Search

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic brought dramatic changes in the delivery of primary health care across the world, presumably changing the number of consultations for infectious diseases and antibiotic use. We aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on infections and antibiotic prescribing in Dutch primary care. All patients included in the routine health care database of the Julius General Practitioners' Network were followed from March through May 2019 ( n = 389,708) and March through May 2020 ( n = 405,688). We extracted data on consultations for respiratory/ear, urinary tract, gastrointestinal and skin infections using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) codes. These consultations were combined in disease episodes and linked to antibiotic prescriptions. The numbers of infectious disease episodes (total and those treated with antibiotics), complications, and antibiotic prescription rates (i.e., proportion of episodes treated with antibiotics) were calculated and compared between the study periods in 2019 and 2020. Fewer episodes were observed during the pandemic months than in the same months in 2019 for both the four infectious disease entities and complications such as pneumonia, mastoiditis and pyelonephritis. The largest decline was seen for gastrointestinal infections (relative risk (RR), 0.54; confidence interval (CI), 0.51 to 0.58) and skin infections (RR, 0.71; CI, 0.67 to 0.75). The number of episodes treated with antibiotics declined as well, with the largest decrease seen for respiratory/ear infections (RR, 0.54; CI, 0.52 to 0.58). The antibiotic prescription rate for respiratory/ear infections declined from 21% to 13% (difference -8.0% (CI, -8.8 to -7.2)), yet the prescription rates for other infectious disease entities remained similar or increased slightly. The decreases in primary care infectious disease episodes and antibiotic use were most pronounced in weeks 15-19, mid-COVID-19 wave, after an initial peak in respiratory/ear infection presentation in week 11, the first week of lock-down. In conclusion, our findings indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic has had profound effects on the presentation of infectious disease episodes and antibiotic use in primary care in the Netherlands. Consequently, the number of infectious disease episodes treated with antibiotics decreased. We found no evidence of an increase in complications.

Urinary tract infections in the elderly are common. Treatment with nitrofurantoin in men may not be sufficient if concomitant tissue involvement is present, resulting in treatment failure. The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of nitrofurantoin failure in the elderly, and to assess the effect of gender and age. A retrospective observational study was conducted using a Dutch general practice medical record database of 21,789 men and 26,622 women aged 65 years or older in 2015. First, nitrofurantoin prescriptions in 2015 were analyzed. Nitrofurantoin failure (subsequent prescription of antibiotic within 30 days) for men, women, and different age categories were compared. The effect of age and gender was assessed using multivariate logistic regression. A total of 3537 patients had a first nitrofurantoin prescription in 2015; 506 men and 3031 women. Overall, 584 patients (17%) experienced nitrofurantoin failure; 135 (27%) men and 449 (15%) women. Male gender (odds ratio (OR) = 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.68-2.61) and age (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.03) was associated with higher treatment failure. Our findings indicate that in a substantial number of elderly men, nitrofurantoin might not be the appropriate treatment. Nitrofurantoin, as a first choice in elderly men with urinary tract infections, should be reconsidered.

Objectives: Patients can acquire extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae during hospitalization, and colonized patients may transmit these bacteria after discharge, most likely to household contacts. In this study, ESBL transmission was quantified in households., Methods: Faecal samples were longitudinally collected from hospitalized patients colonized with ESBL-producing bacteria and from their household members during hospitalization of the index patient and at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months. A mathematical household model was developed, which allowed for person-to-person transmission, acquisition from other sources (background transmission), and losing carriage. Next, a deterministic population model with a household structure was created, informed by parameter values found in the household model., Results: In all, 74 index patients and 84 household members were included. In more than half of the household members ESBL-producing bacteria were demonstrated at some time during follow up. Person-to-person transmission occurred at a rate of 0.0053/colonized person/day (0.0025-0.011), background transmission at 0.00015/day (95% CI 0.00002-0.00039), and decolonization at 0.0026/day (0.0016-0.0040) for index patients and 0.0090/day (0.0046-0.018) for household members. The estimated probability of transmission from an index patient to a household contact was 67% and 37% vice versa., Conclusion: There is frequent transmission of ESBL-producing bacteria in households, which may contribute to the observed endemicity of ESBL carriage in the Netherlands. However, the population model suggests that there is not a single dominant acquisition route in the community., (Copyright © 2016 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The prevalence of patients colonized with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing bacteria increases, especially in long-term-care facilities (LTCFs). Identification of ESBL carriers at hospital admission is relevant for infection control measures and antibiotic therapy for nosocomial infections. We aimed to develop a prediction rule for ESBL carriage at hospital admission for patients admitted from home and LTCFs, and to quantify incidences of nosocomial infections caused by ESBL-producing bacteria. The ESBL-carrier status was determined of patients admitted from LTCFs and from home settings in four hospitals in the Netherlands using perianal swabs obtained within 48 hours of admission. Risk factors for ESBL carriage were assessed. Infections caused by ESBL-producing bacteria were identified retrospectively. Among 1351 patients, 111 (8.2%) were ESBL carriers at admission: 50/579 (8.6%) admitted from LTCFs and 61/772 (7.9%) from home settings (p 0.63). Previous ESBL carriage and previous hospital admission were risk factors for ESBL carriage in multivariable analysis. The area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curve of the model was 0.64 (95% CI 0.58-0.71). Presence of ≥1 risk factor (n = 803; 59%) had sensitivity of 72%. Incidences of nosocomial infections caused by ESBL-producing bacteria were 45.5/10,000 and 2.1/10,000 admission days for ESBL carriers and non-carriers, respectively (p <0.05). In conclusion, prevalence of ESBL carriage at hospital admission was 8.2%, and was comparable among patients admitted from LTCF and home. A clinically useful prediction rule for ESBL carriage at admission could not be developed. The absolute incidence of nosocomial infections by ESBL-producing bacteria was low, but higher among patients carrying ESBL-producing bacteria at the time of hospital admission., (Copyright © 2014 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)