Search

BackgroundAntibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) are required at every hospital regardless of size. We conducted a qualitative study across different hospital settings to examine perspectives of physician and pharmacist stewards about the dynamics within their team and contextual factors that facilitate the success of their programs.MethodsSemistructured interviews were conducted in March-November 2018 with 46 ASP stewards, 30 pharmacists, and 16 physicians, from 39 hospitals within 2 large hospital systems.ResultsWe identified 5 major themes: antibiotic stewards were enthusiastic about their role, committed to the goals of stewardship for their patients and as a public-health imperative, and energized by successful interventions; responsibilities of pharmacist and physician stewards are markedly different, and pharmacy stewards performed the majority of the day-to-day stewardship work; collaborative teamwork is important to improving care, the pharmacists and physicians supported each other, and pharmacists believed that having a strong physician leader was essential; provider engagement strategies are a critical component of stewardship, and recommendations must be communicated in a collegial manner that did not judge the provider competence, preferably through face-to-face interactions; and hospital leadership support for ASP goals and for protected time for ASP activities is critical for success.ConclusionsThe physician-pharmacist team is essential for ASPs; most have pharmacists leading and performing day-to-day activities with physician support. Collaborative, persuasive approaches for ASP interventions were the norm. Stewards were careful not to criticize or judge inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Further research should examine whether this persuasive approach undercuts provider appreciation of stewardship as a public health mandate.

Background Community-acquired pneumonia is a well-studied condition; yet, in the urgent care setting, patient characteristics and adherence to guideline-recommended care are poorly described. Within Intermountain Health, a nonprofit integrated US health care system based in Utah, more patients present to urgent care clinics (UCCs) than emergency departments (EDs) for pneumonia care. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study 1 January 2019 through 31 December 2020 in 28 UCCs within Utah. We extracted electronic health record data for patients aged ≥12 years with ICD-10 pneumonia diagnoses entered by the bedside clinician, excluding patients with preceding pneumonia within 30 days or missing vital signs. We compared UCC patients with radiographic pneumonia (n = 4689), without radiographic pneumonia (n = 1053), without chest imaging (n = 1472), and matched controls with acute cough/bronchitis (n = 15 972). Additional outcomes were 30-day mortality and the proportion of patients with ED visits or hospital admission within 7 days after the index encounter. Results UCC patients diagnosed with pneumonia and possible/likely radiographic pneumonia by radiologist report had a mean age of 40 years and 52% were female. Almost all patients with pneumonia (93%) were treated with antibiotics, including those without radiographic confirmation. Hospital admissions and ED visits within 7 days were more common in patients with radiographic pneumonia vs patients with "unlikely" radiographs (6% vs 2% and 10% vs 6%, respectively). Observed 30-day all-cause mortality was low (0.26%). Patients diagnosed without chest imaging presented similarly to matched patients with cough/acute bronchitis. Most patients admitted to the hospital the same day after the UCC visit (84%) had an interim ED encounter. Pneumonia severity scores (pneumonia severity index, electronic CURB-65, and shock index) overestimated patient need for hospitalization. Conclusions Most UCC patients with pneumonia were successfully treated as outpatients. Opportunities to improve care include clinical decision support for diagnosing pneumonia with radiographic confirmation and development of pneumonia severity scores tailored to the UCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Telehealth improves access to infectious diseases (ID) and antibiotic stewardship (AS) services in small community hospitals (SCHs), but the optimal model has not been defined. We describe implementation and impact of an integrated ID telehealth (IDt) service for 16 SCHs in the Intermountain Healthcare system. Methods The Intermountain IDt service included a 24-hour advice line, eConsults, telemedicine consultations (TCs), daily AS surveillance, long-term AS program (ASP) support by an IDt pharmacist, and a monthly telementoring webinar. We evaluated program measures from November 2016 through April 2018. Results A total of 2487 IDt physician interactions with SCHs were recorded: 859 phone calls (35% of interactions), 761 eConsults (30%), and 867 TCs (35%). Of 1628 eConsults and TCs, 1400 (86%) were SCH provider requests, while 228 (14%) were IDt pharmacist generated. Six SCHs accounted for >95% of interactions. Median consultation times for each initial telehealth interaction type were 5 (interquartile range [IQR], 5–10) minutes for phone calls, 20 (IQR, 15–25) minutes for eConsults, and 50 (IQR, 35–60) minutes for TCs. Thirty-two percent of consults led to in-person ID clinic follow-up. Bacteremia was the most common reason for consultation (764/2487 [31%]) and Staphylococcus aureus the most common organism identified. ASPs were established at 16 facilities. Daily AS surveillance led to 2229 SCH pharmacist and 1305 IDt pharmacist recommendations. Eight projects were completed with IDt pharmacist support, leading to significant reductions in meropenem, vancomycin, and fluoroquinolone use. Conclusions An integrated IDt model led to collaborative ID/ASP interventions and improvements in antibiotic use at 16 SCHs. These findings provide insight into clinical and logistical considerations for IDt program implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Improving antibiotic prescribing in outpatient settings is a public health priority. In the United States, urgent care (UC) encounters are increasing and have high rates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Our objective was to characterize antibiotic prescribing practices during UC encounters, with a focus on respiratory tract conditions. This was a retrospective cohort study of UC encounters in the Intermountain Healthcare network. Among 1.16 million UC encounters, antibiotics were prescribed during 34% of UC encounters and respiratory conditions accounted for 61% of all antibiotics prescribed. Of respiratory encounters, 50% resulted in antibiotic prescriptions, yet the variability at the level of the provider ranged from 3% to 94%. Similar variability between providers was observed for respiratory conditions where antibiotics were not indicated and in first-line antibiotic selection for sinusitis, otitis media, and pharyngitis. These findings support the importance of developing antibiotic stewardship interventions specifically targeting UC settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) improve antibiotic prescribing. Seventy-three percent of US hospitals have <200 beds. Small hospitals (<200 beds) have similar rates of antibiotic prescribing compared to large hospitals, but the majority of small hospitals lack ASPs that satisfy the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's core elements. All hospitals, regardless of size, are now required to have ASPs by The Joint Commission, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has proposed a similar requirement. Very few studies have described the successful implementation of ASPs in small hospitals. We describe barriers commonly encountered in small hospitals when constructing an antibiotic stewardship team, obtaining appropriate metrics of antibiotic prescribing, implementing antibiotic stewardship interventions, obtaining financial resources, and utilizing the microbiology laboratory. We propose potential solutions that tailor stewardship activities to the needs of the facility and the resources typically available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Guidelines recommend a switch from intravenous to oral antibiotics once patients who are hospitalized with pneumonia achieve clinical stability. However, little evidence guides the selection of an oral antibiotic for patients with health care-associated pneumonia, especially where no microbiological diagnosis is made.Objectives: To compare outcomes between patients who were transitioned to broad- versus narrow-spectrum oral antibiotics after initially receiving broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotic coverage.Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of an existing database of adults with community-onset pneumonia admitted to seven Utah hospitals. We identified 220 inpatients with microbiology-negative health care-associated pneumonia from 2010 to 2012. After excluding inpatient deaths and treatment failures, 173 patients remained in which broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotics were transitioned to an oral regimen. We classified oral regimens as broad-spectrum (fluoroquinolone) versus narrow-spectrum (usually a β-lactam). We compared demographic and clinical characteristics between groups. Using a multivariable regression model, we adjusted outcomes by severity (electronically calculated CURB-65), comorbidity (Charlson Index), time to clinical stability, and length of intravenous therapy.Measurements and Main Results: Age, severity, comorbidity, length of intravenous therapy, and clinical response were similar between the two groups. Observed 30-day readmission (11.9 vs. 21.4%; P = 0.26) and 30-day all-cause mortality (2.3 vs. 5.3%; P = 0.68) were also similar between the narrow and broad oral antibiotic groups. In multivariable analysis, we found no statistically significant differences for adjusted odds of 30-day readmission (adjusted odds ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-5.2; P = 0.61) or 30-day all-cause mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-1.6; P = 0.26) between narrow and broad oral antibiotic groups.Conclusions: On the basis of analysis of a limited number of patients observed retrospectively, our findings suggest that it may be safe to switch from broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotic coverage to a narrow-spectrum oral antibiotic once clinical stability is achieved for hospitalized patients with health care-associated pneumonia when no microbiological diagnosis is made. A larger retrospective study with propensity matching or regression-adjusted test of equivalence or ideally a prospective comparative effectiveness study will be necessary to confirm our observations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Antibiotic use and misuse is driving drug resistance. Much of US healthcare takes place in small community hospitals (SCHs); 70% of all US hospitals have <200 beds. Antibiotic use in SCHs is poorly described. We evaluated antibiotic use using data from the National Healthcare and Safety Network antimicrobial use option from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Methods. We used Intermountain Healthcare's monthly antibiotic use reports for 19 hospitals from 2011 to 2013. Hospital care units were categorized as intensive care, medical/surgical, pediatric, or miscellaneous. Antibiotics were categorized based on spectrum of coverage. Antibiotic use rates, expressed as days of therapy per 1000 patient-days (DOT/1000PD), were calculated for each SCH and compared with rates in large community hospitals (LCHs). Negative-binomial regression was used to relate antibiotic use to predictor variables. Results. Total antibiotic use rates varied widely across the 15 SCHs (median, 436 DOT/1000PD; range, 134-671 DOT/1000PD) and were similar to rates in 4 LCHs (509DOT/1000PD; 406-597DOT/1000PD). The proportion of patient-days spent in the respective unit types varied substantially within SCHs and had a large impact on facility-level rates. Broad-spectrum antibiotics accounted for 26% of use inSCHs (range,8%-36%), similar to the proportion in LCHs (32%; range, 26%-37%). Case mix index, proportion of patient-days in specific unit types, and season were significant predictors of antibiotic use. Conclusions. There is substantial variation in patterns of antibiotic use among SCHs. Overall usage in SCHs is similar to usage in LCHs. Small hospitals need to become a focus of stewardship efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]