.

Objective: To investigate whether empiric carbapenem therapy, compared to empiric non-carbapenem therapy, was associated with improved clinical outcomes among hospitalized, non-intensive care unit (ICU) patients with extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacterales infections. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult, non-ICU patients admitted with ESBL-producing Enterobacterales infections. Primary outcome was time to clinical stability from the first empiric antibiotic dose. Secondary outcomes were early clinical response and 30-day all-cause hospital readmission. We used multivariate regression methods to examine time to clinical stability. Results: Of the 142 patients, 59 (42%) received empiric carbapenems and 83 (58%) received empiric non-carbapenems, most commonly ceftriaxone (49/83, 59%). Median age was 59 years. The most common infection source was urinary (71%). The carbapenem group had a higher proportion of patients who received antibiotics within 6 months of admission (55% vs 28%, P < .01) and history of ESBL (57% vs 17%, P < .01). There were no significant differences in hours until clinical stability between the carbapenem and non-carbapenem groups (22 (IQR: 0, 85) vs 19 (IQR: 0, 69), P = .54). Early clinical response (88% vs 90%, P = .79) and 30-day all-cause hospital readmission (17% vs 8%, P = .13) were similar between groups. Conclusion: Among hospitalized non-ICU patients with ESBL-producing Enterobacterales infection, we found no difference in time to clinical stability after the first empiric antibiotic dose between those receiving carbapenems and those who did not. Our data suggest that empiric carbapenem use may not be an important driver of clinical response in patients with less severe ESBL-producing Enterobacterales infection.

Pharmacist-Led Programs to Increase Statin Prescribing: A Narrative Review of the Literature.

Statins are lipid-lowing medications shown to reduce cardiovascular events and are recommended for specific patient populations at elevated risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Despite the demonstrated efficacy of statins for reducing ASCVD risk, and guidance on which populations should receive statin therapy, a substantial portion of eligible patients are not prescribed statin therapy. Pharmacists have attempted to increase the number of eligible patients receiving appropriate statin therapy through a variety of interventions and across several clinical settings. In this article, we highlight multiple studies evaluating the effectiveness of pharmacist-led interventions to improve statin use. A total of seven studies were selected for this narrative review, demonstrating the effectiveness and barriers of different statin-initiation programs delivered by pharmacists to increase statin use in eligible patients. Among the interventions assessed, a combination of provider communicating and statin prescribing through collaborative drug therapy management (CDTM) appear to the be the most useful at increasing statin use. Pharmacists can significantly improve statin use rates among eligible patients through multiple intervention types and across different clinical settings. Further studies should evaluate continued statin adherence and clinical outcomes among patients served by pharmacists.