Research needs in antibiotic stewardship

The association between ambient temperature and antimicrobial resistance of Klebsiella pneumoniae in China: a difference-in-differences analysis

Introduction

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) of Klebsiella pneumoniae (K. pneumoniae) poses a significant global public health threat and is responsible for a high prevalence of infections and mortality. However, knowledge about how ambient temperature influences the AMR of K. pneumoniae is limited in the context of global warming.

Methods

AMR data of 31 Chinese provinces was collected from the China Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (CARSS) between 2014 and 2020. Socioeconomic and meteorological data were collected from the China Statistical Yearbook during the same period. A modified difference-in-differences (DID) approach was applied to estimate the association between ambient temperature and third-generation cephalosporin-resistant K. pneumoniae (3GCRKP) and carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae (CRKP). Furthermore, moderating effects of socioeconomic factors were also evaluated.

Results

Every 1°C increase in annual average temperature was associated with a 4.7% (relative risk (RR):1.047, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.031-1.082) increase in the detection rate of 3GCRKP, and a 10.7% (RR:1.107, 95% CI: 1.011-1.211) increase in the detection rate of CRKP. The relationships between ambient temperature and 3GCRKP and CRKP were found to be moderated by socioeconomic status (GDP per capita, income per capita, and consumption per capita; the interaction p-values <0.05), where higher economic status was found to strengthen the effects of temperature on the detection rate of 3GCRKP and weaken the effects on the detection rate of CRKP.

Discussion

Ambient temperature was found to be positively associated with AMR of K. pneumoniae, and this association was moderated by socioeconomic status. Policymakers should consider the impact of global warming and high temperatures on the spread of 3GCRKP and CRKP when developing strategies for the containment of AMR.

Evaluation of an Opt-Out Protocol for Antibiotic De-Escalation in Patients With Suspected Sepsis: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Sepsis guidelines recommend daily review to de-escalate or stop antibiotics in appropriate patients. This randomized, controlled trial evaluated an opt-out protocol to decrease unnecessary antibiotics in patients with suspected sepsis.

METHODS

We evaluated non-intensive care adults on broad-spectrum antibiotics despite negative blood cultures at 10 US hospitals from September 2018 through May 2020. A 23-item safety check excluded patients with ongoing signs of systemic infection, concerning or inadequate microbiologic data, or high-risk conditions. Eligible patients were randomized to the opt-out protocol vs usual care. Primary outcome was post-enrollment antibacterial days of therapy (DOT). Clinicians caring for intervention patients were contacted to encourage antibiotic discontinuation using opt-out language. If continued, clinicians discussed the rationale for continuing antibiotics and de-escalation plans. To evaluate those with zero post-enrollment DOT, hurdle models provided 2 measures: odds ratio of antibiotic continuation and ratio of mean DOT among those who continued antibiotics.

RESULTS

Among 9606 patients screened, 767 (8%) were enrolled. Intervention patients had 32% lower odds of antibiotic continuation (79% vs 84%; odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], .47-.98). DOT among those who continued antibiotics were similar (ratio of means, 1.06; 95% CI, .88-1.26). Fewer intervention patients were exposed to extended-spectrum antibiotics (36% vs 44%). Common reasons for continuing antibiotics were treatment of localized infection (76%) and belief that stopping antibiotics was unsafe (31%). Thirty-day safety events were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

An antibiotic opt-out protocol that targeted patients with suspected sepsis resulted in more antibiotic discontinuations, similar DOT when antibiotics were continued, and no evidence of harm.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT03517007.

Retrospective study of outcomes of short versus long duration of antibiotic therapy for residual osteomyelitis in surgically resected diabetic foot infection

INTRODUCTION

Optimal treatment duration for residual osteomyelitis (OM) post-amputation in diabetic foot infection (DFI) remains unclear, with resultant heterogeneity in prescribing noted in clinical practice. We aimed to identify a difference in outcomes of long duration of antibiotics (LD) with short duration (SD) in patients with culture-positive proximal bone specimen post-amputation.

METHODS

In this single-centre retrospective cohort study (Melbourne, Australia), we analysed antibiotic duration of DFI patients requiring amputation with culture-positive proximal bone specimen over a 31 month period (January 2019-September 2021). Primary outcome was reamputation or debridement at the same and/or contiguous site of amputation at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were readmission to hospital and/or recommencement of antibiotics for DFI at the same and/or contiguous site at 6 months.

RESULTS

Among 92 patients (83% male, median age 67 years), 26 received <4 weeks (SD) and 66 received ≥4 weeks (LD) antibiotic therapy. In the SD group, primary outcome occurred in 9 patients (35%) compared with 15 patients (23%) in the LD group (P = 0.246). Both secondary outcomes occurred in 12 patients (46%) in the SD group compared with 18 patients (27%) in the LD group (P = 0.086). Adjusted logistic regression analysis showed SD was not significantly associated with primary outcome [OR 1.12 (95% CI 0.38-3.31)] or secondary outcomes [OR 1.67 (95% CI 0.60-4.66)].

CONCLUSIONS

This single-centre experience did not demonstrate significant difference in outcomes between antibiotic duration of <4 weeks and ≥4 weeks in DFI patients with culture-positive proximal bone specimen post-amputation. These data provide background for larger international randomized control trials to establish optimal treatment duration.

Study protocol for a randomized clinical trial to assess 7 versus 14-days of treatment for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections (SHORTEN-2 trial)

BACKGROUND

Research priorities in Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) have rapidly evolved in the last decade. The need for a more efficient use of antimicrobials have fueled plenty of studies to define the optimal duration for antibiotic treatments, and yet, there still are large areas of uncertainty in common clinical scenarios. Pseudomonas aeruginosa has been pointed as a priority for clinical research, but it has been unattended by most randomized trials tackling the effectiveness of short treatments. The study protocol of the SHORTEN-2 trial is presented as a practical example of new ways to approach common obstacles for clinical research in AMS.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a 7-day course of antibiotics is superior to 14-day schemes for treating bloodstream infections by P. aeruginosa (BSI-PA).

METHODS

A superiority, open-label, randomized controlled trial will be performed across 30 Spanish hospitals. Adult patients with uncomplicated BSI-PA will be randomized to receive a 7 versus 14-day course of any active antibiotic. The primary endpoint will be the probability for the 7-day group of achieving better outcomes than the control group, assessing altogether clinical effectiveness, severe adverse events, and antibiotic exposure through a DOOR/RADAR analysis. Main secondary endpoints include treatment failure, BSI-PA relapses, and mortality. A superiority design was set for the primary endpoint and non-inferiority for treatment failure, resulting in a sample size of 304 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SHORTEN-2 trial aligns with some of the priorities for clinical research in AMS. The implementation of several methodological innovations allowed overcoming common obstacles, like feasible sample sizes or measuring the clinical impact and unintended effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCt: 2021-003847-10; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05210439.

It's about the patients: Practical antibiotic stewardship in outpatient settings in the United States

Antibiotic-resistant pathogens cause over 35,000 preventable deaths in the United States every year, and multiple strategies could decrease morbidity and mortality. As antibiotic stewardship requirements are being deployed for the outpatient setting, community providers are facing systematic challenges in implementing stewardship programs. Given that the vast majority of antibiotics are prescribed in the outpatient setting, there are endless opportunities to make a smart and informed choice when prescribing and to move the needle on antibiotic stewardship. Antibiotic stewardship in the community, or "smart prescribing" as we suggest, should factor in antibiotic efficacy, safety, local resistance rates, and overall cost, in addition to patient-specific factors and disease presentation, to arrive at an appropriate therapy. Here, we discuss some of the challenges, such as patient/parent pressure to prescribe, lack of data or resources for implementation, and a disconnect between guidelines and real-world practice, among others. We have assembled an easy-to-use best practice guide for providers in the outpatient setting who lack the time or resources to develop a plan or consult lengthy guidelines. We provide specific suggestions for antibiotic prescribing that align real-world clinical practice with best practices for antibiotic stewardship for two of the most common bacterial infections seen in the outpatient setting: community-acquired pneumonia and skin and soft-tissue infection. In addition, we discuss many ways that community providers, payors, and regulatory bodies can make antibiotic stewardship easier to implement and more streamlined in the outpatient setting.

Assessment of Changes in Visits and Antibiotic Prescribing During the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Antibiotic Use and the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Safety Program for Improving Antibiotic Use aimed to improve antibiotic prescribing in ambulatory care practices by engaging clinicians and staff to incorporate antibiotic stewardship into practice culture, communication, and decision-making. Little is known about implementation of antibiotic stewardship in ambulatory care practices.

OBJECTIVE

To examine changes in visits and antibiotic prescribing during the AHRQ Safety Program.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study evaluated a quality improvement intervention in ambulatory care throughout the US in 389 ambulatory care practices from December 1, 2019, to November 30, 2020.

EXPOSURES

The AHRQ Safety Program used webinars, audio presentations, educational tools, and office hours to engage stewardship leaders and clinical staff to address attitudes and cultures that challenge judicious antibiotic prescribing and incorporate best practices for the management of common infections.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome of the Safety Program was antibiotic prescriptions per 100 acute respiratory infection (ARI) visits. Data on total visits and ARI visits were also collected. The number of visits and prescribing rates from baseline (September 1, 2019) to completion of the program (November 30, 2020) were compared.

RESULTS

Of 467 practices enrolled, 389 (83%) completed the Safety Program; of these, 292 (75%) submitted complete data with 6 590 485 visits to 5483 clinicians. Participants included 82 (28%) primary care practices, 103 (35%) urgent care practices, 34 (12%) federally supported practices, 39 (13%) pediatric urgent care practices, 21 (7%) pediatric-only practices, and 14 (5%) other practice types. Visits per practice per month decreased from a mean of 1624 (95% CI, 1317-1931) at baseline to a nadir of 906 (95% CI, 702-1111) early in the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020), and were 1797 (95% CI, 1510-2084) at the end of the program. Total antibiotic prescribing decreased from 18.2% of visits at baseline to 9.5% at completion of the program (-8.7%; 95% CI, -9.9% to -7.6%). Acute respiratory infection visits per practice per month decreased from baseline (n = 321) to a nadir of 76 early in the pandemic (May 2020) and gradually increased through completion of the program (n = 239). Antibiotic prescribing for ARIs decreased from 39.2% at baseline to 24.7% at completion of the program (-14.5%; 95% CI, -16.8% to -12.2%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study of US ambulatory practices that participated in the AHRQ Safety Program, significant reductions in the rates of overall and ARI-related antibiotic prescribing were noted, despite normalization of clinic visits by completion of the program. The forthcoming AHRQ Safety Program content may have utility in ambulatory practices across the US.

Impact of Clinical Decision Support System Implementation at a Community Hospital with an Existing Tele-Antimicrobial Stewardship Program

Background

Lack of on-site antimicrobial stewardship expertise is a barrier to establishing successful programs. Tele-antimicrobial stewardship programs (TASPs) utilizing a clinical decision support system (CDSS) can address these challenges.

Methods

This interrupted time series study reports the impact of CDSS implementation (February 2020) within an existing TASP on antimicrobial usage in a community hospital. Segmented regression analysis was used to assess differences in antimicrobial usage from January 2018 through December 2021. Pre- and post-CDSS frequencies of intravenous vs oral antimicrobials, time to optimal therapy (TTOT), pharmacist efficiency (number of documented interventions per month), and percentage of hospitalized patients receiving antimicrobials were compared with descriptive statistics.

Results

Implementation of a CDSS into an existing TASP was associated with an immediate 11% reduction in antimicrobial usage (level change, P < .0001). Antimicrobial usage was already trending down by 0.25% per month (pre-CDSS slope, P < .0001) and continued to trend down at a similar rate after implementation (post-CDSS slope, P = .0129). Frequency of use of select oral agents increased from 38% to 57%. Median TTOT was 1 day faster (2.9 days pre-CDSS vs 1.9 days post-CDSS). On average, pharmacists documented 2.2-fold more interventions per month (198 vs 90) and patients received 1.03 fewer days of antimicrobials per admission post-CDSS.

Conclusions

Implementation of a CDSS within an established TASP at a community hospital resulted in decreased antimicrobial usage, higher rates of oral usage, faster TTOT, and improved pharmacist efficiency.

White paper on antimicrobial stewardship in solid organ transplant recipients

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) have made immense strides in optimizing antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral use in clinical settings. However, although ASPs are required institutionally by regulatory agencies in the United States and Canada, they are not mandated for transplant centers or programs specifically. Despite the fact that solid organ transplant recipients in particular are at increased risk of infections from multidrug-resistant organisms, due to host and donor factors and immunosuppressive therapy, there currently are little rigorous data regarding stewardship practices in solid organ transplant populations, and thus, no transplant-specific requirements currently exist. Further complicating matters, transplant patients have a wide range of variability regarding their susceptibility to infection, as factors such as surgery of transplant, intensity of immunosuppression, and presence of drains or catheters in situ may modify the risk of infection. As such, it is not feasible to have a "one-size-fits-all" style of stewardship for this patient population. The objective of this white paper is to identify opportunities, risk factors, and ASP strategies that should be assessed with solid organ transplant recipients to optimize antimicrobial use, while producing an overall improvement in patient outcomes. We hope it may serve as a springboard for development of future guidance and identification of research opportunities.

OUP accepted manuscript

Antimicrobial and diagnostic stewardship initiatives have become increasingly important in paediatric settings. The value of qualitative approaches to conduct stewardship work in paediatric patients is being increasingly recognized. This article seeks to provide an introduction to basic elements of qualitative study designs and provide an overview of how these methods have successfully been applied to both antimicrobial and diagnostic stewardship work in paediatric patients. A multidisciplinary team of experts in paediatric infectious diseases, paediatric critical care and qualitative methods has written a perspective piece introducing readers to qualitative stewardship work in children, intended as an overview to highlight the importance of such methods and as a starting point for further work. We describe key differences between qualitative and quantitative methods, and the potential benefits of qualitative approaches. We present examples of qualitative research in five discrete topic areas of high relevance for paediatric stewardship work: provider attitudes; provider prescribing behaviours; stewardship in low-resource settings; parents’ perspectives on stewardship; and stewardship work focusing on select high-risk patients. Finally, we explore the opportunities for multidisciplinary academic collaboration, incorporation of innovative scientific disciplines and young investigator growth through the use of qualitative research in paediatric stewardship. Qualitative approaches can bring rich insights and critically needed new information to antimicrobial and diagnostic stewardship efforts in children. Such methods are an important tool in the armamentarium against worsening antimicrobial resistance, and a major opportunity for investigators interested in moving the needle forward for stewardship in paediatric patients.

Impact of early antimicrobial stewardship intervention in patients with positive blood cultures: results from a randomized comparative study: Impact of stewardship on BSI outcomes

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial stewardship intervention (ASI) appears necessary to realize the full benefits of rapid diagnostic technologies in clinical practice. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes between early ASI paired with MALDI-TOF compared to MALDI-TOF with standard of care (SOC) reporting in patients with positive blood cultures.

METHODS

Adult patients with positive blood cultures and organism speciation via MALDI-TOF admitted between 2/2015 and 9/2015 were randomized to ASI or SOC in a 1:1 fashion. Patients admitted for at least 48 hours following positive culture were included in analyses. ASI was defined as a clinical assessment by a stewardship team member with non-binding treatment recommendations offered to the primary team. The primary outcome was time to definitive therapy. Secondary outcomes included post-culture length of stay (LOS), time to first change in antibiotics, and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 149 patients were included in analyses (76 in the ASI group and 73 in the SOC group). ASI and SOC arms did not differ according to age, sex, comorbidities, or severity of illness. Gram-positive organisms were common in both SOC and ASI arms (74.0 vs 61.8%, p=0.11). Time-to-definitive therapy was reduced, on average, by 30.3 hours in the ASI group (71.6 vs. 41.3 hours, p=0.01). Hospital LOS following the first positive blood culture was significantly shorter in the ASI group (8.7 vs. 11.2 days, p=0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

ASI combined with MALDI-TOF reduced the time to definitive therapy, time to first change in antibiotics, and was associated with a shorter post-culture LOS.

A commitment and call to strengthen and expand qualitative research efforts to improve the impact of antimicrobial stewardship

Inadequate recognition of the value of qualitative research in healthcare, notably in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS), in addition to a lack of publishing space in medical journals has prompted JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance to focus on a qualitative series of AMS papers to incite interest in and support for pivotal qualitative approaches that make an indispensable contribution to our understanding of antibiotic use and how to address antimicrobial resistance. In this series, invited authors with diverse backgrounds and considerable expertise address and review intricate and varying qualitative research methods, behaviour change determinants, interventions and qualitative perspectives, with the aim of strengthening commitment and expanding qualitative initiatives to further the impact of AMS globally.

Implementing an Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in the Intensive Care Unit by Engaging Critical Care Nurses

The continuing rise in the incidence of multidrug-resistant organism infections has made combating this grave threat a national imperative. One of the most potent weapons in our arsenal against such organisms is the prudent use of antibiotics. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs aim to slow the development of antimicrobial resistance through judicious, monitored use of antibiotics. Traditionally, AMS programs have included pharmacists and physicians with training in AWS, infectious disease physicians, hospital leadership, microbiologists, and infection prevention professionals. Nurses are missing from AMS programs, especially intensive care nurses. Critical care nurses provide the majority of patient care to ICU patients and monitor the progress of the patient's condition. The ICU nurse is an obvious asset to the AMS programs. ICU nurses are well-educated autonomous professionals with a unique role in coordinating with the critical care team. Critical care nurses already perform numerous nursing tasks with AWS functions. This, together with their unique perspective makes them a valuable asset that has often been overlooked. Traditionally, perceived barriers have kept ICU nurses from joining AMS teams. By removing these barriers and engaging critical care nurses in the important work of AWS, we can strengthen our AMS team and achieve optimal outcomes for our patients.

A Baker's Dozen of Top Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention Publications in 2020

The number of articles related to antimicrobial stewardship published each year has increased significantly over the last decade. Keeping up with the literature, particularly the most innovative, well-designed, or applicable to one’s own practice area, can be challenging. The Southeastern Research Group Endeavor (SERGE-45) network reviewed antimicrobial stewardship–related, peer-reviewed literature from 2020 that detailed actionable interventions. The top 13 publications were summarized following identification using a modified Delphi technique. This article highlights the selected interventions and may serve as a key resource for teaching and training, and to identify novel or optimized stewardship opportunities within one’s institution.

Nurse practitioners as antibiotic stewards: Examining prescribing patterns and perceptions

BACKGROUND

Advanced practice providers in the outpatient setting play a key role in antibiotic stewardship, yet little is known about how to engage these providers in stewardship activities and what factors influence their antibiotic prescribing practices.

METHODS

We used mixed methods to obtain data on practices and perceptions related to antibiotic prescribing by nurse practitioners (NP) and Veteran patients. We interviewed NPs working in the outpatient setting at one Veterans Affairs facility and conducted focus groups with Veterans. Emerging themes were mapped to the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety framework. We examined NP antibiotic prescribing data from 2017 to 2019.

RESULTS

We interviewed NPs and conducted Veteran focus groups. Nurse practitioners reported satisfaction with resources, including ready access to pharmacists and infectious disease specialists. Building patient trust was reported as essential to prescribing confidence level. Veterans indicated the need to better understand differences between viral and bacterial infections. NP prescribing patterns revealed a decline in antibiotics prescribed for upper respiratory illnesses over a 3-year period.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient NPs focus on educating the patient while balancing organizational access challenges. Further research is needed to determine how to include both NPs and patients when implementing outpatient antibiotic stewardship strategies. Further research is also needed to understand factors associated with the decline in nurse practitioner antibiotic prescribing observed in this study.

White Paper: Bridging the gap between surveillance data and antimicrobial stewardship in the outpatient sector-practical guidance from the JPIAMR ARCH and COMBACTE-MAGNET EPI-Net networks

Background

The outpatient setting is a key scenario for the implementation of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) activities, considering that overconsumption of antibiotics occurs mainly outside hospitals. This publication is the result of a joint initiative by the JPIAMR ARCH and COMBACTE-MAGNET EPI-Net networks, which is aimed at formulating a set of target actions for linking surveillance data with AMS activities in the outpatient setting.

Methods

A scoping review of the literature was carried out in three research areas: AMS leadership and accountability; antimicrobial usage and AMS; antimicrobial resistance and AMS. Consensus on the actions was reached through a RAND-modified Delphi process involving over 40 experts in infectious diseases, clinical microbiology, AMS, veterinary medicine or public health, from 18 low-, middle- and high-income countries.

Results

Evidence was retrieved from 38 documents, and an initial 25 target actions were proposed, differentiating between essential or desirable targets according to clinical relevance, feasibility and applicability to settings and resources. In the first consultation round, preliminary agreement was reached for all targets. Further to a second review, 6 statements were re-considered and 3 were deleted, leading to a final list of 22 target actions in the form of a practical checklist.

Conclusions

This White Paper is a pragmatic and flexible tool to guide the development of calibrated surveillance-based AMS interventions specific to the outpatient setting, which is characterized by substantial inter- and intra-country variability in the organization of healthcare structures, maintaining a global perspective and taking into account the feasibility of the target actions in low-resource settings.

Identifying global research gaps to mitigate antimicrobial resistance: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Identify research gaps relevant to the global effort to combat antimicrobial resistance.

METHODS

Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Ovid MEDLINE were searched for reviews on antimicrobial resistance published between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. Recommendations for future research were identified.

FINDINGS

Seventy-four reviews met inclusion criteria; 300 research gaps and recommendations were identified. The largest number were from the human health sector (105; 35%) followed by environmental health (72; 23%), animal health (66; 22%), food and feed (14; 5%), and plants and crops (8; 3%); 35 (12%) involved more than one sector. The largest number of gaps concerned surveillance of resistance (68; 23%), followed by study design or methodology (52; 17%), interventions (41; 14%), risk assessment and modeling (35; 12%), ecological (26; 9%) and biochemical (28; 9%) aspects of resistance, interface between reservoirs of resistant pathogens (24; 8%), and economic (15; 5%) and awareness- and behavior-related (11; 4%) aspects of antimicrobial resistance.

CONCLUSIONS

Important research gaps remain in our complete understanding of antimicrobial resistance, and more research is needed about its development, transmission, and impact across the interface of human, animal, and environmental reservoirs.

Nationwide audit and feedback on implementation of antibiotic stewardship programmes in Norwegian hospitals

Background

Implementation of antibiotic stewardship programmes (ASPs) in hospitals is challenging and there is a knowledge gap on how to pursue this process efficiently.

Objectives

To evaluate whether audit and feedback (A&F) is a feasible and useful methodology to assess and support the implementation of ASPs in hospitals.

Methods

A multidisciplinary team performed document reviews and on-site interviews with professionals involved in the implementation of ASPs. Oral feedback on preliminary findings and areas of improvement were provided on-site, followed by feedback reports summarizing major findings and recommendations. Descriptive statistics were used to present number of hospital trusts, interviewees, professions, disciplines, workload and costs.

Results

All 22 hospital trusts in Norway participated in the A&F conducted October 2017 to April 2019. Altogether, 446 leaders and healthcare workers were interviewed: 110 leaders, 336 health professionals of whom 89 were antimicrobial stewardship team members. Median number of days from audits were performed till reporting were 36 (IQR 30-49). Median workload for auditors per visit was 7 days (6-8). Total costs were €133 952. Main audit findings were that ASP structures were established in most hospital trusts, but leadership commitment and implementation of interventions were often lacking. The hospital trusts received feedback on establishing governance structures, setting local targets, implementing interventions and increased involvement of nurses.

Conclusions

Nationwide A&F provides a unique and comprehensive insight into the implementation of ASPs in hospitals and is feasible with a reasonable amount of resources. This approach can identify targets for improved implementation of ASPs in hospitals.

Prescription Antibiotic Use Among the US population 1999-2018: National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys

Background

Antibiotic resistance has been identified as a public health threat both in the United States and globally. The United States published the National Strategy for Combating Antibiotic Resistance in 2014, which included goals to reduce inappropriate outpatient antibiotic use.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted using National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) years 1999–2018. Weighted prevalence of past 30-day nontopical outpatient antibiotic use was calculated, as well as the change in prevalence from 1999–2002 to 2015–2018 and 2007–2010 to 2015–2018, both overall and for subgroups. Associations with past 30-day nontopical outpatient antibiotic use in 2015–2018 were examined using predictive margins calculated by multivariable logistic regression.

Results

The overall prevalence of past 30-day nontopical outpatient antibiotic use adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, poverty status, time of year of the interview, and insurance status from 1999–2002 to 2015–2018 changed significantly from 4.9% (95% CI, 3.9% to 5.0%) to 3.0% (95% CI, 2.6% to 3.0%), with the largest decrease among children age 0–1 years. From 2007–2010 to 2015–2018, there was no significant change (adjusted prevalence ratio [adjPR], 1.0; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.2). Age was significantly associated with antibiotic use, with children age 0–1 years having significantly higher antibiotic use than all other age categories >6 years. Being non-Hispanic Black was negatively associated with antibiotic use as compared with being non-Hispanic White (adjPR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4 to 0.8).

Conclusions

While there were declines in antibiotic use from 1999–2002 to 2015–2018, there were no observed declines during the last decade.

Using Audit and Feedback to Improve Antimicrobial Prescribing in Emergency Departments: A Multicenter Quasi-Experimental Study in the Veterans Health Administration

Background

In this pilot trial, we evaluated whether audit-and-feedback was a feasible strategy to improve antimicrobial prescribing in emergency departments (EDs).

Methods

We evaluated an audit-and-feedback intervention using a quasi-experimental interrupted time-series design at 2 intervention and 2 matched-control EDs; there was a 12-month baseline, 1-month implementation, and 11-month intervention period. At intervention sites, clinicians received (1) a single, one-on-one education about antimicrobial prescribing for common infections and (2) individualized feedback on total and condition-specific (uncomplicated acute respiratory infection [ARI]) antimicrobial use with peer-to-peer comparisons at baseline and every quarter. The primary outcome was the total antimicrobial-prescribing rate for all visits and was assessed using generalized linear models. In an exploratory analysis, we measured antimicrobial use for uncomplicated ARI visits and manually reviewed charts to assess guideline-concordant management for 6 common infections.

Results

In the baseline and intervention periods, intervention sites had 28 016 and 23 164 visits compared to 33 077 and 28 835 at control sites. We enrolled 27 of 31 (87.1%) eligible clinicians; they acknowledged receipt of 33.3% of feedback e-mails. Intervention sites compared with control sites had no absolute reduction in their total antimicrobial rate (incidence rate ratio = 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.01). At intervention sites, antimicrobial use for uncomplicated ARIs decreased (68.6% to 42.4%; P < .01) and guideline-concordant management improved (52.1% to 72.5%; P < .01); these improvements were not seen at control sites.

Conclusions

At intervention sites, total antimicrobial use did not decrease, but an exploratory analysis showed reduced antimicrobial prescribing for viral ARIs. Future studies should identify additional targets for condition-specific feedback while exploring ways to make electronic feedback more acceptable.

Rates of increase of antibiotic resistance and ambient temperature in Europe: a cross-national analysis of 28 countries between 2000 and 2016

Background

The rapid increase of bacterial antibiotic resistance could soon render our most effective method to address infections obsolete. Factors influencing pathogen resistance prevalence in human populations remain poorly described, though temperature is known to contribute to mechanisms of spread.

Aim

To quantify the role of temperature, spatially and temporally, as a mechanistic modulator of transmission of antibiotic resistant microbes.

Methods

An ecologic analysis was performed on country-level antibiotic resistance prevalence in three common bacterial pathogens across 28 European countries, collectively representing over 4 million tested isolates. Associations of minimum temperature and other predictors with change in antibiotic resistance rates over 17 years (2000–2016) were evaluated with multivariable models. The effects of predictors on the antibiotic resistance rate change across geographies were quantified.

Results

During 2000–2016, for Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae, European countries with 10°C warmer ambient minimum temperatures compared to others, experienced more rapid resistance increases across all antibiotic classes. Increases ranged between 0.33%/year (95% CI: 0.2 to 0.5) and 1.2%/year (95% CI: 0.4 to 1.9), even after accounting for recognised resistance drivers including antibiotic consumption and population density. For Staphylococcus aureus a decreasing relationship of −0.4%/year (95% CI:  −0.7 to 0.0) was found for meticillin resistance, reflecting widespread declines in meticillin-resistant S. aureus across Europe over the study period.

Conclusion

We found evidence of a long-term effect of ambient minimum temperature on antibiotic resistance rate increases in Europe. Ambient temperature might considerably influence antibiotic resistance growth rates, and explain geographic differences observed in cross-sectional studies. Rising temperatures globally may hasten resistance spread, complicating mitigation efforts.

From 'molecules of life' to new therapeutic approaches, an evolution marked by the advent of artificial intelligence: the cases of chronic pain and neuropathic disorders

The large families of the molecules of life are at the origin of the discovery of new compounds with which to treat disease. The arrival of artificial intelligence (AI) has considerably modified the search for innovative bioactive drugs and their therapeutic applications. Conventional approaches at different organizational research levels have emerged and, thus, AI associated with gene and cell therapies could supplant conventional pharmacotherapy and facilitate the diagnosis of pathologies. Using the examples of chronic pain and neuropathic disorders, which affect a large number of patients, I illustrate here how AI could generate new therapeutic approaches, why some compounds are seen as recreational drugs and others as medicinal drugs, and why, in some countries, psychedelic drugs are considered as potential therapeutic drugs but not in others.

Rapid conversion of an in-patient hospital unit to accommodate COVID-19: An interdisciplinary human factors, ethnography, and infection prevention and control approach

BACKGROUND

In response to the Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, in-patient units in hospitals around the world have altered their patient care routines and Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practices. Our interdisciplinary team of applied Human Factors (HF), ethnography, and IPC experts assisted one Unit, normally serving general surgical and orthopedic patients, as it rapidly converted to deliver COVID-19-specific care. This paper describes the conversion experience of the Unit, and outlines broader lessons for other acute care teams faced with similar issues.

METHODS

We deployed walkthroughs, simulations, and ethnography to identify important safety gaps in care delivery processes on the Unit. These interventions were undertaken using interdisciplinary theories of implementation that combined systems-level HF perspectives, ethnographic approaches, and individual-level IPC perspectives. Timely recommendations were developed and delivered to Unit staff for feedback and implementation.

RESULTS

We describe three interventions on the Unit: 1) the de-cluttering and re-organization of personal protective equipment (PPE); 2) the reconfiguring of designated 'dirty' tray tables and supplies; and 3) the redesign of handling pathways for 'dirty' linens and laundry. Each of these interventions was implemented to varying degrees, but all contributed to discussions of safety and IPC implementation that extended beyond the Unit and into the operations of the broader hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Leveraging our team's interdisciplinary expertise and blended approaches to implementation, the interventions assisted in the Unit's rapid conversion towards providing COVID-19-specific care. The deployment and implementation of the interventions highlight the potential of collaboration between HF, ethnography, and IPC experts to support frontline healthcare delivery under pandemic conditions in an effort to minimize nosocomial transmission potential in the acute healthcare setting.

Evaluation of antibiotic prescribing in emergency departments and urgent care centers across the Veterans' Health Administration

OBJECTIVE

Assessments of antibiotic prescribing in ambulatory care have largely focused on viral acute respiratory infections (ARIs). It is unclear whether antibiotic prescribing for bacterial ARIs should also be a target for antibiotic stewardship efforts. In this study, we evaluated antibiotic prescribing for viral and potentially bacterial ARIs in patients seen at emergency departments (EDs) and urgent care centers (UCCs).

DESIGN

This retrospective cohort included all ED and UCC visits by patients who were not hospitalized and were seen during weekday, daytime hours during 2016-2018 in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Guideline concordance was evaluated for viral ARIs and for 3 potentially bacterial ARIs: acute exacerbation of COPD, pneumonia, and sinusitis.

RESULTS

There were 3,182,926 patient visits across 129 sites: 80.7% in EDs and 19.3% in UCCs. Mean patient age was 60.2 years, 89.4% were male, and 65.6% were white. Antibiotics were prescribed during 608,289 (19.1%) visits, including 42.7% with an inappropriate indication. For potentially bacterial ARIs, guideline-concordant management varied across clinicians (median, 36.2%; IQR, 26.0-52.7) and sites (median, 38.2%; IQR, 31.7-49.4). For viral ARIs, guideline-concordant management also varied across clinicians (median, 46.2%; IQR, 24.1-68.6) and sites (median, 40.0%; IQR, 30.4-59.3). At the clinician and site levels, we detected weak correlations between guideline-concordant management for viral ARIs and potentially bacterial ARIs: clinicians (r = 0.35; P = .0001) and sites (r = 0.44; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that, across EDs and UCCs within VHA, there are major opportunities to improve management of both viral and potentially bacterial ARIs. Some clinicians and sites are more frequently adhering to ARI guideline recommendations on antibiotic use.

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.

Severe influenza/respiratory syncytial virus infections and hospital antimicrobial stewardship opportunities: impact of a 4-year surveillance including molecular diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in adults hospitalized for a respiratory infection in the winter months and to evaluate the impact of a viral diagnosis on empirical antimicrobial management (antibiotics and antivirals).

DESIGN

Observational cohort study.

SETTING

Acute-care university hospital.

PATIENTS

The study included 963 adult patients hospitalized over a 4-year surveillance period.

METHODS

Annual surveillance timelines were defined according to epidemiological criteria related to the circulation of RSV and influenza viruses in the general population. Patients were screened following a severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) case definition at the emergency department and were enrolled for molecular assay targeting influenza/RSV viruses after oral informed consent. Epidemiological and clinical data were recorded prospectively, microbiological investigations, antimicrobial management, and outcome data were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

An influenza or RSV virus was documented in 316 of 963 patients (33%). Optimization of antimicrobial management (AM) was achieved in 162 of 265 patients (61%) with a positive viral diagnosis and no bacterial infection at admission (AM treatment not initiated, n = 111; discontinued, n = 51). In contrast, only 128 of 462 patients (28%) with negative microbiological investigations did not have AM treatment initiated (n = 116) or had such treatment discontinued (n = 12). Early, targeted antiviral treatment was prescribed in 235 of 253 patients (93%) confirmed with influenza. Epidemiological, clinical, and outcome data were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Epidemiological surveillance associated with influenza/RSV molecular diagnosis in adults hospitalized for severe winter respiratory infections dramatically enhanced antimicrobial management.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs; a two-part narrative review of step-wise design and issues of controversy Part I: step-wise design of an antimicrobial stewardship program

Regardless of one's opinion of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs), it is hardly possible to work in hospital care and not be exposed to the term or its practical effects. Despite the term being relatively new, the number of publications in the field is vast, including several excellent reviews of general and specific aspects. Work in antimicrobial stewardship is complex, and includes not only aspects of infectious disease and microbiology, but also of epidemiology, genetics, behavioural psychology, systems science, economics and ethics, to name a few. This review aims to take several of these aspects and the scientific evidence of antimicrobial stewardship studies and merge them into two questions: How should we design ASPs based on what we know today? And which are the most essential unanswered questions regarding antimicrobial stewardship on a broader scale? This narrative review is written in two separate parts aiming to provide answers to the two questions. This first part is written as a step-wise approach to designing a stewardship intervention based on the pillars of unmet need, feasibility, scientific evidence and necessary core elements. It is written mainly as a guide to someone new to the field. It is sorted into five distinct steps: (a) focusing on designing aims; (b) assessing performance and local barriers to rational antimicrobial use; (c) deciding on intervention technique; (d) practical, tailored design including core element inclusion; and (e) evaluation and sustainability. The second part, published separately, formulates ten critical questions on controversies in the field of antimicrobial stewardship. It is aimed at clinicians and researchers with stewardship experience and strives to promote discussion, not to provide answers.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs; a two-part narrative review of step-wise design and issues of controversy. Part II: Ten questions reflecting knowledge gaps and issues of controversy in the field of antimicrobial stewardship

Regardless of one's opinion on antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs), it is hardly possible to work in hospital care and not be exposed to the term or its practical effects. Despite the term being relatively new, the number of publications in the field is vast, including several excellent reviews of general and specific aspects. Work in antimicrobial stewardship is complex, and include aspects not only of infectious disease and microbiology, but also of epidemiology, genetics, behavioural psychology, systems science, economics and ethics, to name but a few. This review aims to take several of these aspects and the scientific evidence from antimicrobial stewardship studies and merge them into two questions: How should we design ASPs based on what we know today? and Which are the most essential unanswered questions regarding antimicrobial stewardship on a broader scale? This narrative review is written in two separate parts aiming to provide answers to the two questions. The first part, published separately, is written as a step-wise approach to designing a stewardship intervention based on the pillars of unmet need, feasibility, scientific evidence and necessary core elements. It is written mainly as a guide to someone new to the field. It is sorted into five distinct steps; (a) focusing on designing aims; (b) assessing performance and local barriers to rational antimicrobial use; (c) deciding on intervention technique; (d) practical, tailored design including core element inclusion; and (e) evaluation and sustainability. This second part formulates 10 critical questions on controversies in the field of antimicrobial stewardship. It is aimed at clinicians and researchers with stewardship experience and strives to promote discussion, not to provide answers.