Search

Purpose Small community hospitals often lack the human, financial, and technological resources necessary to implement and maintain successful antimicrobial stewardship programs now required by national regulatory and accrediting bodies. Creative solutions are needed to address this problem. Summary A 3-stage, quasi-experimental study including patients receiving antibiotics for pneumonia, skin and soft tissue infections, and urinary tract infections at a community hospital in Wisconsin from June 2013 to December 2015 was conducted. Remote telehealth prospective audit and feedback, guideline and order set management, and staff education targeting pharmacists, nurses, and physicians were provided during the 7-month intervention phase; these services were then removed for the postintervention period. Antimicrobial utilization (days of therapy [DOT] per 1,000 patient-days), hospital length of stay, and readmission and 30-day mortality rates were assessed to determine the impact of telehealth services on these outcomes. During the preintervention (baseline), intervention, and postintervention periods, 1,037 patients received antibiotics for the targeted infectious disease conditions. Patient demographics and rates of infectious disease conditions were similar among the different periods. Telehealth antimicrobial stewardship reduced broad-spectrum antibiotic use, including use of imipenem (from 83 to 31 DOT, P < 0.001), levofloxacin (from 123 to 99 DOT, P < 0.001), and vancomycin (from 104 to 85 DOT, P < 0.001), compared to utilization during the baseline period; mean (SD) length of stay also decreased (from 4.6 [2.8] days to 4.2 [2.6] days, P = 0.02). After nonrenewal of telehealth stewardship, vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam usage returned to or exceeded baseline levels. Conclusion The partnership between an academic medical center and a small community hospital improved antimicrobial utilization and clinical outcomes. Successful telehealth antimicrobial stewardship models should be explored further as a means to provide optimal patient care.

Purpose A systematic review was performed to determine if remote stewardship (telestewardship) provides clinical and fiscal benefit and is a feasible alternative to local stewardship programs. Summary Antibiotic resistance is an increasingly important national and global threat. US regulators have made antimicrobial stewardship programs a condition of participation in federally funded healthcare programs, and stewardship programs are surveyed during accreditation visits. Small and rural hospitals are at risk for stewardship noncompliance because lack of resources limits comprehensive stewardship program implementation. Remote stewardship programs are established to remedy this area of partial compliance. To characterize the impact of remote stewardship on selected clinical and fiscal outcomes, PubMed was searched for studies involving telestewardship that reported data on antimicrobial utilization, patient length of stay, mortality, bacterial susceptibility, hospital-acquired Clostridioides difficile infection (HA-CDI), and/or antimicrobial costs. A systematic approach was used to screen study titles, abstracts, and content and data extracted. Study quality was analyzed using Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tools. Fourteen studies were included in the final review. Collectively, the antimicrobial utilization data was positive, with utilization of targeted antimicrobials decreasing after telestewardship implementation. Mixed (both positive and neutral) results were found for patient length of stay, mortality, and HA-CDI rates. Fiscal outcomes were consistently positive. Conclusion Based on the reviewed evidence, remote antimicrobial stewardship programs may aid in the more judicious use of antimicrobials by decreasing utilization rates. More studies are needed to clarify patient-oriented outcomes. Telestewardship has positive effects in terms of cost savings, although savings may be offset by the structure of the program.

Classical stewardship efforts have targeted immunocompetent patients; however, appropriate use of antimicrobials in the immunocompromised host has become a target of interest. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is one of the most common and significant complications after solid-organ transplant (SOT). The treatment of CMV requires a dual approach of antiviral drug therapy and reduction of immunosuppression for optimal outcomes. This dual approach to CMV management increases complexity and requires individualization of therapy to balance antiviral efficacy with the risk of allograft rejection. In this review, we focus on the development and implementation of CMV stewardship initiatives, as a component of antimicrobial stewardship in the immunocompromised host, to optimize the management of prevention and treatment of CMV in SOT recipients. These initiatives have the potential not only to improve judicious use of antivirals and prevent resistance but also to improve patient and graft survival given the interconnection between CMV infection and allograft function.

PurposeThe objective of this study was to implement a standardized process across health systems to determine the prevalence and clinical relevance of prescribing errors intercepted by pharmacists.MethodsThis prospective, multicenter, observational study was conducted across 11 hospitals. Pharmacist-intercepted prescribing errors were collected during inpatient order verification over 6 consecutive weeks utilizing a standardized documentation process. The potential harm of each error was evaluated using a modified National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC-MERP) index with physician validation, and errors were stratified into those with potentially low, serious, or life-threatening harm. Endpoints included the median error rate per 1,000 patient days, error type, and potential harm with correlating cost avoidance.ResultsPharmacists intervened on 7,187 errors, resulting in a mean error rate of 39 errors per 1,000 patient days. Among the errors, 46.6% (n = 3,349) were determined to have potentially serious consequences and 2.4% (n = 175) could have been life-threatening if not intercepted. This equates to $874,000 in avoided cost. The top 3 error types occurring with the highest frequency were “wrong dose/rate/frequency” (n = 2,298, 32.0%), “duplicate therapy” (n = 1,431, 19.9%), and “wrong timing” (n = 960, 13.4%). “Wrong dose/rate/frequency” (n = 49, 28%), “duplicate therapy” (n = 26, 14.9%), and “drug-disease interaction” (n = 24, 13.7%) errors occurred with the highest frequency among errors with potential for life-threatening harm. “Wrong dose/rate/frequency” (n = 1,028, 30.7%), “wrong timing” (n = 573, 17.1%), and “duplicate therapy” (n = 482, 14.4%) errors occurred with the highest frequency among errors with potentially serious harm.ConclusionDocumentation of pharmacist intervention on prescribing errors via a standardized process creates a platform for multicenter analysis of prescribing error trends and an opportunity for development of system-wide solutions to reduce potential harm from prescribing errors.

This pre-post study examines the association between respiratory virus incidence and ambulatory antibiotic orders and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective:Evaluate the difference in antibiotic prescribing between various levels of resident training or attending types.Design:Observational, retrospective study.Setting:Tertiary-care, academic medical center in Madison, Wisconsin.Methods:We measured antibiotic utilization from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2018, in our general medicine (GM) and hospitalist services. The GM1 service is staffed by outpatient internal medicine physicians, the GM2 service is staffed by geriatricians and hospitalists, and the GM3 service is staffed by only hospitalists. The GMA service is led by junior resident physicians, and the GMB service is led by senior resident physicians. We measured utilization using days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 patient days (PD). In a secondary analysis based on antibiotic spectrum, we used average DOT per 1,000 PD.Results:Teaching services prescribed more antibiotics than nonteaching services (671.6 vs 575.2 DOT per 1,000 PD; P < .0001). Junior resident–led services used more antibiotics than senior resident–led services (740.9 vs 510.0 DOT per 1,000 PD; P < .0001). Overall, antibiotic prescribing was numerically similar between various attending physician backgrounds. A secondary analysis showed that GM services prescribed more broad-spectrum, anti-MRSA, and anti-pseudomonal antibiotics than the hospitalist services. GM junior resident–led services prescribed more broad-spectrum, anti-MRSA, and antipseudomonal therapy compared to their senior counterparts.Conclusions:Antibiotics were prescribed at a significantly higher rate in services associated with trainees than those without. Services led by a junior resident physician prescribed antibiotics at a significantly higher rate than services led by a senior resident. Interventions to reduce unnecessary antibiotic exposure should be targeted toward resident physicians, especially junior trainees.

Skin and soft tissue infections, such as cellulitis, are commonly diagnosed in the emergency department and these patients are often admitted to the hospital for intravenous antibiotic therapy. Oritavancin is a novel antibiotic approved for the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections that is administered as a one-time infusion. While oritavancin has demonstrated comparable efficacy with multi-dose parenteral antibiotics in clinical trials and has been proposed as an alternative to admission for emergency department patients, there is a paucity of available real world effectiveness data. In this case series, we describe the characteristics and outcomes of ten patients with high-risk skin and soft tissue infections who received oritavancin and were discharged from the emergency department.

Alternative antibiotics for surgical prophylaxis are associated with increased adverse events and surgical site infection compared to cefazolin. In a sample of perioperative inpatients from 100 hospitals in the United States, cefazolin was 9-fold less likely to be used in patients with a documented β-lactam allergy whereas clindamycin was 45-fold more likely.

While current research efforts focus primarily on identifying patient level interventions that mitigate the direct impact of COVID-19, it is important to consider the collateral effects of COVID-19 on antimicrobial resistance. Early reports suggest high rates of antibiotic utilization in COVID-19 patients despite their lack of direct activity against viral pathogens. The ongoing pandemic is exacerbating known barriers to optimal antibiotic stewardship in the ED, representing an additional direct threat to patient safety and public health. There is an urgent need for research analyzing overall and COVID-19 specific antibiotic prescribing trends in the ED. Optimizing ED stewardship during COVID-19 will likely require a combination of traditional stewardship approaches (e.g. academic detailing, provider education, care pathways) and effective implementation of host response biomarkers and rapid COVID-19 diagnostics. Antibiotic stewardship interventions with demonstrated efficacy in mitigating the impact of COVID-19 on ED prescribing should be widely disseminated and inform the ongoing pandemic response.

In a multicenter point-prevalence study, we found that the rate of supportive care was high; among those receiving COVID-19 drug therapies, adverse reactions occurred in 12% of patients.There are currently no FDA-approved medications for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). At the onset of the pandemic, off-label medication use was supported by limited or no clinical data. We sought to characterize experimental COVID-19 therapies and identify safety signals during this period.We conducted a noninterventional, multicenter, point prevalence study of patients hospitalized with suspected/confirmed COVID-19. Clinical and treatment characteristics within a 24-hour window were evaluated in a random sample of up to 30 patients per site. The primary objective was to describe COVID-19-targeted therapies. The secondary objective was to describe adverse drug reactions (ADRs).A total of 352 patients treated for COVID-19 at 15 US hospitals From April 18 to May 8, 2020, were included in the study. Most patients were treated at academic medical centers (53.4%) or community hospitals (42.6%). Sixty-seven patients (19%) were receiving drug therapy in addition to supportive care. Drug therapies used included hydroxychloroquine (69%), remdesivir (10%), and interleukin-6 antagonists (9%). Five patients (7.5%) were receiving combination therapy. The rate of use of COVID-19-directed drug therapy was higher in patients with vs patients without a history of asthma (14.9% vs 7%, P = 0.037) and in patients enrolled in clinical trials (26.9% vs 3.2%, P0.001). Among those receiving drug therapy, 8 patients (12%) experienced an ADR, and ADRs were recognized at a higher rate in patients enrolled in clinical trials (62.5% vs 22%; odds ratio, 5.9; P = 0.028).While we observed high rates of supportive care for patients with COVID-19, we also found that ADRs were common among patients receiving drug therapy, including those enrolled in clinical trials. Comprehensive systems are needed to identify and mitigate ADRs associated with experimental COVID-19 treatments.

ObjectiveWe conducted a quality improvement initiative to restrict fluoroquinolone prescribing on two inpatient units housing high-risk patients and applied a human factors approach to understanding the barriers and facilitators to success of this intervention by front-line providers.MethodsThis was a mixed-methods, quasi-experimental study. This study was conducted on two inpatient units at a tertiary care academic medical center: the medical-surgical intensive care and abdominal solid organ transplant units. Unit-level data were collected retrospectively for 24 months pre- and post- fluoroquinolone restriction intervention, implemented in July 2016, for all admissions to the study units. Our restriction intervention required antimicrobial stewardship pre-approval for fluoroquinolone prescribing. We explored barriers and facilitators to optimal fluoroquinolone prescribing using semi-structured interviews attending, fellow and resident physicians, advanced practice providers and pharmacists on these units.ResultsHospital-onset C. difficile infection did not decrease significantly, but fluoroquinolone use declined significantly from 111.6 to 19.8 days of therapy per 1000 patient-days without negatively impacting length of stay, readmissions or mortality. Third generation cephalosporin and aminoglycoside use increased post-restriction. Providers identified our institution's strong antimicrobial stewardship program and pharmacy involvement in antimicrobial decision making as key facilitators of fluoroquinolone optimization and patient complexity, lack of provider education and organizational culture as barriers to optimal prescribing.ConclusionsFluoroquinolones can be safely restricted even among high-risk patients without negatively impacting length of stay, readmissions or mortality. Our study provides a framework for successful antimicrobial stewardship interventions informed by perceptions of front line providers.

Objective Oritavancin is a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic approved for use in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections as a single 1200-mg parenteral dose. Because of oritavancin's long half-life and broad gram-positive activity, interest in its use for other infections is high. Methods This study is a retrospective cohort evaluation of patients receiving oritavancin at a single academic medical center. All patients receiving more than one dose of oritavancin were included. Patients were excluded if therapy was interrupted by more than 14 days. Efficacy, defined a priori as clinical success, improvement, or failure, and adverse drug effect outcomes were collected. Results Seventeen patients received multiple oritavancin doses (range 2–18 doses) for the treatment of complicated infections including osteomyelitis, surgical site infection, intravascular infections, and pneumonia. All patients achieved clinical success or improvement with oritavancin. Four patients (24%) had an adverse event requiring oritavancin discontinuation that reversed rapidly. Conclusions Off-label oritavancin use may be a safe and effective alternative to daily antibiotic infusions to treat complicated infectious disease processes. This study is limited by small sample size and retrospective design, but it provides information on using oritavancin in these complex gram-positive infections.

The in vitro activity of meropenem-vaborbactam was examined against clinical carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae isolates collected over 3 years at our medical center. Only 3 KPC-producers were identified. Susceptibility to meropenem-vaborbactam was noted in 15/16 (94%) isolates (MIC90 2 mg/L) that were nonsusceptible to meropenem. Meropenem-vaborbactam may have utility at centers where non–KPC-producers are more frequent.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is an established strategy to optimize antifungal therapy with certain triazoles. While established relationships exist between concentration and safety or efficacy, the impact of TDM timing on outcomes is unknown. We report clinical outcomes, including antifungal exposure and mortality, in patients receiving institutional versus reference laboratory TDM. The availability of in-house triazole assays reduced the time to drug concentration result (12 versus 68 h; P < 0.001) and time to achieve therapeutic serum concentrations (10 versus 31 days; P < 0.001). Subtherapeutic concentrations were associated with higher patient mortality (32% versus 13.3%; P = 0.036).

Background Treatment guidelines for pneumonia recommend beta-lactam antibiotic-based therapy. Although reported penicillin allergy is common, more than 90% of patients with reported penicillin allergy are not allergic. Objective We evaluated the association of a documented penicillin and/or cephalosporin (P/C) allergy to antibiotic use for the treatment of inpatient pneumonia. Methods This was a national cross-sectional study conducted among Vizient, Inc., network hospitals that voluntarily contributed data. Among hospitalized patients with pneumonia, we examined the relation of a documented P/C allergy in the electronic health record to prevalence of first-line beta-lactam antibiotic administration and alternative antibiotics using multivariable log-binomial regression with generalized estimating equations. Results Of 2,276 inpatients receiving antibiotics for pneumonia at 95 U.S. hospitals, 450 (20%) had a documented P/C allergy. Compared with pneumonia patients without a documented P/C allergy, patients with a documented P/C allergy had reduced prevalence of first-line beta-lactam antibiotic use (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 0.79; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.69-0.89]). Patients with high-risk P/C reactions (n = 91) had even lower prevalence of first-line beta-lactam antibiotic use (aPR 0.47; 95% CI 0.35-0.64). Alternative antibiotics associated with a higher use in pneumonia patients with a documented P/C allergy included carbapenems (aPR 1.61; 95% CI 1.22-2.13) and fluoroquinolones (aPR 1.52; 95% CI 1.21-1.91). Conclusions Inpatients with documented P/C allergy and pneumonia were less likely to receive recommended beta-lactams and more likely to receive carbapenems and fluoroquinolones. Inpatient allergy assessment may improve optimal antibiotic therapy for the 20% of inpatients with pneumonia and a documented P/C allergy.

IntroductionClostridioides difficileinfection (CDI) is one of the most common healthcare-associated infections in the USA, having high incidence in intensive care units (ICU). Antibiotic use increases risk of CDI, with fluoroquinolones (FQs) particularly implicated. In healthcare settings, antibiotic stewardship (AS) and infection control interventions are effective in CDI control, but there is little evidence regarding the most effective AS interventions. Preprescription authorisation (PPA) restricting FQs is a potentially promising AS intervention to reduce CDI. The FQ Restriction for the Prevention of CDI (FIRST) trial will evaluate the effectiveness of an FQ PPA intervention in reducing CDI rates in adult ICUs compared with preintervention care, and evaluate implementation effectiveness using a human-factors and systems engineering model.Methods and analysisThis is a multisite, stepped-wedge, cluster, effectiveness-implementation clinical trial. The trial will take place in 12 adult medical-surgical ICUs with ≥10 beds, using Epic as electronic health record (EHR) and pre-existing AS programmes. Sites will receive facilitated implementation support over the 15-month trial period, succeeded by 9 months of follow-up. The intervention comprises a clinical decision support system for FQ PPA, integrated into the site EHRs. Each ICU will be considered a single site and all ICU admissions included in the analysis. Clinical data will be extracted from EHRs throughout the trial and compared with the corresponding pretrial period, which will constitute the baseline for statistical analysis. Outcomes will include ICU-onset CDI rates, FQ days of therapy (DOT), alternative antibiotic DOT, average length of stay and hospital mortality. The study team will also collect implementation data to assess implementation effectiveness using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model.Ethics and disseminationThe trial was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (2018-0852-CP015). Results will be made available to participating sites, funders, infectious disease societies, critical care societies and other researchers.Trial registration numberNCT03848689.

tudy Objective As patients with abdominal solid organ transplants (SOT) are at increased risk of polymicrobial intraabdominal infections (IAIs) following transplantation, the objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness and adverse event profile of tigecycline with those of other broad-spectrum therapies for polymicrobial IAIs in this population. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Large academic medical center with multiple outpatient clinics. Patients A total of 81 adult SOT recipients were included who were treated for confirmed or suspected polymicrobial IAIs from 2007–2012; of these patients, 27 received tigecycline and 54 received comparator therapy with a broad-spectrum β-lactam (e.g., piperacillin-tazobactam, cefepime, or meropenem) with or without glycopeptide or lipopeptide gram-positive therapy (vancomycin or daptomycin) (comparator group). Patients in the comparator group were matched to tigecycline-treated patients based on transplant type (kidney, combined kidney-pancreas, combined kidney-liver, or solitary pancreas) in a 1:2 ratio (tigecycline:other broad-spectrum antibiotics). Measurements And Main Results Data on patient demographics, comorbidities, and clinical variables were collected and compared by using bivariate analyses. Clinical outcomes—clinical cure, improvement, or failure, and disease recurrence—as well as death within 1 year were analyzed by bivariate analyses and logistic regression. Clinical cure was lower in the tigecycline group versus the comparator group (40.7% vs 72.2%, p=0.008), but cure combined with improvement was similar between the two groups (85.2% vs 88.9%, p=0.724). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that treatment with comparator antibiotics increased the odds of cure (odds ratio [OR] 1.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15–12.27) and reduced the odds of treatment failure (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.07-4.55) and death within 1 year (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.22–2.86); however, patients receiving comparator antibiotics were more likely to have disease recurrence (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.33–6.36). Patients receiving tigecycline experienced a higher rate of adverse events than those receiving comparator antibiotics (29.6% vs 9.3%, p=0.026). Conclusion Patients receiving tigecycline were less likely to achieve optimal clinical outcomes and had more adverse events. Alternative regimens should be selected over tigecycline for treatment of polymicrobial IAIs in abdominal SOT recipients until additional studies are completed to examine its role in this population. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Background Urinary tract infections (UTI) are the most common type of infection in the United States. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report in March 2014 regarding antibiotic use in hospitals reported “UTI” treatment was avoidable at least 39% of the time. The accurate diagnosis and treatment of UTI plays an important role in cost-effective medical care and appropriate antimicrobial utilization. Objective We summarize the most common misperceptions of UTI that result in extraneous testing and excessive antimicrobial treatment. We present 10 myths associated with the diagnosis and treatment of UTI and succinctly review the literature pertaining to each myth. We explore the myths associated with pyuria, asymptomatic bacteriuria, candiduria, and the elderly and catheterized patients. We attempt to give guidance for clinicians facing these clinical scenarios. Discussion From our ambulatory, emergency department, and hospital experiences, patients often have urine cultures ordered without an appropriate indication, or receive unnecessary antibiotic therapy due to over-interpretation of the urinalysis. Conclusions Asymptomatic bacteriuria is common in all age groups and is frequently over-treated. A UTI diagnosis should be based on a combination of clinical symptoms with supportive laboratory information. This review will assist providers in navigating common pitfalls in the diagnosis of UTI.

Antimicrobial resistance is recognized as a global health crisis.[1][1] In the United States alone, more than 2 million patients contract antibiotic-resistant infections that result in 23,000 deaths annually.[2][2] One factor contributing to antimicrobial resistance is antimicrobial misuse or

In response to the antimicrobial resistance crisis, pharmaceutical industry reinvested in and produced new antibiotics. Antimicrobial stewardship programs influence optimal antimicrobial use, which often places them at the cross-roads of resistance and treatments. We surveyed a clinical administration database of US medical centers between 2014 and 2018 for index antimicrobial utilization date of six Qualified Infectious Diseases Products (QIDP). Among 132 hospitals identified, the median time to use any agent was 398 days (range 13 to >1478 days). QIDP antibiotic use was more likely among academic medical centers (range 34%–88%) and hospitals >400 beds (range 39%–86%) compared to non-academic medical center (3–51%) and smaller and hospitals (range 0%–61%). The South was quickest to use all QIDP (median 733 days), while the Northeast was longest at 1370 days. New antimicrobials have limited clinical use, which impacts manufacturers' ability to stay in the antimicrobial market and further risking a depleted antimicrobial pipeline.

Daptomycin use at our institution changed to ideal body weight dosing based on a published analysis of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic efficacy target attainment, bacterial ecology, and a desire to reduce drug toxicity. The current study compared outcomes between actual body weight and ideal body weight dosing of daptomycin before and after this intervention. In the evaluable group, 69 patients received doses based on actual body weight and 48 patients received doses based on ideal body weight. Patients were treated for documented Enterococcus species, Staphylococcus aureus , or coagulase-negative Staphylococcus infections, including bloodstream, intraabdominal, skin and soft tissue, urinary, and bone. There was no statistically significant difference in clinical success between the groups (88.9% for actual body weight compared to 89.1% for ideal body weight, P = 0.97). After we adjusted for gender, age, body mass index, concomitant 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl–coenzyme A reductase inhibitors, infection type, and organism type, clinical success rates remained similar between groups (adjusted odds ratio of 0.68 in favor of actual body weight, 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.13 to 3.55). Microbiological outcomes, length of stay, mortality, and adverse effects were also similar between groups. Further studies are warranted to confirm that ideal body weight dosing provides similar outcomes to actual body weight dosing for all patients and types of infections and organisms.

Objective.Develop a clinical decision support tool comprised of an electronic medical record alert and antimicrobial stewardship navigator to facilitate antimicrobial stewardship.Design.We analyzed alerts targeting antimicrobial de-escalation to assess the effectiveness of the navigator as a stewardship tool. The alert provides antimicrobial recommendations, then directs providers to the navigator, which includes order management, relevant patient information, evidence-based clinical information, and bidirectional communication capability.Setting.Academic, tertiary care medical center with an electronic medical record.Intervention.Alerts containing stewardship recommendations and immediate access to the navigator were created.Results.Antibiotic use and response data were collected 1 day before stewardship recommendation via the best practice alert (BPA) tool and 1 day after the BPA tool response. A total of 1,285 stewardship BPAs were created. Two hundred and forty-four (18.9%) of the BPAs were created and acted upon within 72 hours for the purpose of de-escalation: 169 (69%) were accepted, 30 (12%) were accepted with modification, and 45 (18%) were rejected. Statistically significant decreases in total antibiotic use as well as in use of broad-spectrum (anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and anti-pseudomonal) agents occurred when accepted recommendations were compared with rejected recommendations.Conclusions.We describe the successful development of a clinical decision support tool to perform prospective audit and feedback comprised of an alert and navigator system featuring evidence-based recommendations and clinical and educational information. We demonstrate that this tool improves antibiotic use through our example of de-escalation.Clinical Trials Identifier.This project was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01573195).

Background Cellulitis is commonly treated in the emergency department (ED). Patients who present with cellulitis incur significant health care costs and may be overtreated with antibiotics. The accurate diagnosis and treatment of cellulitis plays an important role in cost-effective, high-quality medical care, as well as appropriate antibiotic utilization. Objective We aim to describe common fallacies regarding cellulitis. We present 10 myths that result in misdiagnosis, overtreatment, or inappropriate empiric management of cellulitis. Clinical presentation, including swelling and redness, is explored in depth, along with incidence of community-acquired methicillin-resistance Staphylococcus aureus, management of tick bites, and effective antibiotic therapy for cellulitis. Discussion Patients are often treated for cellulitis unnecessarily or inappropriately. Awareness of these myths will help guide providers in clinical decision making in order to effectively tailor treatment for these infections. Conclusions Cellulitis is not as simple as it might seem, and is commonly misdiagnosed in the ED. Noninfectious causes of local symptoms, including lymphedema, venous stasis, and deep vein thrombosis need to be considered. Cellulitis should be treated with empiric antimicrobial therapy based on patient risk factors and regional susceptibility patterns. This review will assist providers in managing cellulitis and avoiding treatment errors that lead to high costs, unwanted side effects for patients, and overuse of antibiotics.

OBJECTIVETo characterize the top 1% of inpatients who contributed to the 6-month antimicrobial budget in a tertiary, academic medical center and identify cost-effective intervention opportunities targeting high-cost antimicrobial utilization.DESIGNRetrospective cohort study.PATIENTSTop 1% of the antimicrobial budget from July 1 through December 31, 2014.METHODSPatients were identified through a pharmacy billing database. Baseline characteristics were collected through a retrospective medical chart review. Patients were presented to the antimicrobial stewardship team to determine appropriate utilization of high-cost antimicrobials and potential intervention opportunities. Appropriate use was defined as antimicrobial therapy that was effective, safe, and most cost-effective compared with alternative agents.RESULTSA total of 10,460 patients received antimicrobials in 6 months; 106 patients accounted for $889,543 (47.2%) of the antimicrobial budget with an antimicrobial cost per day of $219±$192 and antimicrobial cost per admission of $4,733±$7,614. Most patients were immunocompromised (75%) and were followed by the infectious disease consult service (80%). The most commonly prescribed antimicrobials for treatment were daptomycin, micafungin, liposomal amphotericin B, and meropenem. Posaconazole and valganciclovir accounted for most of the prophylactic therapy. Cost-effective opportunities (n=71) were present in 57 (54%) of 106 patients, which included dose optimization, de-escalation, dosage form conversion, and improvement in transitions of care.CONCLUSIONAntimicrobial stewardship oversight is important in implementing cost-effective strategies, especially in complex and immunocompromised patients who require the use of high-cost antimicrobials.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:259–265

Background: Gastric acid suppressant medications used as stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in the intensive care unit (ICU) are often prescribed inappropriately after discharge. We present tools to reduce the use and cost of non-indicated SUP. Objective: To reduce the non-indicated use of SUP after hospital discharge originally started in the ICU, using an education intervention and pharmacist-led medication reconciliation on patient care rounds and at hospital discharge. Methods: In a retrospective medical record review using a historic control, 356 consecutively admitted patients to the medical/surgical ICU at the University of Wisconsin Hospital were assessed for the appropriate use of SUP at admission to the ICU, at transfer to a general care unit, and at hospital discharge. The education intervention involved teaching both the medical and pharmacist staff about indications for SUP using a memorandum and a pocket guide. Pharmacists also conducted medication reconciliation during daily patient care rounds and at discharge to justify medication use. The outcome of this study is the percentage of patients prescribed non-indicated gastric acid suppressants at hospital discharge. This outcome is compared to a previous study conducted at our hospital. Results: Of 356 eligible patients, 308 (86.5%) received SUP while in the ICU. Thirty-nine (11%) were given continuing SUP after discharge from the hospital, of which 31 (8.7%) had no clear indication. This was a 64.3% reduction from the 24.4% found in the prior study (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Educational materials that guide prescribing, pharmacist interaction on patient care rounds, and pharmacist-conducted medication reconciliation significantly reduced the prescribing of non-indicated gastric acid suppressant medications after hospital discharge.

OBJECTIVETo identify themes associated with patient perceptions of antibiotic use and the role of patients in inpatient antimicrobial stewardship.DESIGNWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 30 hospitalized patients using the Health Belief Model as the framework for questions and analysis.SETTINGAn academic tertiary care hospital in Madison, Wisconsin.PARTICIPANTSA total of 30 general medicine inpatients receiving at least 1 anti-infective medication were interviewed.RESULTSParticipants recognized antibiotic resistance as a serious public health threat but expressed low perceived susceptibility to being personally affected by antibiotic resistance. Views of susceptibility were influenced by a high degree of trust in physicians and misperceptions regarding the mechanisms underlying resistance. Participants expressed high self-efficacy and a desire to be involved in their health care. Perceived roles for patients in preventing the inappropriate use of antibiotics ranged from asking questions and speaking up about concerns to active involvement in decision making regarding antibiotic treatments. Few participants reported being offered the opportunity to engage in such shared decision making while hospitalized.CONCLUSIONSOur findings suggest an important role for patients in improving antibiotic use in hospitals. However, patient engagement has not been recognized as a critical component of antimicrobial stewardship programs. Our study suggests that the likelihood of patient engagement in stewardship practices is currently limited by low perceived susceptibility and lack of cues to act. Further investigation into how patients may be engaged as good stewards of antibiotics may reveal new ways to improve antibiotic prescribing practices in the inpatient setting.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:576–582

Electronic health records (EHRs) and clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have the potential to enhance antimicrobial stewardship. Numerous EHRs and CDSSs are available and have the potential to enable all clinicians and antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) to more efficiently review pharmacy, microbiology, and clinical data. Literature evaluating the impact of EHRs and CDSSs on patient outcomes is lacking, although EHRs with integrated CDSSs have demonstrated improvements in clinical and economic outcomes. Both technologies can be used to enhance existing ASPs and their implementation of core ASP strategies. Resolution of administrative, legal, and technical issues will enhance the acceptance and impact of these systems. EHR systems will increase in value when manufacturers include integrated ASP tools and CDSSs that do not require extensive commitment of information technology resources. Further research is needed to determine the true impact of current systems on ASP and the ultimate goal of improved patient outcomes through optimized antimicrobial use.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are established means for institutions to improve patient outcomes while reducing the emergence of resistant bacteria. With the increased adoption and evolution of electronic medical records (EMRs), there is a need to assimilate the tools of ASPs into EMRs, using decision support and feedback. Third-party software vendors provide the mainstay for integration of individual institutional EMR and ASP efforts. Epic is the leading implementer of EMR technology in the United States. A collaboration of physicians and pharmacists are working closely with Epic to provide a more comprehensive platform of ASP tools that may be institutionally individualized. We review the historical relationship between ASPs and the EMR, cite examples of Epic stewardship tools from 3 academic medical centers' ASPs, discuss limitations of these Epic tools, and conclude with the current process in evolution to integrate ASP tools and decision support capacities directly into Epic's EMR.

Hospitals are implementing antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in response to national guidelines to improve the use and to extend the utility of antiinfective drugs. An often implied purpose of ASPs is to curb or reverse the emergence of resistant bacteria. Because antibiotic use causes antibiotic resistance, there is a natural tendency to link local measures of antibiotic use to local measures of bacterial resistance, and the hospital antibiogram is a readily available measure of resistance. We performed a literature review to identify published reports that used hospitalwide and unit-specific antibiograms to assess the relationship of ASP interventions to changes in resistance. Eight studies were identified and reviewed. The relationship between hospital antibiotic use and resistance is complex, and the existing literature has several limitations. Furthermore, the antibiogram itself is neither designed nor well suited to reflect changes in hospital antimicrobial drug use. The literature on the effectiveness of ASPs in reducing resistance continues to emerge, but at this time the antibiogram bears an inconsistent relationship with changes in hospital antibiotic use and cannot be recommended to reliably evaluate an ASP intervention. Interrupted time series analysis is a superior strategy to assess the effect of an ASP intervention on bacterial resistance, but it is not widely used because of its complexity and greater data requirements. Nevertheless, before ASP efforts can be convincingly demonstrated to have a favorable impact on resistance, a more sophisticated approach that links drug use to resistance should become a priority, at least for hospitals that have sufficient resources.

Antistaphylococcal beta-lactams enhance daptomycin activity and have been used successfully in combination for refractory methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections. Ceftaroline possesses MRSA activity, but it is unknown if it improves the daptomycin potency comparably to other beta-lactams. We report a complex patient case of endocarditis who was treated with daptomycin in combination with ceftaroline, which resulted in clearance of a daptomycin-nonsusceptible strain. An in vitro pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model of renal failure was used to simulate the development of daptomycin resistance and evaluate the microbiologic effects of daptomycin plus ceftaroline treatment. Combination therapy with daptomycin and ceftaroline restored daptomycin sensitivity in vivo and resulted in clearance of persistent blood cultures. Daptomycin susceptibility in vitro was increased in the presence of either ceftaroline or oxacillin. Daptomycin at 6 mg/kg of body weight every 48 h was bactericidal in the model but resulted in regrowth and daptomycin resistance (MIC, 2 to 4 μg/ml) with continued monotherapy. The addition of ceftaroline at 200 mg every 12 h after the emergence of daptomycin resistance enhanced bacterial killing. Importantly, daptomycin plus ceftaroline as the initial combination therapy produced rapid and sustained bactericidal activity and prevented daptomycin resistance. Both in vivo - and in vitro -derived daptomycin resistance resulted in bacteria with more fluid cell membranes. After ceftaroline was added in the model, fluidity was restored to the level of the initial in vivo isolate. Daptomycin-resistant isolates required high daptomycin exposures (at least 10 mg/kg) to optimize cell membrane damage with daptomycin alone. Ceftaroline combined with daptomycin was effective in eliminating daptomycin-resistant MRSA, and these results further justify the potential use of daptomycin plus beta-lactam therapy for these refractory infections.

Using pharmacy residents as covert observers, we evaluated compliance with hand hygiene and contact precautions among 101 unique health care workers on entrance, exit, and inside rooms of patients with known or suspected Clostridium difficile infection. Overall compliance rates with hand hygiene upon entering and exiting patient rooms were 63.4% and 69.3%, respectively. However, there was a lack of hand hygiene inside patient rooms for the observed opportunities.

Objective: To report a probable case of vasospastic angina after administration of dihydroergotamine mesylate in a patient without coronary artery disease. Case Summary: A 49-year-old woman with relapsing/remitting multiple sclerosis was admitted for severe headache and pain crisis. She received a single dose of intravenous dihydroergotamine and, within 30 minutes, experienced chest pain, nausea, and vomiting. No changes on electrocardiogram were noted, but cardiac enzyme levels were elevated. Brief episodes of chest pain persisted for several days and resolved spontaneously before the woman's discharge. She had several cardiac risk factors, including cigarette smoking, hypertension, and a family history of coronary artery disease, but cardiac catheterization on hospital day 5 revealed no underlying coronary artery disease. Discussion: Although cardiovascular adverse reactions have been reported with ergotamine tartrate, dihydroergotamine has rarely been linked with such reactions, including coronary vasospasm and myocardial infarction. Prescribing information for dihydroergotamine cautions against its use in patients with coronary artery disease or risk factors for underlying coronary artery disease without a cardiac workup before initiation of therapy. This patient had several cardiac risk factors, but cardiac catheterization revealed no underlying coronary artery disease. Concomitant verapamil therapy for hypertension did not prevent the vasospastic effects of dihydroergotamine. The Naranjo probability scale revealed a probable adverse reaction of vasospastic angina associated with dihydroergotamine. Conclusions: Health-care professionals should be aware of the possibility for vasospastic angina in patients receiving dihydroergotamine who have no underlying coronary artery disease. Prescribing information should be closely followed.