Variation in Empiric Coverage Versus Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in Hospitalizations for Community-Onset Pneumonia Across 128 US Veterans Affairs Medical Centers

Incidence of drug-resistant pathogens in community-acquired pneumonia at a safety net hospital

The 2019 Infectious Diseases Society of America guideline for the management of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) emphasizes the need for clinician to understand local epidemiological data to guide selection of appropriate treatment. Currently, the local distribution of causative pathogens and their associated resistance patterns in CAP is unknown. A retrospective observational study was performed of patients admitted to an 870-bed safety net hospital between March 2016 and March 2021 who received a diagnosis of CAP or healthcare-associated pneumonia within the first 48 hours of admission. The primary outcome was the incidence of CAP caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PsA) as determined by comparing the number of satisfactory sputum cultures or blood cultures with these drug-resistant organisms to the total number of reviewed patients. Secondary outcomes studied included risk factors associated with CAP caused by drug-resistant organisms, utilization of broad-spectrum antibiotics, appropriate antibiotic de-escalation within 72 hours, and treatment duration. In this 220-patient cohort, MRSA or PsA was isolated from three sputum cultures and no blood cultures. The local incidence of drug-resistant pathogens among the analyzed sample of CAP patients was 1.4% (n = 3/220). The overall incidence of CAP caused by MRSA or PsA among admitted patients is low at our safety-net county hospital. Future research is needed to identify local risk factors associated with the development of CAP caused by drug-resistant pathogens.IMPORTANCEThis study investigates the incidence of drug-resistant pathogens including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa among community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) patients at a safety net hospital. Understanding local bacteria resistance patterns when treating CAP is essential and supported by evidence-based guidelines. Our findings empower other clinicians to investigate resistance patterns at their own institutions and identify methods to improve antibiotic use. This has the potential to reduce the unnecessary use of broad-spectrum antibiotic agents and combat the development of antibiotic resistance.

New Guidelines for Severe Community-acquired Pneumonia

In 2023, the new European guidelines on severe community-acquired pneumonia, providing clinical practice recommendations for the management of this life-threatening infection, characterized by a high burden of mortality, morbidity, and costs for the society. This review article aims to summarize the principal evidence related to eight different questions covered in the guidelines, by also highlighting the future perspectives for research activity.

ERS/ESICM/ESCMID/ALAT guidelines for the management of severe community-acquired pneumonia

PURPOSE

Severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality, and whilst European and non-European guidelines are available for community-acquired pneumonia, there are no specific guidelines for sCAP.

METHODS

The European Respiratory Society (ERS), European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID), and Latin American Thoracic Association (ALAT) launched a task force to develop the first international guidelines for sCAP. The panel comprised a total of 18 European and four non-European experts, as well as two methodologists. Eight clinical questions for sCAP diagnosis and treatment were chosen to be addressed. Systematic literature searches were performed in several databases. Meta-analyses were performed for evidence synthesis, whenever possible. The quality of evidence was assessed with GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to decide on the direction and strength of recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations issued were related to diagnosis, antibiotics, organ support, biomarkers and co-adjuvant therapy. After considering the confidence in effect estimates, the importance of outcomes studied, desirable and undesirable consequences of treatment, cost, feasibility, acceptability of the intervention and implications to health equity, recommendations were made for or against specific treatment interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In these international guidelines, ERS, ESICM, ESCMID, and ALAT provide evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for diagnosis, empirical treatment, and antibiotic therapy for sCAP, following the GRADE approach. Furthermore, current knowledge gaps have been highlighted and recommendations for future research have been made.

ERS/ESICM/ESCMID/ALAT guidelines for the management of severe community-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality, and while European and non-European guidelines are available for community-acquired pneumonia, there are no specific guidelines for sCAP.

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

The European Respiratory Society (ERS), European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) and Latin American Thoracic Association (ALAT) launched a task force to develop the first international guidelines for sCAP. The panel comprised a total of 18 European and four non-European experts, as well as two methodologists. Eight clinical questions for sCAP diagnosis and treatment were chosen to be addressed. Systematic literature searches were performed in several databases. Meta-analyses were performed for evidence synthesis, whenever possible. The quality of evidence was assessed with GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to decide on the direction and strength of recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations issued were related to diagnosis, antibiotics, organ support, biomarkers and co-adjuvant therapy. After considering the confidence in effect estimates, the importance of outcomes studied, desirable and undesirable consequences of treatment, cost, feasibility, acceptability of the intervention and implications to health equity, recommendations were made for or against specific treatment interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In these international guidelines, ERS, ESICM, ESCMID and ALAT provide evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for diagnosis, empirical treatment and antibiotic therapy for sCAP, following the GRADE approach. Furthermore, current knowledge gaps have been highlighted and recommendations for future research have been made.

The threat of multidrug-resistant/extensively drug-resistant Gram-negative respiratory infections: another pandemic

Antibiotic resistance is recognised as a global threat to human health by national healthcare agencies, governments and medical societies, as well as the World Health Organization. Increasing resistance to available antimicrobial agents is of concern for bacterial, fungal, viral and parasitic pathogens. One of the greatest concerns is the continuing escalation of antimicrobial resistance among Gram-negative bacteria resulting in the endemic presence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extremely drug-resistant (XDR) pathogens. This concern is heightened by the identification of such MDR/XDR Gram-negative bacteria in water and food sources, as colonisers of the intestine and other locations in both hospitalised patients and individuals in the community, and as agents of all types of infections. Pneumonia and other types of respiratory infections are among the most common infections caused by MDR/XDR Gram-negative bacteria and are associated with high rates of mortality. Future concerns are already heightened due to emergence of resistance to all existing antimicrobial agents developed in the past decade to treat MDR/XDR Gram-negative bacteria and a scarcity of novel agents in the developmental pipeline. This clinical scenario increases the likelihood of a future pandemic caused by MDR/XDR Gram-negative bacteria.

Improving Vancomycin Stewardship in Critically Ill Children

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Inappropriate vancomycin use is common in children's hospitals. We report a quality improvement (QI) intervention to reduce vancomycin use in our tertiary care PICU.

METHODS

We retrospectively quantified the prevalence of infections caused by organisms requiring vancomycin therapy, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), among patients with suspected bacterial infections. Guided by these data, we performed 3 QI interventions over a 3-year period, including (1) stakeholder education, (2) generation of a consensus-based guideline for empiric vancomycin use, and (3) implementation of this guideline through clinical decision support. Vancomycin use in days of therapy (DOT) per 1000 patient days was measured by using statistical process control charts. Balancing measures included frequency of bacteremia due to an organism requiring vancomycin not covered with empiric therapy, 30-day mortality, and cardiovascular, respiratory, and renal organ dysfunction.

RESULTS

Among 1276 episodes of suspected bacterial infection, a total of 19 cases of bacteremia (1.5%) due to organisms requiring vancomycin therapy were identified, including 6 MRSA bacteremias (0.5%). During the 3-year QI project, overall vancomycin DOT per 1000 patient days in the PICU decreased from a baseline mean of 182 DOT per 1000 patient days to 109 DOT per 1000 patient days (a 40% reduction). All balancing measures were unchanged, and all cases of MRSA bacteremia were treated empirically with vancomycin.

CONCLUSION

Our interventions reduced overall vancomycin use in the PICU without evidence of harm. Provider education and consensus building surrounding indications for empiric vancomycin use were key strategies.

Influence of microbiological culture results on antibiotic choices for veterans with hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia

OBJECTIVE

We examined the impact of microbiological results from respiratory samples on choice of antibiotic therapy in patients treated for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) or ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP).

DESIGN

Four-year retrospective study.

SETTING

Veterans' Health Administration (VHA).

PATIENTS

VHA patients hospitalized with HAP or VAP and with respiratory cultures between October 1, 2014, and September 30, 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

We compared patients with positive and negative respiratory culture results, assessing changes in antibiotic class and Antibiotic Spectrum Index (ASI) from the day of sample collection (day 0) through day 7.

RESULTS

Between October 1, 2014, and September 30, 2018, we identified 5,086 patients with HAP/VAP: 2,952 with positive culture results and 2,134 with negative culture results. All-cause 30-day mortality was 21% for both groups. The mean time from respiratory sample receipt in the laboratory to final respiratory culture result was longer for those with positive (2.9 ± 1.3 days) compared to negative results (2.5 ± 1.3 days; P < .001). The most common pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Vancomycin and β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors were the most commonly prescribed agents. The decrease in the median ASI from 13 to 8 between days 0 and 6 was similar among patients with positive and negative respiratory cultures. Patients with negative cultures were more likely to be off antibiotics from day 3 onward.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of respiratory cultures had only a small influence on antibiotics used during the treatment of HAP/VAP. The decrease in ASI for both groups suggests the integration of antibiotic stewardship principles, including de-escalation, into the care of patients with HAP/VAP.

Simulated Adoption of 2019 Community-Acquired Pneumonia Guidelines Across 114 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers: Estimated Impact on Culturing and Antibiotic Selection in Hospitalized Patients

BACKGROUND

The 2019 American Thoracic Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) revised recommendations for culturing and empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics. We simulated guideline adoption in Veterans Affairs (VA) inpatients.

METHODS

For all VA acute hospitalizations for CAP from 2006-2016 nationwide, we compared observed with guideline-expected proportions of hospitalizations with initial blood and respiratory cultures obtained, empiric antibiotic therapy with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (anti-MRSA) or Pseudomonas aeruginosa (antipseudomonal), empiric "overcoverage" (receipt of anti-MRSA/antipseudomonal therapy without eventual detection of MRSA/P. aeruginosa on culture), and empiric "undercoverage" (lack of anti-MRSA/antipseudomonal therapy with eventual detection on culture).

RESULTS

Of 115 036 CAP hospitalizations over 11 years, 17 877 (16%) were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Guideline adoption would slightly increase respiratory culture (30% to 36%) and decrease blood culture proportions (93% to 36%) in hospital wards and increase both respiratory (40% to 100%) and blood (95% to 100%) cultures in ICUs. Adoption would decrease empiric selection of anti-MRSA (ward: 27% to 1%; ICU: 61% to 8%) and antipseudomonal (ward: 25% to 1%; ICU: 54% to 9%) therapies. This would correspond to greatly decreased MRSA overcoverage (ward: 27% to 1%; ICU: 56% to 8%), slightly increased MRSA undercoverage (ward: 0.6% to 1.3%; ICU: 0.5% to 3.3%), with similar findings for P. aeruginosa. For all comparisons, P < .001.

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of the 2019 CAP guidelines in this population would substantially change culturing and empiric antibiotic selection practices, with a decrease in overcoverage and slight increase in undercoverage for MRSA and P. aeruginosa.

Decreases in Antimicrobial Use Associated With Multihospital Implementation of Electronic Antimicrobial Stewardship Tools

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial stewards may benefit from comparative data to inform interventions that promote optimal inpatient antimicrobial use.

METHODS

Antimicrobial stewards from 8 geographically dispersed Veterans Affairs (VA) inpatient facilities participated in the development of antimicrobial use visualization tools that allowed for comparison to facilities of similar complexity. The visualization tools consisted of an interactive web-based antimicrobial dashboard and, later, a standardized antimicrobial usage report updated at user-selected intervals. Stewards participated in monthly learning collaboratives. The percent change in average monthly antimicrobial use (all antimicrobial agents, anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus [anti-MRSA] agents, and antipseudomonal agents) was analyzed using a pre-post (January 2014-January 2016 vs July 2016-January 2018) design with segmented regression and external comparison with uninvolved control facilities (n = 118).

RESULTS

Intervention sites demonstrated a 2.1% decrease (95% confidence interval [CI], -5.7% to 1.6%) in total antimicrobial use pre-post intervention vs a 2.5% increase (95% CI, 0.8% to 4.1%) in nonintervention sites (absolute difference, 4.6%; P = .025). Anti-MRSA antimicrobial use decreased 11.3% (95% CI, -16.0% to -6.3%) at intervention sites vs a 6.6% decrease (95% CI, -9.1% to -3.9%) at nonintervention sites (absolute difference, 4.7%; P = .092). Antipseudomonal antimicrobial use decreased 3.4% (95% CI, -8.2% to 1.7%) at intervention sites vs a 3.6% increase (95% CI, 0.8% to 6.5%) at nonintervention sites (absolute difference, 7.0%; P = .018).

CONCLUSIONS

Comparative data visualization tool use by stewards at 8 VA facilities was associated with significant reductions in overall antimicrobial and antipseudomonal use relative to uninvolved facilities.

Validation of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Risk Factors in Predicting MRSA Community-Acquired Pneumonia at an Academic Medical Center

Background: The 2019 Infectious Diseases Society of America community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) guidelines recommend antimethicillin- resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) therapy in patients with CAP based on previously identified risk factors for MRSA with an emphasis on local epidemiology and institutional validation of risk. Thus, we sought to assess the ability of guideline-recognized risk factors to predict MRSA CAP at our institution. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study from January 2016 to March 2020. Patients were included if they were >18 years old, diagnosed with CAP, and had a MRSA nasal screen and respiratory culture obtained on admission. Patients were excluded if CAP diagnosis was not met, respiratory cultures were not obtained within 48 hours of antibiotic initiation, or they had cystic fibrosis. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and likelihood ratios (LR) were calculated using Vasser Stats 2019. Pre/post-test odds and pre/post-test probabilities were calculated using Excel 2019. Results: Of 705 screened patients, 221 were included. MRSA prevalence in CAP patients at our institution was 3.6%. History of MRSA isolated from a respiratory specimen had high specificity (98%), high positive LR of 20 (95% CI 5.3–74.8), and high post-test probability of 42.8%. Receipt of IV antibiotics during hospitalization within the past 90 days had a positive LR of 1.9 (95% CI 0.74–4.84). A positive MRSA nasal screen on admission had a positive LR of 6.9 (95% CI 4.0–12.1), negative LR 0.28 (95% CI 0.08–0.93), positive post-test probability of 20.7%, and negative post-test probability of 1.04%. Conclusion: Our study utilized institutional data to validate guideline recognized risk factors for MRSA CAP specifically at our institution. Risk factors including history of MRSA isolated from a respiratory specimen, and positive post-admission MRSA nasal screen were validated as significant risk factors; receipt of IV antibiotics during hospitalization within the past 90 days was not shown to be a risk factor for MRSA CAP based on our institutional data. Validated risk factors may help providers discern which patients with CAP at our institution would benefit most from empiric MRSA treatment.

Antibiotic Stewardship in the Intensive Care Unit. An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report in Collaboration with the AACN, CHEST, CDC, and SCCM

Intensive care units (ICUs) are an appropriate focus of antibiotic stewardship program efforts because a large proportion of any hospital’s use of parenteral antibiotics, especially broad-spectrum, occurs in the ICU. Given the importance of antibiotic stewardship for critically ill patients and the importance of critical care practitioners as the front line for antibiotic stewardship, a workshop was convened to specifically address barriers to antibiotic stewardship in the ICU and discuss tactics to overcome these. The working definition of antibiotic stewardship is “the right drug at the right time and the right dose for the right bug for the right duration.” A major emphasis was that antibiotic stewardship should be a core competency of critical care clinicians. Fear of pathogens that are not covered by empirical antibiotics is a major driver of excessively broad-spectrum therapy in critically ill patients. Better diagnostics and outcome data can address this fear and expand efforts to narrow or shorten therapy. Greater awareness of the substantial adverse effects of antibiotics should be emphasized and is an important counterargument to broad-spectrum therapy in individual low-risk patients. Optimal antibiotic stewardship should not focus solely on reducing antibiotic use or ensuring compliance with guidelines. Instead, it should enhance care both for individual patients (by improving and individualizing their choice of antibiotic) and for the ICU population as a whole. Opportunities for antibiotic stewardship in common ICU infections, including community- and hospital-acquired pneumonia and sepsis, are discussed. Intensivists can partner with antibiotic stewardship programs to address barriers and improve patient care.

The Impact of Rapid Species Identification on Management of Bloodstream Infections: What's in a Name?

Bloodstream infections are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Molecular rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) are transforming care for patients with bloodstream infection by providing the opportunity to dramatically shorten times to effective therapy and speeding de-escalation of overly broad empiric therapy. However, because of the novelty of these tests which provide information regarding microbial identification and whether specific antibiotic-resistance mutations were detected, many front-line providers still delay final decisions until complete phenotypic susceptibility results are available several days later. Thus the benefits of mRDTs have been largely limited to circumstances where antimicrobial stewardship programs closely monitor these tests and intervene as soon as the results are available. We searched PubMed and Google Scholar for articles published from 1980 to 2019 using the terms antibiotic, antifungal, bacteremia, bloodstream infection, candidemia, candidiasis, children, coagulase negative staphylococcus, consultation, contamination, costs, echocardiogram, endocarditis, enterobacteriaceae, enterococcus, Gram-negative, guidelines, IDSA, immunocompromised, infectious disease or ID, lumbar puncture, meningitis, mortality, MRSA, MSSA, neonatal, outcomes, pediatric, pneumococcal, polymicrobial, Pseudomonas, rapid diagnostic testing, resistance, risk factors, sepsis, Staphylococcus aureus, stewardship, streptococcus, and treatment. With the data from this search, we aim to provide guidance to front-line providers regarding the interpretation and immediate actions to be taken in response to the identification of common bloodstream pathogens by mRDTs. In addition to antimicrobial therapy, additional diagnostic or therapeutic interventions are recommended for particular organisms and clinical settings to either determine the extent of infection or control its source. Pediatric perspectives are offered for those bloodstream pathogens for which management differs from that in adults.

MRSA prevalence and hospital-level antibiotic use: A retrospective study across 122 acute-care hospitals

We evaluated the relationship between local MRSA prevalence rates and antibiotic use across 122 VHA hospitals in 2016. Higher hospital-level MRSA prevalence was associated with significantly higher rates of antibiotic use, even after adjusting for case mix and stewardship strategies. Benchmarking anti-MRSA antibiotic use may need to adjust for MRSA prevalence.

Novel strategies for rapid identification and susceptibility testing of MRSA

INTRODUCTION

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is associated with adverse clinical outcomes and increased morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, and health-care costs. Rapid diagnosis of MRSA infections has been associated with positive impact on clinical outcomes.

AREAS COVERED

We searched relevant papers in PubMed for the last 10 years. In major papers, we scanned the bibliographies to ensure that important articles were included. This review describes screening and diagnostic test methods for MRSA and their analytical performances with a focus on rapid molecular-based assays including those that are on the horizon. Future novel technologies will allow more rapid detection of phenotypic resistance. In the case of whole-genome sequencing, detection of mutations may predict resistance, transmission, and virulence.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently there are many diagnostic options for the detection of MRSA in surveillance and clinical samples. In general, these are highly accurate and have resulted in improvements in targeted management and reduction in hospital or intensive care unit length of stay for both MSSA and MRSA. Impact on mortality has been variable. Promising novel technologies will not only accurately identify pathogens and detect their resistance markers but will allow discovery of virulence determinants that might further affect patient management.

Determinants of empirical antipseudomonal antibiotic prescription for adults with pneumonia in the emergency department

Background

Antipseudomonal antibiotics should be restricted to patients at risk of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection. However, the indications in different guidelines on community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) are discordant. Our objectives were to assess the prevalence of antipseudomonal antibiotic prescriptions and to identify determinants of empirical antibiotic choices in the emergency department.

Methods

Observational, retrospective, one-year cohort study in hospitalized adults with pneumonia. Antibiotic choices and clinical and demographic data were recorded on a standardized form. Antibiotics with antipseudomonal activity were classified into two groups: a) β-lactam antipseudomonals (β-APS), including carbapenems, piperacillin / tazobactam or cefepime (in monotherapy or combination) and b) monotherapy with antipseudomonal quinolones.

Results

Data were recorded from 549 adults with pneumonia, with Pseudomonas aeruginosa being isolated in only nine (1.6%). Most (85%) prescriptions were compliant with SEPAR guidelines and 207 (37%) patients received antibiotics with antipseudomonal activity (14% β-APS and 23% levofloxacin). The use of β-APS was independently associated with ICU admission (OR 8.16 95% CI 3.69–18.06) and prior hospitalization (OR 6.76 95% CI 3.02–15.15), while levofloxacin was associated with negative pneumococcal urine antigen tests (OR 3.41 95% CI 1.70–6.85) but negatively associated with ICU admission (OR 0.26 95% CI 0.08–0.86). None of these factors were associated with P aeruginosa episodes. In univariate analysis, prior P aeruginosa infection/colonization (2/9 vs 6/372, p = 0.013), severe COPD (3/9 vs 26/372, p = 0.024), multilobar involvement (7/9 vs 119/372, p = 0.007) and prior antibiotic (6/9 vs 109/372, p = 0.025) were significantly associated with P aeruginosa episodes.

Conclusions

Antipseudomonal prescriptions were common, in spite of the very low incidence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The rationale for prescription was influenced by both severity-of-illness and pneumococcal urine antigen test (levofloxacin) and prior hospitalization and ICU admission (β-APS). However, these factors were not associated with P aeruginosa episodes. Only prior P aeruginosa infection/colonization and severe COPD seem to be reliable indicators in clinical practice.

Empirical Anti-MRSA vs Standard Antibiotic Therapy and Risk of 30-Day Mortality in Patients Hospitalized for Pneumonia

IMPORTANCE

Use of empirical broad-spectrum antibiotics for pneumonia has increased owing to concern for resistant organisms, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The association of empirical anti-MRSA therapy with outcomes among patients with pneumonia is unknown, even for high-risk patients.

OBJECTIVE

To compare 30-day mortality among patients hospitalized for pneumonia receiving empirical anti-MRSA therapy vs standard empirical antibiotic regimens.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted of all hospitalizations in which patients received either anti-MRSA or standard therapy for community-onset pneumonia in the Veterans Health Administration health care system from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2013. Subgroups of patients analyzed were those with initial intensive care unit admission, MRSA risk factors, positive results of a MRSA surveillance test, and positive results of a MRSA admission culture. Primary analysis was an inverse probability of treatment-weighted propensity score analysis using generalized estimating equation regression; secondary analyses included an instrumental variable analysis. Statistical analysis was conducted from June 14 to November 20, 2019.

EXPOSURES

Empirical anti-MRSA therapy plus standard pneumonia therapy vs standard therapy alone within the first day of hospitalization.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Risk of 30-day all-cause mortality after adjustment for patient comorbidities, vital signs, and laboratory results. Secondary outcomes included the development of kidney injury and secondary infections with Clostridioides difficile, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus species, or gram-negative bacilli.

RESULTS

Among 88 605 hospitalized patients (86 851 men; median age, 70 years [interquartile range, 62-81 years]), empirical anti-MRSA therapy was administered to 33 632 (38%); 8929 patients (10%) died within 30 days. Compared with standard therapy alone, in weighted propensity score analysis, empirical anti-MRSA therapy plus standard therapy was significantly associated with an increased adjusted risk of death (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.4 [95% CI, 1.3-1.5]), kidney injury (aRR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.3-1.5]), and secondary C difficile infections (aRR, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.3-1.9]), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp infections (aRR, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.0-2.3]), and secondary gram-negative rod infections (aRR, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.2-1.8]). Similar associations between anti-MRSA therapy use and 30-day mortality were found by instrumental variable analysis (aRR, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.4-1.9]) and among patients admitted to the intensive care unit (aRR, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.2-1.5]), those with a high risk for MRSA (aRR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.1-1.4]), and those with MRSA detected on surveillance testing (aRR, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.3-1.9]). No significant favorable association was found between empirical anti-MRSA therapy and death among patients with MRSA detected on culture (aRR, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.8-1.4]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study suggests that empirical anti-MRSA therapy was not associated with reduced mortality for any group of patients hospitalized for pneumonia. These results contribute to a growing body of evidence that questions the value of empirical use of anti-MRSA therapy using existing risk approaches.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Adults with Community-acquired Pneumonia. An Official Clinical Practice Guideline of the American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America

Background: This document provides evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on the management of adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

Methods: A multidisciplinary panel conducted pragmatic systematic reviews of the relevant research and applied Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology for clinical recommendations.

Results: The panel addressed 16 specific areas for recommendations spanning questions of diagnostic testing, determination of site of care, selection of initial empiric antibiotic therapy, and subsequent management decisions. Although some recommendations remain unchanged from the 2007 guideline, the availability of results from new therapeutic trials and epidemiological investigations led to revised recommendations for empiric treatment strategies and additional management decisions.

Conclusions: The panel formulated and provided the rationale for recommendations on selected diagnostic and treatment strategies for adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

Hot topics and current controversies in community-acquired pneumonia

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is one of the most common infectious diseases, as well as a major cause of death both in developed and developing countries, and it remains a challenge for physicians around the world. Several guidelines have been published to guide clinicians in how to diagnose and take care of patients with CAP. However, there are still many areas of debate and uncertainty where research is needed to advance patient care and improve clinical outcomes. In this review we highlight current hot topics in CAP and present updated evidence around these areas of controversy.

Community-acquired pneumonia is the most frequent cause of infectious death worldwide; however, there are several areas of controversy that should be addressed to improve patient care. This review presents the available data on these topics.http://bit.ly/2ShnH7A

Health Care-Associated Pneumonia: Is It Still a Useful Concept?

"Health care-associated pneumonia (HCAP) was introduced into guidelines because of concerns about the increasing prevalence of drug-resistant pathogens (DRPs) not covered by standard empirical therapy. We now know that DRPs are very localized phenomena with low rates in most sites. Although HCAP risk factors are associated with a higher mortality, this is driven by comorbidities rather than the pathogens. Empirical coverage of DRPs has generally not resulted in better patient outcomes. A far more nuanced approach must be taken for patients with risk factors for DRPs taking into account the local cause and severity of disease.

In Data We Trust? Comparison of Electronic Versus Manual Abstraction of Antimicrobial Prescribing Quality Metrics for Hospitalized Veterans With Pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Electronic health records provide the opportunity to assess system-wide quality measures. Veterans Affairs Pharmacy Benefits Management Center for Medication Safety uses medication use evaluation (MUE) through manual review of the electronic health records.

OBJECTIVE

To compare an electronic MUE approach versus human/manual review for extraction of antibiotic use (choice and duration) and severity metrics.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Retrospective.

SUBJECTS

Hospitalizations for uncomplicated pneumonia occurring during 2013 at 30 Veterans Affairs facilities.

MEASURES

We compared summary statistics, individual hospitalization-level agreement, facility-level consistency, and patterns of variation between electronic and manual MUE for initial severity, antibiotic choice, daily clinical stability, and antibiotic duration.

RESULTS

Among 2004 hospitalizations, electronic and manual abstraction methods showed high individual hospitalization-level agreement for initial severity measures (agreement=86%-98%, κ=0.5-0.82), antibiotic choice (agreement=89%-100%, κ=0.70-0.94), and facility-level consistency for empiric antibiotic choice (anti-MRSA r=0.97, P<0.001; antipseudomonal r=0.95, P<0.001) and therapy duration (r=0.77, P<0.001) but lower facility-level consistency for days to clinical stability (r=0.52, P=0.006) or excessive duration of therapy (r=0.55, P=0.005). Both methods identified widespread facility-level variation in antibiotic choice, but we found additional variation in manual estimation of excessive antibiotic duration and initial illness severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Electronic and manual MUE agreed well for illness severity, antibiotic choice, and duration of therapy in pneumonia at both the individual and facility levels. Manual MUE showed additional reviewer-level variation in estimation of initial illness severity and excessive antibiotic use. Electronic MUE allows for reliable, scalable tracking of national patterns of antimicrobial use, enabling the examination of system-wide interventions to improve quality.

CDS in a Learning Health Care System: Identifying Physicians' Reasons for Rejection of Best-Practice Recommendations in Pneumonia through Computerized Clinical Decision Support

BACKGROUND

Local implementation of guidelines for pneumonia care is strongly recommended, but the context of care that affects implementation is poorly understood. In a learning health care system, computerized clinical decision support (CDS) provides an opportunity to both improve and track practice, providing insights into the implementation process.

OBJECTIVES

This article examines physician interactions with a CDS to identify reasons for rejection of guideline recommendations.

METHODS

We implemented a multicenter bedside CDS for the emergency department management of pneumonia that integrated patient data with guideline-based recommendations. We examined the frequency of adoption versus rejection of recommendations for site-of-care and antibiotic selection. We analyzed free-text responses provided by physicians explaining their clinical reasoning for rejection, using concept mapping and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Among 1,722 patient episodes, physicians rejected recommendations to send a patient home in 24%, leaving text in 53%; reasons for rejection of the recommendations included additional or alternative diagnoses beyond pneumonia, and comorbidities or signs of physiologic derangement contributing to risk of outpatient failure that were not processed by the CDS. Physicians rejected broad-spectrum antibiotic recommendations in 10%, leaving text in 76%; differences in pathogen risk assessment, additional patient information, concern about antibiotic properties, and admitting physician preferences were given as reasons for rejection.

CONCLUSION

While adoption of CDS recommendations for pneumonia was high, physicians rejecting recommendations frequently provided feedback, reporting alternative diagnoses, additional individual patient characteristics, and provider preferences as major reasons for rejection. CDS that collects user feedback is feasible and can contribute to a learning health system.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Since the 1960s, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged, disseminated globally and become a leading cause of bacterial infections in both health-care and community settings. However, there is marked geographical variation in MRSA burden owing to several factors, including differences in local infection control practices and pathogen-specific characteristics of the circulating clones. Different MRSA clones have resulted from the independent acquisition of staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec (SCCmec), which contains genes encoding proteins that render the bacterium resistant to most β-lactam antibiotics (such as methicillin), by several S. aureus clones. The success of MRSA is a consequence of the extensive arsenal of virulence factors produced by S. aureus combined with β-lactam resistance and, for most clones, resistance to other antibiotic classes. Clinical manifestations of MRSA range from asymptomatic colonization of the nasal mucosa to mild skin and soft tissue infections to fulminant invasive disease with high mortality. Although treatment options for MRSA are limited, several new antimicrobials are under development. An understanding of colonization dynamics, routes of transmission, risk factors for progression to infection and conditions that promote the emergence of resistance will enable optimization of strategies to effectively control MRSA. Vaccine candidates are also under development and could become an effective prevention measure.