Search

Background Stratification to categorize patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) as low or high risk for metastatic infection may direct diagnostic evaluation and enable personalized management. We investigated the frequency of metastatic infections in low-risk SAB patients, their clinical relevance, and whether omission of routine imaging is associated with worse outcomes. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study at 7 Dutch hospitals among adult patients with low-risk SAB, defined as hospital-acquired infection without treatment delay, absence of prosthetic material, short duration of bacteremia, and rapid defervescence. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients whose treatment plan changed due to detected metastatic infections, as evaluated by both actual therapy administered and by linking a adjudicated diagnosis to guideline-recommended treatment. Secondary outcomes were 90-day relapse-free survival and factors associated with the performance of diagnostic imaging. Results Of 377 patients included, 298 (79%) underwent diagnostic imaging. In 15 of these 298 patients (5.0%), imaging findings during patient admission had been interpreted as metastatic infections that should extend treatment. Using the final adjudicated diagnosis, 4 patients (1.3%) had clinically relevant metastatic infection. In a multilevel multivariable logistic regression analysis, 90-day relapse-free survival was similar between patients without imaging and those who underwent imaging (81.0% versus 83.6%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.749; 95% confidence interval,.373–1.504). Conclusions Our study advocates risk stratification for the management of SAB patients. Prerequisites are follow-up blood cultures, bedside infectious diseases consultation, and a critical review of disease evolution. Using this approach, routine imaging could be omitted in low-risk patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this retrospective cohort study, selected patients with disseminated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia, but without endovascular infection on echocardiography and 18F-FDG-PET/CT, were free of relapse after IV-oral switch. Mortality was low and similar to patients who received prolonged intravenous treatment. IV-oral switch was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy is developing a national antimicrobial stewardship registry. This registry will report both the quality of antibiotic use in hospitals in the Netherlands and the stewardship activities employed. It is currently unclear which aspects of the quality of antibiotic use are monitored by antimicrobial stewardship teams (A-teams) and can be used as indicators for the stewardship registry. In this pilot study we aimed to determine which stewardship objectives are eligible for the envisioned registry.Methods: We performed an observational pilot study among five Dutch hospitals. We assessed which of the 14 validated stewardship objectives (11 process of care recommendations and 3 structure of care recommendations) the A-teams monitored and documented in individual patients. They provided, where possible, data to compute quality indicator (QI) performance scores in line with recently developed QIs to measure appropriate antibiotic use in hospitalized adults for the period of January 2015 through December 2015 RESULTS: All hospitals had a local antibiotic guideline describing recommended antimicrobial use. All A-teams monitored the performance of bedside consultations in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and the prescription of restricted antimicrobials. Documentation and reporting were the best for the use of restricted antimicrobials: 80% of the A-teams could report data. Lack of time and the absence of an electronic medical record system enabling documentation during the daily work flow were the main barriers hindering documentation and reporting.Conclusions: Five out of 11 stewardship objectives were actively monitored by A-teams. Without extra effort, 4 A-teams could report on the quality of use of restricted antibiotics. Therefore, this aspect of antibiotic use should be the starting point of the national antimicrobial stewardship registry. Our registry is expected to become a powerful tool to evaluate progress and impact of antimicrobial stewardship programs in hospitals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]