Search

Background: Approximately 30% of antimicrobials prescribed in the outpatient setting are unnecessary and up to 50% are inappropriate. Despite this, antimicrobial stewardship (AS) efforts mostly focus on the inpatient setting, and limited data describe AS interventions at hospital discharge. Acknowledging the potential value of discharge AS, we used our existing resources to review discharge oral antimicrobial prescriptions., Objective: The primary objective of this retrospective, single-center study was to evaluate the impact of an AS program on discharge oral antimicrobial prescriptions., Methods: Discharge oral antimicrobial prescriptions sent to our hospital-operated outpatient pharmacy, reviewed by an infectious diseases (ID) pharmacist, and recorded into our data collection tool from September 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, were evaluated retrospectively. The primary outcome was to identify the frequency a drug-related problem (DRP) was identified by an ID pharmacist. Secondary outcomes included DRP characterization, percentage of prescriptions with interventions, intervention acceptance rate, and reduction in antimicrobial days dispensed at discharge when interventions to limit treatment duration were accepted., Results: Of the 803 discharge oral antimicrobial prescriptions reviewed, at least 1 DRP was identified in 43.1% (346/803). The most frequently identified DRPs pertained to treatment duration, drug selection, and dose selection. At least 1 intervention was recommended in 42.8% (344/803) of prescriptions. In total, 438 interventions were made and the acceptance rate was 75.6% (331/438). The most common types of interventions included recommendations for a different duration, a different dose or frequency, and antimicrobial discontinuation. When interventions to reduce treatment duration were accepted, the median (interquartile range) number of antimicrobial days decreased from 8 (5-10) days to 4 (0-5.5) days ( P < 0.001)., Conclusion and Relevance: An ID pharmacist's review of discharge oral antimicrobial prescriptions sent to our hospital-operated outpatient pharmacy resulted in identification of DRPs and subsequent interventions in a substantial number of prescriptions.

Objective: We evaluated the impact of a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) protocol on the vancomycin length of therapy (LOT) for skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs). Design: Retrospective quasi-experimental pre- and post- MRSA nasal PCR protocol implementation study. Setting: Tertiary-care academic medical center in Jacksonville, Florida. Patients: Eligible patients received empiric vancomycin for SSTIs from January 1st to September 30th 2020 (pre-implementation group) and from January 1st to September 30th 2022 (post-implementation group). Intervention: The electronic health system software was modified to provide a best-practice advisory (BPA) prompt to the pharmacist upon order verification of vancomycin for patients with SSTIs. Methods: We reviewed patient records to determine the time from vancomycin prescription to de-escalation. The secondary outcomes were incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), number of vancomycin levels collected, and hospital length of stay (LOS). Results: The study included 131 patients (pre-implementation, n = 86 and post-implementation, n = 45). There was no significant difference in vancomycin length of therapy (LOT) between implementation groups: mean LOT in days and standard deviation (SD) were 2.7 (1.9) and 2.6 (1.3), respectively, p-value 0.493. Of significance, in the post-implementation group, vancomycin LOT between patients with a negative and positive MRSA PCR were 2.3 (1.1) and 3.9 (1.6), p-value 0.006. There was no difference in secondary outcomes. Conclusion: The utilization of the MRSA nasal PCR to guide vancomycin de-escalation did not significantly change the vancomycin LOT, however in the post-implementation group there was a significant difference in vancomycin LOT between negative and positive MRSA PCRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy / Journal Canadien de la Pharmacie Hospitalière is the property of Canadian Society of Hospital Pharmacists and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: The latest vancomycin therapeutic drug monitoring guidelines for serious MRSA infections have made a pivotal change in dosing, switching from targeting trough levels to AUC dosing. Because of these new recommendations, antimicrobial stewardship programs across the country are tasked with implementing AUC based dosing. Objectives: To assess plans for institutional adoption of vancomycin AUC dosing programs and perceptions of currently used programs in hospitals across the US. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to members of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy IDprn Listserv and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists between May and June 2020 to assess current institutional vancomycin dosing. Institutional program use and multiple software user parameters were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Two hundred two pharmacists responded to the survey with the majority practicing in institutions with 251-500 beds. Most respondents have yet to implement AUC dosing (142/202, 70.3%) with many of them planning to do so in the next year (81/142, 57.0%). Of those that already implemented AUC dosing programs, purchased Bayesian software (23/60, 38.3%) and homemade software (21/60, 35.0%) were the 2 methods most frequently utilized. Purchased Bayesian software users were more likely to recommend their software to other institutions and ranked user friendliness higher compared to non-purchased software. Conclusion: Most respondents have not made the switch to vancomycin AUC dosing, but there is a growing interest with many institutions looking to adopt a program within the next year. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Appropriate prescribing of anti-infectives is a public health challenge. In our hospital, clinical microbiologists (clinical microbiology mobile unit, UMMc) and clinical pharmacists (clinical pharmacy, PHAc) carry out interventions on anti-infective prescriptions to improve practices. Our main objective was to evaluate the acceptance of UMMc and PHAc interventions on anti-infective prescriptions by quantifying the rate of prescription change 24 h after intervention. The secondary objective was to characterize the type of intervention and associate the rate of change for each. All prescriptions are computerized, and interventions traced via DxCare® software, which feeds a local data warehouse (HEGP-CDW). This descriptive, retrospective, single-center, uncontrolled study was conducted from January 2015 to December 2018. The data were extracted over this period from the data warehouse and analyzed using R software. UMMc interventions were accepted 72.2% of the time and PHA interventions 87.3%. The types of interventions found were mostly dose adjustments (61.1% for the UMMc and 54.2% for the PHAc) and proposals to change or stop a drug. Interventions have an impact on anti-infective prescriptions and are generally followed by clinicians. For the category "discontinuation of a molecule", almost half of the advice from the UMMc was refused. The collaboration between the UMMc and PHAc should be reinforced to improve acceptance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In the Netherlands, home treatment with intravenous antimicrobial therapy is a relatively new concept. Although several studies have shown that outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) can be administered safely, people receiving antimicrobials at home remain at risk for adverse events, including readmission. Aim The aim of our retrospective study was to identify risk factors for readmission in patients discharged with OPAT. Method Patients who were at least 18 years or older, discharged with OPAT between January 2016–December 2018 were included. Variables that were collected consisted of baseline demographics, complications, readmission within 30 days and treatment failure. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for readmission. Results A total of 247 patients were included; the most common reason for OPAT was bone and joint infections (17%). Penicillin (37%), cephalosporin (26%) and vancomycin/aminoglycoside (15%) were the most commonly prescribed antimicrobials. Among patients receiving medication subject to therapeutic drug monitoring (i.e. aminoglycosides or vancomycin), 51% (19/37) received weekly therapeutic drug monitoring. Receiving aminoglycosides or vancomycin (adjusted OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.30–3.25, p < 0.05) and infection of prosthetic material (adjusted OR 2.92, 95% CI 1.11–7.65, p < 0.05) were independent risk factors associated with readmission. Conclusion Although patients receiving medication subject to therapeutic drug monitoring are at higher risk of readmission, only half of the patients discharged with aminoglycosides or vancomycin were monitored according to IDSA guidelines. A specialized team in charge of monitoring patients with OPAT is more likely to increase the rate of monitoring to prevent readmissions and complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of Review: Antimicrobial stewardship within acute care is common and has been expanding to outpatient areas. Some inpatient antimicrobial stewardship tactics apply to outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) and complex outpatient antimicrobial therapy (COpAT) management, but differences do exist. Recent Findings: OPAT/COpAT is a growing area of practice and research with its own unique considerations for antimicrobial stewardship. Potential ideas for antimicrobial stewardship in the OPAT/COpAT setting include redesigning the regimen to COpAT instead of OPAT, ensuring the use of the shortest effective duration of antimicrobial therapy; using antimicrobials dosed less frequently, such as long-acting glycopeptides; optimizing antimicrobial susceptibility testing reporting for common OPAT/COpAT drugs; and establishing routine laboratory and safety monitoring. Future consensus is needed to determine validated OPAT program metrics and outcomes. Summary: As more focus is placed on outpatient antimicrobial stewardship, clinicians practicing in OPAT should publish more data regarding OPAT program methods and outcomes as they relate to antimicrobial stewardship. These can involve patient clinical outcomes, OPAT readmission rates, OPAT therapy completion, and central line-related complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Objective: The optimal pharmacodynamic parameter for the prediction of efficacy of vancomycin is the area under the concentration–time curve (AUC), and current published data indicate that dosing based on vancomycin trough concentrations is an inaccurate substitute. In this study, our objective was to compare the achievement of therapeutic target attainment after switching from a trough‐based to an AUC‐based dosing strategy as a part of our institution's vancomycin‐per‐pharmacy protocol. Design: Prospective observational quality assurance study. Setting: Academic medical center. Patients: A total of 296 hospitalized adults who received vancomycin and monitoring under our institution's vancomycin‐per‐pharmacy protocol were included in the analysis. The preimplementation retrospective comparison group consisted of 179 patients in whom vancomycin was initiated using a trough‐based dosing strategy between November 22, 2017, and January 22, 2018. The postimplementation group included 117 patients in whom vancomycin was initiated using an AUC‐based dosing strategy using two‐point sampling between June 19, 2018, and July 19, 2018, after hospital‐wide implementation of this protocol on June 19, 2018. Measurements and Main Results: AUC values were calculated from two vancomycin concentrations (peak and trough). The primary outcome was achievement of therapeutic AUC values (400–800 mg·hr/L) in the postimplementation group or therapeutic trough level values (10–20 mg/L) in the preimplementation group. Only 98 (55%) of 179 initial trough values were therapeutic in the preimplementation group (trough‐only dosing method) versus 86 (73.5%) of 117 initial AUC values in the postimplementation group (AUC‐based dosing method) (p=0.0014). A lower proportion of supratherapeutic AUC values was observed in the postimplementation group compared with supratherapeutic trough concentrations in the preimplementation group (1.7% vs 18%, p<0.0001). Overall, 62% of patients with initially therapeutic AUC values had subsequent trough value increases of 25% or greater, occurring at a median of 6 days of vancomycin therapy. Nephrotoxicity occurred in 11% of patients in the preimplementation versus 9.4% in the postimplementation group (p=0.70). Conclusion: Compared with a trough concentration–based dosing strategy, AUC‐based dosing using two‐point sampling improved therapeutic target attainment. Implementation is feasible at any hospital that performs vancomycin peak concentration testing and is a workable alternative to using Bayesian software for estimating AUC. This approach should also be directly compared with AUC‐based dosing using Bayesian software. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This narrative review aims to describe barriers of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy at home (OPAT), potentially compromising general standards of antibiotic stewardship (ABS) and facilitators of OPAT for ABS. Methods: After a literature review, five authors determined the barriers and facilitators to discuss in this review. Results: Sixty-six publications were included in the narrative review and seven barriers and five facilitators are discussed in this article. The impracticability of multiple daily dosing during OPAT, the impact of real-life temperature variations, deviations of the infusion rates of elastomeric devices, access to prolonged intravenous antibiotic therapy, not administering loading doses before the initiation of extended or continuous infusions and the transmural nature of care associated with OPAT, can lead to deviations of recommended treatment regimens and sub-optimal clinical and laboratory follow-up, with a risk of inferior clinical outcomes, adverse events, drug-resistance and higher costs. On the other hand, OPAT provides access to treatments with intravenous antibiotics and simultaneously avoids prolonged hospitalization. Conclusion: Implementing ABS guidelines in OPAT programs, e.g., by using a multidisciplinary team approach and facility-specific protocols for OPAT with patient selection criteria and instructions for selection, storage, preparation and administration of antibiotics, can improve appropriate antibiotic use. Additionally, further research should examine the effectiveness of these interventions on outcomes of OPAT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]