Home intravenous antibiotic therapy (HIVAT): indications, patients and antimicrobial agents

Successful Integration of Clinical Pharmacists in an OPAT Program: A Real-Life Multidisciplinary Circuit

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) programs encompass a range of healthcare processes aiming to treat infections at home, with the preferential use of the intravenous route. Although several barriers arise during the implementation of OPAT circuits, recent cumulative data have supported the effectiveness of these programs, demonstrating their application in a safe and cost-effective manner. Given that OPAT is evolving towards treating patients with higher complexity, a multidisciplinary team including physicians, pharmacists, and nursing staff should lead the program. The professionals involved require previous experience in infectious diseases treatment as well as in outpatient healthcare and self-administration. As we describe here, clinical pharmacists exert a key role in OPAT multidisciplinary teams. Their intervention is essential to optimize antimicrobial prescriptions through their participation in stewardship programs as well as to closely follow patients from a pharmacotherapeutic perspective. Moreover, pharmacists provide specialized counseling on antimicrobial treatment technical compounding. In fact, OPAT elaboration in sterile environments and pharmacy department clean rooms increases OPAT stability and safety, enhancing the quality of the program. In summary, building multidisciplinary teams with the involvement of clinical pharmacists improves the management of home-treated infections, promoting a safe self-administration and increasing OPAT patients' quality of life.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness, safety and acceptability of community intravenous antibiotic service models: CIVAS systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate evidence of the efficacy, safety, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) models.

DESIGN

A systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database (EED), Research Papers in Economics (RePEc), Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry, Health Business Elite, Health Information Management Consortium (HMIC), Web of Science Proceedings, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy website. Searches were undertaken from 1993 to 2015.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies, except case reports, considering adult patients or practitioners involved in the delivery of OPAT were included. Studies combining outcomes for adults and children or non-intravenous (IV) and IV antibiotic groups were excluded, as were those focused on process of delivery or clinical effectiveness of 1 antibiotic over another. Titles/abstracts were screened by 1 reviewer (20% verified). 2 authors independently screened studies for inclusion.

RESULTS

128 studies involving >60 000 OPAT episodes were included. 22 studies (17%) did not indicate the OPAT model used; only 29 involved a comparator (23%). There was little difference in duration of OPAT treatment compared with inpatient therapy, and overall OPAT appeared to produce superior cure/improvement rates. However, when models were considered individually, outpatient delivery appeared to be less effective, and self-administration and specialist nurse delivery more effective. Drug side effects, deaths and hospital readmissions were similar to those for inpatient treatment, but there were more line-related complications. Patient satisfaction was high, with advantages seen in being able to resume daily activities and having greater freedom and control. However, most professionals perceived challenges in providing OPAT.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no systematic differences related to the impact of OPAT on treatment duration or adverse events. However, evidence of its clinical benefit compared with traditional inpatient treatment is lacking, primarily due to the dearth of good quality comparative studies. There was high patient satisfaction with OPAT use but the few studies considering practitioner acceptability highlighted organisational and logistic barriers to its delivery.

The Community IntraVenous Antibiotic Study (CIVAS): a mixed-methods evaluation of patient preferences for and cost-effectiveness of different service models for delivering outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy

Background

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is widely used in most developed countries, providing considerable opportunities for improved cost savings. However, it is implemented only partially in the UK, using a variety of service models.

Objectives

The aims of this research were to (1) establish the extent of OPAT service models in England and identify their development; (2) evaluate patients’ preferences for different OPAT service delivery models; (3) assess the cost-effectiveness of different OPAT service delivery models; and (4) convene a consensus panel to consider our evidence and make recommendations.

Methods

This mixed-methods study included seven centres providing OPAT using four main service models: (1) hospital outpatient (HO) attendance; (2) specialist nurse (SN) visiting at home; (3) general nurse (GN) visiting at home; and (4) self-administration (SA) or carer administration. Health-care providers were surveyed and interviewed to explore the implementation of OPAT services in England. OPAT patients were interviewed to determine key service attributes to develop a discrete choice experiment (DCE). This was used to perform a quantitative analysis of their preferences and attitudes. Anonymised OPAT case data were used to model cost-effectiveness with both Markov and simulation modelling methods. An expert panel reviewed the evidence and made recommendations for future service provision and further research.

Results

The systematic review revealed limited robust literature but suggested that HO is least effective and SN is most effective. Qualitative study participants felt that different models of care were suited to different types of patient and they also identified key service attributes. The DCE indicated that type of service was the most important factor, with SN being strongly preferred to HO and SA. Preferences were influenced by attitudes to health care. The results from both Markov and simulation models suggest that a SN model is the optimal service for short treatment courses (up to 7 days). Net monetary benefit (NMB) values for HO, GN and SN services were £2493, £2547 and £2655, respectively. For longer treatment, SA appears to be optimal, although SNs provide slightly higher benefits at increased cost. NMB values for HO, GN, SN and SA services were £8240, £9550, £10,388 and £10,644, respectively. The simulation model provided useful information for planning OPAT services. The expert panel requested more guidance for service providers and commissioners. Overall, they agreed that mixed service models were preferable.

Limitations

Recruitment to the qualitative study was suboptimal in the very elderly and ethnic minorities, so the preferences of patients from these groups might not be represented. The study recruited from Yorkshire, so the findings may not be applicable nationally.

Conclusions

The quantitative preference analysis and economic modelling favoured a SN model, although there are differences between sociodemographic groups. SA provides cost savings for long-term treatment but is not appropriate for all.

Future work

Further research is necessary to replicate our results in other regions and populations and to evaluate mixed service models. The simulation modelling and DCE methods used here may be applicable in other health-care settings.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Service and Delivery Research programme.

Intravenous antimicrobial therapy in the hospital-at-home setting: data from the Spanish Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy Registry

Aim: To evaluate outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) in the hospital-at-home (HaH) model, using data from a Spanish registry. Patients & methods: We describe episodes/characteristics of patients receiving OPAT. Results: Four thousand and five patients were included (mean age 66.2 years), generating 4416 HaH episodes, 4474 infections and 5088 antibiotic treatments. Most patients were from the hospital admission ward and emergency department. Respiratory, urinary and intra-abdominal infections predominated (72%). Forty-six different antimicrobials were used, including combinations of ≥2 drugs (20.7%). Most HaH episodes had a successful outcome (91%). Conclusion: Our findings are similar to those obtained previously although our study case profiles differ, suggesting that disease processes of greater severity and complexity can be treated using this healthcare model, without compromising patient safety.

The history and evolution of outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT)

Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) is now a widely accepted and safe therapeutic option for carefully selected patients. Benefits include cost savings and improved patient satisfaction; risks include failure to adhere to care, unexpected changes in the underlying infection, and adverse drug and intravenous access events. We report on our 40-year experience with OPAT in a single healthcare system in the USA and highlight OPAT developments in several countries. We compared data on patients treated in our programme over two time periods: Period 1 from 1978 to 1990; and Period 2, calendar year 2014. In Period 2 paediatric patients were excluded. Between Periods 1 and 2, changes included an almost three-fold increase in the number of patients treated per year (80 vs. 229), treatment of more patients with severe orthopaedic-related infections (20% vs. 38%), a marked increase in the use of peripherally inserted central catheters to administer antibiotics (20% vs. 98%), a shorter duration of inpatient stay and a longer duration of OPAT (13 days vs. 24 days). Other changes in Period 2 included treatment of 20% of patients without antecedent hospitalisation, and use of carbapenems rather than cephalosporins as the most frequently administered agents. OPAT was safe, with rehospitalisation rates of 6% and 1% in Periods 1 and 2, respectively. We recommend increased access to structured OPAT teams and the development of standard definitions and criteria for important outcome measures (e.g. clinical 'cure' and unplanned hospital re-admissions). These steps are critical for patient safety and financial stewardship of resources.

[Specialized home care for infectious disease. Experience from 1995 to 2002]

OBJECTIVE

In 1995 a specialized home care service for infectious diseases was created in our institution. The aim was to improve the quality of life of patients with prolonged parenteral antimicrobial therapy requirements, reduce the length of hospital stay, and improve the care received after discharge by clinical and analytical surveillance. This study reviews the experience of this service from 1995 to 2002 using prospectively recorded data.

METHODS

An analysis was performed of the number of patients included in the home care program per year, number of patients with HIV infection, infectious disease diagnosed, department referring the patient, antimicrobial treatment administered, destination at discharge, and reason for hospital re-admission.

RESULTS

The number of patients included each year from 1995 to 2002 was 52, 55, 77, 232, 213, 321, 280 and 219, respectively. The percentage of HIV-infected patients decreased from 90% in 1995 to 23% in 2002. The main reason for referral to the program changed from substitution of day-care hospital treatment to early discharge from hospitalization. Whereas CMV infection was the most frequent infection treated during the 1995-1998 period, bacterial infections predominated in the following years. In 148 episodes, self-administration or a portable infusion pump was used for drug administration. Self-administration was associated with a greater risk of complications (24% vs. 12%, OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.5-3.6, P < 0.001) and catheter-related sepsis (4% vs. 0%, OR 12.9, 95% CI 10.9-15.3, P < 0.001). HIV-infected patients were re-hospitalized due to complications unrelated to the home care service more frequently than HIV-uninfected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of HIV-infected patients included in the infectious disease home care service has progressively decreased since 1996, a fact likely to be related to the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy and better control of opportunistic infections. Currently, bacterial infections are the most frequent infections treated in the service. Early hospital discharge is now the main reason for referral to the home program.

[Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) in bone and joint infections]

The medical treatment of many bone and joint infections (including chronic osteomyelitis, prosthetic joint infection, and septic arthritis) requires prolonged intravenous antimicrobial therapy. For some patients, this treatment could be administered outside the hospital in a program that offers outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT). In France, we have no registry of patients receiving OPAT. Initiation of this program requires specific criteria based on a patient evaluation and selection, and an interdisciplinary team of professionals committed to high-quality patient care. Various vascular access devices and infusion pump therapy are used to administer OPAT. The most common parenteral agents for OPAT are beta-lactams and glycopeptids (specifically vancomycin). Antimicrobial courses are stopped prematurely in 3 to 10% of the cases because of an adverse reaction or vascular access complications. Several published studies demonstrate the effectiveness of OPAT and higher patient satisfaction than hospital care. In addition, OPAT is clearly more cost-effective than intravenous therapy provided in the hospital setting. Some diagnoses, such as cellulites, community-acquired pneumonia, and endocarditis may be managed with OPAT.

Evolution of Antibiotic Use and Cost in Patients with Community-Acquired Pneumonia

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the evolution and efficiency of the clinical management (particularly shift therapy) of patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in a hospital setting.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of 120 hospitalised patients who were treated with antibiotics for CAP in the first semesters of 1999 (50 patients), 2000 (39 patients) and 2001 (31 patients). We evaluated the prescribed daily dose and the average hospitalisation and treatment periods for each drug. Pareto curves were used to examine relative costs and quantities of drugs administered. Total therapy costs and average cost for an antibiotic were also calculated.

RESULTS

Over the 3 years, the drugs most commonly used were ceftriaxone and ciprofloxacin; levofloxacin, introduced in 2001, allowed for shorter average treatment periods. Twenty-one of 39 (53.8%) patients seen in the first semester of 2000 were discharged early compared with 29 of 31 (93.54%) in 2001. Therapy was continued at home (shift therapy) with ciprofloxacin (n = 8), ceftriaxone (n = 5) and cotrimoxazole (n = 2) in 2000 and with ceftriaxone (n = 15), oral ciprofloxacin (n = 7) and oral levofloxacin (n = 7) in 2001.

CONCLUSIONS

Shift therapy using either oral or injectable antibiotics is possible in patients with CAP and allowed us to realise significant savings in management. Selection of route of administration of shift therapy should be made on an individual basis.

A model for home infusion therapy initiation and maintenance

Many factors impact the success of home infusion therapy. A model has been designed to incorporate all of the factors that need to be considered when setting up a home infusion program. The primary factors included in the model are patient, nursing, medical, caregiver, equipment, environment, medication, and legal issues. Each of the factors are subdivided into relevant points to be included in the patient's discharge management plan. Using the model will help nurses make a comprehensive patient assessment, plan patient and caregiver education, and assist patients in completing their course of infusion therapy.

Parenteral cephalosporin therapy in ambulatory care: advantages and disadvantages

Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) programmes are effective, well tolerated and economically advantageous in carefully selected patient populations. Inclusion criteria for patient selection for OPAT include good clinical appearance and uncomplicated infection. By virtue of their favourable microbiological and pharmacological properties, cephalosporins in general, and ceftriaxone in particular, are the most widely prescribed antibiotics for OPAT worldwide. OPAT was largely created to prolong parenteral therapy following early discharge and has now been extended to community general practice. Indeed, more than 250000 treatments are performed in the US each year for a wide variety of serious infections, with an increase of 100% during the last 5 years. In 1994, an advisory committee was created in Canada to provide guidelines for home intravenous therapy. Of the 3 models that were defined (the visiting nurse model, the infusion centre model and the self-administration model), the OPAT self-administration model offers considerable cost savings and is probably largely utilised in a number of countries, such as Italy, where specific models have not been codified. Once the need for parenteral antibiotic therapy has been established, the choice of antibiotic is the second step in the decision-making process. Third generation cephalosporins are characterised by a number of important advantages in the OPAT setting, namely a favourable antibacterial spectrum, tolerability profile and patient compliance, as well as advantageous cost considerations. While the advantages of parenteral cephalosporin therapy in the ambulatory care setting outweigh the disadvantages in terms of cost effectiveness and rapid onset of action, adverse events such as pain at the injection site following intramuscular administration and phlebitis after intravenous infusion should be borne in mind.

Place of parenteral cephalosporins in the ambulatory setting: clinical evidence

During the last decade, 6 parenteral third generation cephalosporins have been introduced into clinical practice. The three most frequently used agents are cefotaxime, ceftazidime and ceftriaxone. Although primarily used in hospitals, these agents are increasingly employed in the ambulatory setting. In particular, ceftriaxone, because of its favourable pharmacokinetic profile allowing once-daily administration by a bolus injection, has demonstrated both tolerability and efficacy in the ambulatory setting during extensive worldwide use. Sophisticated parenteral infusion systems enable cephalosporins that require more frequent administration to be delivered in this setting. In noncomparative studies involving a range of patient populations and serious infections (mostly bone, joint and soft tissue, and pneumonia and febrile episodes in neutropenia), these cephalosporins achieved equivalent efficacy and tolerability, and considerable cost savings, since patients were able to receive all or part of their treatment in the home or outpatient setting. However, more comparative studies of ambulatory parenteral therapy in the inpatient setting or ambulatory oral therapy are necessary to further clarify the true cost effectiveness of this type of healthcare delivery. This is increasingly relevant in countries where parenteral antimicrobials are not the 'standard of care' in managing many serious infections. Published experience to date confirms that third generation cephalosporins, particularly ceftriaxone, should have an essential place in the therapeutic formulary of any ambulatory parenteral antibiotic programme.

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy for central nervous system infections

Patients with central nervous system (CNS) infections are increasingly treated with intravenous antimicrobials outside the hospital, but the safety and problems associated with this therapy have not been well defined. To examine this issue, we reviewed 68 cases in which outpatient intravenous antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) was received through our physician office-based infusion clinic. All infections were cured, and no deaths occurred during therapy. Seizures occurred in 2 patients but without significant injury and apparently were unrelated to antimicrobial therapy. Eleven patients (16%) were hospitalized after starting OPAT, 5 for procedures and 6 for medical reasons. The antimicrobial used was changed in 13 cases (19%) because of an adverse effect or clinical failure. OPAT can be safe and effective for patients with CNS infections, but patients must be carefully selected and monitored closely.

Outpatient intravenous antibiotic therapy for endocarditis

The clinical spectrum of endocarditis continues to evolve, as does its diagnosis and management. Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for medically stable patients with viridans streptococcal endocarditis. Other carefully selected and monitored patients with infective endocarditis may also be considered for completion of therapy outside the hospital setting.

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy for osteomyelitis

OPAT for osteomyelitis is effective, safe, and well-established. There are particular considerations with osteomyelitis, however, that relate to patient selection and the plans of therapy. Orthopedic infections may impose physical considerations that need to be considered. Concomitant medical problems, such as diabetes, must be considered and may be good reasons for hospital care aside from the infection. Further investigations of treatment of osteomyelitis are clearly needed, with OPAT patients being good subjects to study.

Evolution of outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy

The future will no doubt continue to promote safe, cost-effective therapies such as outpatient intravenous therapy. It is imperative that physicians trained and knowledgeable in the administration of outpatient intravenous antimicrobial drug administration continue to assume responsibility and leadership roles.