Patient-Directed Discharges Among Persons Who Use Drugs Hospitalized with Invasive Staphylococcus aureus Infections: Opportunities for Improvement

Association of Homelessness with Before Medically Advised Discharge After Surgery

BACKGROUND

Before medically advised (BMA) discharge, which refers to patients leaving the hospital at their own discretion, is associated with higher rates of readmission and death in other settings. It is not known if housing status is associated with this phenomenon after surgery.

METHODS

We identified all admitted adults who underwent an operation by one of 11 different surgical services at a single tertiary care hospital between January 2013 and June 2022. Chi-square tests and t-tests were used to compare demographic and clinical features between BMA discharges and standard discharges. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between housing status and BMA discharge, adjusting for demographic and admission characteristics. Documented reasons for BMA discharge were also abstracted from the medical record.

RESULTS

Of 111,036 patient admissions, 242 resulted in BMA discharge (0.2%). After adjusting for observable confounders, patients experiencing homelessness had substantially higher odds of BMA discharge after surgery (adjusted odds ratio 4.4, 95% confidence interval 3.0-6.4; p < 0.001) when compared to housed. Patients who underwent emergency surgery, patients with a documented substance use disorder, and those insured by Medicaid also had significantly higher odds of BMA discharge. System- or provider-related reasons (including patient frustration with the hospital environment, challenges in managing substance dependence, and perceived inadequacy of paint control) were documented in 96% of BMA discharges for patients experiencing homelessness (vs. 66% in housed patients).

CONCLUSION

BMA discharge is more common in patients experiencing homelessness after surgery even after adjusting for observable confounding characteristics. Deeper understanding of the drivers of BMA discharge in patients experiencing homelessness through qualitative methods are critical to promote more equitable and effective care.

How I manage severe bacterial infections in people who inject drugs

BACKGROUND

Injecting drug use is a risk factor for severe bacterial infection, but there is limited high-quality evidence to guide clinicians providing care to people who inject drugs. Management can be complicated by mistrust, stigma, and competing patient priorities.

OBJECTIVES

To review the management of severe infections in people who inject drugs, using an illustrative clinical scenario of complicated Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection.

SOURCES

The discussion is based on recent literature searches of relevant topics. Very few randomized clinical trials have focussed specifically on the management of severe bacterial infections among people who inject drugs. Most recommendations are, therefore, based on observational studies, extrapolation from other patient groups, and the experience and opinions of the authors.

CONTENT

We discuss evidence and options regarding the following management issues for severe bacterial infections among people who inject drugs: initial management of sepsis; indications for surgical management; assessment and management of substance dependence; approaches to antibiotic administration following clinical stability; opportunistic health promotion; and secondary prevention of bacterial infections. Throughout, we highlight the importance of harm reduction and strategies to optimize patient engagement in care through a patient-centred approach.

IMPLICATIONS

We advocate for a multi-disciplinary trauma-informed approach to the management of severe bacterial infection among people who inject drugs. We emphasize the need for pragmatic trials to inform management guidelines, including those that are co-designed with the community. In particular, research is needed to establish the comparative effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of inpatient intravenous antibiotics vs. early oral antibiotic switch, outpatient parenteral therapy, and long-acting lipoglycopeptide antibiotics in this scenario.

The Intersection of Substance Use Disorders and Infectious Diseases in the Emergency Department

Substance use disorders (SUDs) intersect clinically with many infectious diseases, leading to significant morbidity and mortality if either condition is inadequately treated. In this article, we will describe commonly seen SUDs in the emergency department (ED) as well as their associated infectious diseases, discuss social drivers of patient outcomes, and introduce novel ED-based interventions for co-occurring conditions. Clinicians should come away from this article with prescriptions for both antimicrobial medications and pharmacotherapy for SUDs, as well as an appreciation for social barriers, to care for these patients.

Real-World Dalbavancin Use for Serious Gram-Positive Infections: Comparing Outcomes Between People Who Use and Do Not Use Drugs

Background

Dalbavancin has been used off-label to treat invasive bacterial infections in vulnerable populations like people who use drugs (PWUD) because of its broad gram-positive coverage and unique pharmacological properties. This retrospective, multisite study examined clinical outcomes at 90 days in PWUD versus non-PWUD after secondary treatment with dalbavancin for bacteremia, endocarditis, osteomyelitis, septic arthritis, and epidural abscesses.

Methods

Patients at 3 teaching hospitals who received dalbavancin for an invasive infection between March 2016 and May 2022 were included. Characteristics of PWUD and non-PWUD, infection highlights, hospital stay and treatment, and outcomes were compared using χ2 for categorical variables, t test for continuous variables, and nonparametric tests where appropriate.

Results

There were a total of 176 patients; 78 were PWUD and 98 were non-PWUD. PWUD were more likely to have a patient-directed discharge (26.9% vs 3.1%; P < .001) and be lost to follow-up (20.5% vs 7.14%; P < .01). Assuming loss to follow-up did not achieve clinical cure, 73.1% of PWUD and 74.5% of non-PWUD achieved clinical cure at 90 days (P = .08).

Conclusions

Dalbavancin was an effective treatment option for invasive gram-positive infections in our patient population. Despite higher rates of patient-directed discharge and loss to follow-up, PWUD had similar rates of clinical cure at 90 days compared to non-PWUD.

Contemporary Management of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia-Controversies in Clinical Practice

Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) carries a high risk for excess morbidity and mortality. Despite its prevalence, significant practice variation continues to permeate clinical management of this syndrome. Since the publication of the 2011 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines on management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections, the field of SAB has evolved with the emergence of newer diagnostic strategies and therapeutic options. In this review, we seek to provide a comprehensive overview of the evaluation and management of SAB, with special focus on areas where the highest level of evidence is lacking to inform best practices.

Clinical presentation, microbiology, and prognostic factors of prosthetic valve endocarditis. Lessons learned from a large prospective registry

BACKGROUND

Prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) is a serious infection associated with high mortality that often requires surgical treatment.

METHODS

Study on clinical characteristics and prognosis of a large contemporary prospective cohort of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) that included patients diagnosed between January 2008 and December 2020. Univariate and multivariate analysis of factors associated with in-hospital mortality was performed.

RESULTS

The study included 1354 cases of PVE. The median age was 71 years with an interquartile range of 62-77 years and 66.9% of the cases were male. Patients diagnosed during the first year after valve implantation (early onset) were characterized by a higher proportion of cases due to coagulase-negative staphylococci and Candida and more perivalvular complications than patients detected after the first year (late onset). In-hospital mortality of PVE in this series was 32.6%; specifically, it was 35.4% in the period 2008-2013 and 29.9% in 2014-2020 (p = 0.031). Variables associated with in-hospital mortality were: Age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.08-1.23), intracardiac abscess (OR:1.78, 95% CI:1.30-2.44), acute heart failure related to PVE (OR: 3. 11, 95% CI: 2.31-4.19), acute renal failure (OR: 3.11, 95% CI:1.14-2.09), septic shock (OR: 5.56, 95% CI:3.55-8.71), persistent bacteremia (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.21-2.83) and surgery indicated but not performed (OR: 2.08, 95% CI: 1.49-2.89). In-hospital mortality in patients with surgical indication according to guidelines was 31.3% in operated patients and 51.3% in non-operated patients (p<0.001). In the latter group, there were more cases of advanced age, comorbidity, hospital acquired PVE, PVE due to Staphylococcus aureus, septic shock, and stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Not performing cardiac surgery in patients with PVE and surgical indication, according to guidelines, has a significant negative effect on in-hospital mortality. Strategies to better discriminate patients who can benefit most from surgery would be desirable.

People who use drugs in hospital settings: 'Moving towards a person-centred harm reduction model'

People who use drugs often continue to use drugs while in hospital. However, health-care systems often expect abstinence from drugs as a condition of engagement in various services. This commentary piece proposes that this approach is inconsistent with the principles of person-centred care. A harm reduction-based approach in conjunction with collaboration of people who use drugs is proposed as a model for providing person-centred care to people who use drugs during hospital-based treatment.

Outcomes of Partial Oral Antibiotic Treatment for Complicated Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia in People Who Inject Drugs

BACKGROUND

Staphylococcus aureus represents the leading cause of complicated bloodstream infections among persons who inject drugs (PWID). Standard of care (SOC) intravenous (IV) antibiotics result in high rates of treatment success but are not feasible for some PWID. Transition to oral antibiotics may represent an alternative treatment option.

METHODS

We evaluated all adult patients with a history of injection drug use hospitalized from January 2016 through December 2021 with complicated S. aureus bloodstream infections, including infective endocarditis, epidural abscess, vertebral osteomyelitis, and septic arthritis. Patients were compared by antibiotic treatment (standard of care intravenous [SOC IV] antibiotics, incomplete IV therapy, or transition from initial IV to partial oral) using the primary composite endpoint of death or readmission from microbiologic failure within 90 days of discharge.

RESULTS

Patients who received oral antibiotics after an incomplete IV antibiotic course were significantly less likely to experience microbiologic failure or death than patients discharged without oral antibiotics (P < .001). There was no significant difference in microbiologic failure rates when comparing patients who were discharged on partial oral antibiotics after receiving at least 10 days of IV antibiotics with SOC regimens (P > .9).

CONCLUSIONS

Discharge of PWID with partially treated complicated S. aureus bacteremias without oral antibiotics results in high rates of morbidity and should be avoided. For PWID hospitalized with complicated S. aureus bacteremias who have received at least 10 days of effective IV antibiotic therapy after clearance of bacteremia, transition to oral antibiotics with outpatient support represents a potential alternative if the patient does not desire SOC IV antibiotic therapy.

Partial-Oral Antibiotic Therapy for Bone and Joint Infections in People With Recent Injection Drug Use

Background

Limited outcome data exist regarding partial-oral antibiotic therapy, defined as oral antibiotics as part of a patient's treatment, for bone and joint infections (BJIs) in people who inject drugs (PWID).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of all PWID reporting drug use within 3 months and BJIs requiring ≥6 weeks of antibiotics in an urban safety-net hospital between February 1, 2019, and February 1, 2021. Treatment outcomes were assessed by chart review. Rates of failure, defined as death, symptoms, or signs concerning for worsening or recurrent infections, were assessed 90 and 180 days after completion of antibiotics. Univariate logistic regression was used to explore the association between covariates and failure.

Results

Of 705 patients with BJI, 88 (13%) were PWID. Eighty-six patients were included in the final cohort. Forty-four (51%) were homeless, 50 (58%) had spine infection, 68 (79%) had surgery, and 32 of 68 (47%) had postoperatively retained hardware. Twelve (14%) of 86 patients received exclusively intravenous (IV) antibiotics, and 74 (86%) received partial-oral antibiotics. Twelve (14%) of 86 patients had patient-directed discharge. In those who received partial-oral antibiotics, the failure rate was 20% at 90 days and 21% at 180 days after completion of intended treatment. Discharge to a medical respite and follow-up with infectious diseases (ID) or surgery were negatively associated with odds of failure.

Conclusions

Partial-oral treatment of BJI in PWID was a common practice and often successful when paired with medical respite and follow-up with ID or surgery.

Medication Initiation, Patient-directed Discharges, and Hospital Readmissions Before and After Implementing Guidelines for Opioid Withdrawal Management

OBJECTIVES

Rising rates of hospitalization for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) result in high rates of patient-directed discharge (PDD, also called "discharge against medical advice") and 30-day readmissions. Interdisciplinary addiction consult services are an emerging criterion standard to improve care for these patients, but these services are resource- and expertise-intensive. A set of withdrawal guidelines was developed to guide generalists in caring for patients with opioid withdrawal at a hospital without an addiction consult service.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was performed to determine PDD, 30-day readmission, and psychiatry consult rates for hospitalized patients with OUD during periods before (July 1, 2017, to March 31, 2018) and after (January 1, 2019, to July 31, 2019) the withdrawal guidelines were implemented. Information on the provision of opioid agonist therapy (OAT) was also obtained.

RESULTS

Use of OAT in patients with OUD increased significantly after guideline introduction, from 23.3% to 64.8% ( P < 0.001). Patient-directed discharge did not change, remaining at 14% before and after. Thirty-day readmissions increased 12.4% to 15.7% ( P = 0.05065). Receiving any OAT was associated with increased PDD and readmission, but only within the postintervention cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

A guideline to facilitate generalist management of opioid withdrawal in hospitalized patients improved the process of care, increasing the use of OAT and decreasing workload on the psychiatry consult services. Although increased inpatient OAT has been previously shown to decrease PDD, in this study PDD and readmission rates did not improve. Guidelines may be insufficient to impact these outcomes.

Health care professional perspectives on discharging hospitalized patients with injection drug use-associated infections

Background:

Patients with injection drug use (IDU)-associated infections traditionally experience prolonged hospitalizations, which often result in negative experiences and bad outcomes. Harm reduction approaches that value patient autonomy and shared decision-making regarding outpatient treatment options may improve outcomes. We sought to identify health care professionals (HCPs) perspectives on the barriers to offering four different options to hospitalized people who use drugs (PWUD): long-term hospitalization, oral antibiotics, long-acting antibiotics at an infusion center, and outpatient parenteral antibiotics.

Methods:

We recruited HCPs (n = 19) from a single tertiary care center in Portland, Maine. We interviewed HCPs involved with discharge decision-making and other HCPs involved in the specialized care of PWUD. Semi-structured interviews elicited lead HCP values, preferences, and concerns about presenting outpatient antimicrobial treatment options to PWUD, while support HCPs provided contextual information. We used the iterative categorization approach to code and thematically analyze transcripts.

Results:

HCPs were willing to present outpatient treatment options for patients with IDU-associated infections, yet several factors contributed to reluctance. First, insufficient resources, such as transportation, may make these options impractical. However, HCPs may be unaware of existing community resources or viable treatment options. They also may believe the hospital protects patients, and that discharging patients into the community exposes them to structural harms. Some HCPs are concerned that patients with substance use disorder will not make ‘good’ decisions regarding outpatient antimicrobial options. Finally, there is uncertainty about how responsibility for offering outpatient treatment is shared across changing care teams.

Conclusion:

HCPs perceive many barriers to offering outpatient care for people with IDU-associated infections, but with appropriate interventions to address their concerns, may be open to considering more options. This study provides important insights and contextual information that can help inform specific harm reduction interventions aimed at improving care of people with IDU-associated infections.

Management of Infective Endocarditis in People Who Inject Drugs: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association has sponsored both guidelines and scientific statements that address the diagnosis, management, and prevention of infective endocarditis. As a result of the unprecedented and increasing incidence of infective endocarditis cases among people who inject drugs, the American Heart Association sponsored this original scientific statement. It provides a more in-depth focus on the management of infective endocarditis among this unique population than what has been provided in prior American Heart Association infective endocarditis-related documents.

METHODS

A writing group was named and consisted of recognized experts in the fields of infectious diseases, cardiology, addiction medicine, and cardiovascular surgery in October 2021. A literature search was conducted in Embase on November 19, 2021, and multiple terms were used, with 1345 English-language articles identified after removal of duplicates.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of infective endocarditis in people who inject drugs is complex and requires a unique approach in all aspects of care. Clinicians must appreciate that it requires involvement of a variety of specialists and that consultation by addiction-trained clinicians is as important as that of more traditional members of the endocarditis team to improve infective endocarditis outcomes. Preventive measures are critical in people who inject drugs and are cured of an initial bout of infective endocarditis because they remain at extremely high risk for subsequent bouts of infective endocarditis, regardless of whether injection drug use is continued.

Description and outcomes of patients with substance use disorder with serious bacterial infections who had a multidisciplinary care conference

Background

Patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) and severe bacterial infections requiring prolonged antibiotic therapy represent a significant challenge to providers due to complexity of care coordination required to ensure safe and effective treatment. Our institution developed a patient-centered multidisciplinary discharge planning conference, OPTIONS-DC, to address this challenge.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review to evaluates parameters between patients who received an OPTIONS-DC and those who did not.

Results

We identified 73 patients receiving an OPTIONS-DC and 100 who did not. More patients with an OPTIONS-DC were < 40 years of age (76.7% versus 61.0%, OR = 2.3, 95% CI = 1.1-4.7, p = 0.02), had positive HCV antibody testing (58.9% versus 41.0%, OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.1-3.8, p = 0.02), injection drug use (93.2% versus 79.0%, OR = 3.6 95% CI = 1.3-10.1, p = 0.01), used methamphetamines (84.9% versus 72.0%, OR = 2.2, 95% CI = 1.0-4.8, p = 0.04), and started inpatient SUD treatment (80.8% versus 63%, OR = 2.5, 95% CI = 1.2-5.0, p = 0.04) compared with those without a conference. The OPTIONS-DC group was more likely to be diagnosed with bacteremia (74.0% versus 57.0%, OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.1-4.1, p = 0.02), endocarditis (39.7% versus21.0%, OR = 2.5, 95% CI = 1.3-4.9, p = 0.03), vertebral osteomyelitis (45.2% versus 15.0%, OR = 4.7, 95% CI = 2.3-9.6, p < 0.01), and epidural abscess (35.6% versus 10.0%, OR = 5.0, 95% CI = 2.2-11.2, p < 0.01) and require 4 weeks or more of antibiotic treatment (97.3% versus 51.1%, OR = 34.1, 95% CI = 7.9-146.7, p = 0.01). Patients with an OPTIONS-DC were also more likely to be admitted between 2019 and 2020 than between 2018 and 2019 (OR = 4.1, 95% CI = 2.1-7.9, p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Patients with an OPTIONS-DC tended to have more complicated infections and longer courses of antibiotic treatment. While further research on outcomes is needed, patients receiving an OPTIONS-DC were able to successfully complete antibiotic courses across a variety of settings.