Predictors of Unplanned Hospitalization in Patients Receiving Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy Across a Large Integrated Healthcare Network

Current practices and challenges of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy: a narrative review

Extended hospitalization for infection management increases inpatient care costs and the risk of healthcare-associated adverse events, including infections. The growing global demand for healthcare, the diminishing availability of hospital beds and an increasing patient preference for care within their own home have been the primary drivers of the expansion of hospital-in-the-home programmes. Such programmes include the use of IV antimicrobials in outpatient settings, known as outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT). However, OPAT practices vary globally. This review article aims to describe the current OPAT practices and challenges worldwide. OPAT practice begins with patient evaluation and selection using eligibility criteria, which requires collaboration between the interdisciplinary OPAT team, patients and caregivers. Depending on care requirements, eligible patients may be enrolled to various models of care, receiving medication by healthcare professionals at outpatient infusion centres, hospital clinics, home visits or through self-administration. OPAT can be used for the management of many infections where an effective oral treatment option is lacking. Various classes of parenteral antimicrobials, including β-lactams, aminoglycosides, glycopeptides, fluoroquinolones and antifungals such as echinocandins, are used globally in OPAT practice. Despite its benefits, OPAT has numerous challenges, including complications from medication administration devices, antimicrobial side effects, monitoring requirements, antimicrobial instability, patient non-adherence, patient OPAT rejection, and challenges related to OPAT team structure and administration, all of which impact its outcome. A negative outcome could include unplanned hospital readmission. Future research should focus on mitigating these challenges to enable optimization of the OPAT service and thereby maximize the documented benefits for the healthcare system, patients and healthcare providers.

Does comorbidity index predict OPAT readmission?

Objectives

To determine if the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) is an accurate predictor of unplanned readmissions for patients using outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) services.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of patients >16 years of age who had received OPAT at Lancashire Teaching Hospitals between 2019 and 2021. The number of unplanned hospitalizations was measured and categorized as OPAT related or non-OPAT related. The CCI for each patient group was calculated using an online tool, and logistic regression was used to assess the association between risk factors and risk of being readmitted.

Results

The cohort consisted of 741 patients. Unplanned readmission was seen in 112 patients (15.1%). The mean CCI score for patients with OPAT-related readmissions was 4.22, 0.92 higher than the mean for patients who were not readmitted (3.30). The mean CCI score for patients with non-OPAT-related readmissions was higher still at 4.89. The logistic regression showed that increased CCI, age, male gender and home location compared with clinic were associated with increased odds of readmission, although these effects did not meet statistical significance.

Conclusions

These results suggest that a higher CCI score is associated with a non-statistically significant increased risk of unplanned hospitalization. We concluded that the CCI may therefore be used in future decision-making regarding the acceptance of patients to OPAT and requires further investigation.

Patient outcomes following home-based outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy and facility-based outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In this systematic literature review and meta-analysis, we did not find a statistically significant difference in readmission and treatment failure rates between home-based and facility-based OPAT. Optimal patient selection for appropriate OPAT location appears to be more important than the location itself for the best OPAT outcome.

Usefulness of Routine Laboratory Tests for Follow up of Patients Receiving Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy Run by Infectious Diseases Fellows

BACKGROUND

The infectious disease society of America (IDSA) recommends routine laboratory tests for all patients receiving outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) to monitor for adverse events. There are no data to support how often patients should take monitoring laboratory tests. In addition, the relevance of different laboratory tests commonly used for OPAT follow up is not clearly known.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study over a 7-year study interval (1 January 2014 to 31 December 2021). Clinical data were obtained to identify the risk factors associated with abnormal laboratory tests and determine if abnormal laboratory tests led to antibiotic change or hospital readmission.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-six patients met the inclusion criteria for this study. In our multivariate analysis, the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) of 0-4 (aOR 0.39, 95%Cl 0.18-0.86), the use of ceftriaxone without vancomycin (aOR 0.47, 95%Cl 0.24-0.91) and an OPAT duration of 2-4 weeks (aOR 0.47, 95%Cl 0.24-0.91) were associated with a lower risk of OPAT complications. A CCI of 5 or more (aOR 2.5, 95%Cl (1.1-5.7)) and an OPAT duration of 5 or more weeks (aOR 2.7, 95% Cl 1.3-5.6) were associated with a higher risk of OPAT complications. An abnormal complete metabolic panel or vancomycin levels, but not an abnormal complete blood count, were associated with antibiotic change or readmission.

CONCLUSION

Patients with fewer comorbidities, ceftriaxone and short OPAT durations are at lower risk for OPAT complications. These patients could be followed with less frequent laboratory monitoring.

From sea to shining IV: the current state of OPAT in the United States

First described in the United States, outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) has become an indispensable part of treating serious infections. The proportion of infectious disease (ID) physicians utilizing a formal OPAT program has increased in recent years, but remains a minority. In addition, many ID physicians have indicated that OPAT programs have inadequate financial and administrative support. Given the medical complexity of patients receiving OPAT, as well as the challenges of communicating with OPAT providers across health care facilities and systems, OPAT programs ideally should involve a multidisciplinary team. The majority of patients in the United States receive OPAT either at home with assistance from home infusion companies and visiting nurses or at a skilled nursing facility (SNF), though the latter has been associated with lower rates of patient satisfaction. Current and future opportunities and challenges for OPAT programs include providing OPAT services for people who inject drugs (PWID) and incorporating the increasing use of oral antibiotics for infections historically treated with parenteral therapy. In this review, we will discuss the current practice patterns and patient experiences with OPAT in the United States, as well as identify future challenges and opportunities for OPAT programs.

Antifungal use via outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy

BACKGROUND

Antifungal administration via outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is infrequent. As patients with invasive fungal infections (IFIs) receiving OPAT are at high risk of readmissions, careful, risk based patient selection and monitoring is important.

OBJECTIVES

To describe our experience managing IFIs via OPAT, including assessment of risk factors associated with unplanned readmissions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of outpatients from two tertiary hospitals in Western Australia managed with parenteral antifungals for the treatment of IFIs from 2012 to 2020. Outcomes assessed were unplanned OPAT-related readmissions, adverse events and achievement of treatment aims at the completion of OPAT.

RESULTS

Forty six patients were included, encompassing 696 OPAT days. Twenty three (50%) patients received intravenous (IV) liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB), 23 (50%) received IV echinocandins and one (2%) patient received IV fluconazole. One patient received both IV L-AmB and an echinocandin. Unplanned OPAT-related readmissions occurred in 13 (28%) patients and any adverse event occurred in 19 (41%), most commonly nephrotoxicity amongst patients receiving L-AmB. On univariate analysis, unplanned OPAT-related readmissions were more common in Mucorales infection, L-AmB doses of ≥5mg/kg and otorhinolaryngologic (ENT) infections. At the completion of OPAT, attainment of treatment aims occurred in 28 (61%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving parenteral antifungals via OPAT experience high rates of unplanned readmissions and adverse events. Risk factor identification may facilitate optimal patient selection and establishment of treatment aims.

Evaluate the Effectiveness of Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy (OPAT) Program in Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Study

(1) Background: Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) is a well-established and cost-effective measure that improves the efficient use of healthcare resources and increases bed availability. Only limited published data is available to illustrate OPAT implementation and outcomes in Saudi Arabia. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of OPAT in a tertiary center in Saudi Arabia. (2) Methods: In this retrospective study, clinical charts of enrolled patients were reviewed in a tertiary care center from the initial month of November 2017 to March 2020. All admitted patients with a central line and who enrolled in the OPAT of the hospital during this study period were included. The primary outcome was the 30-days readmission rate of OPAT patients. Secondary outcomes were factors associated with OPAT failure. Descriptive analysis of the data was used to express the results. (3) Results: We enrolled 90 patients; 54 (60%) were male; the mean age was 55.16 (±17.7) years old. The mean duration of the antimicrobial treatment was 21.9 (+24.6) days. All patients completed the intended course of therapy. Ertapenem was the most frequently used antimicrobial (43%), followed by vancomycin (11.2%). Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are some of the most common bacterial infections in 25 patients (26.9%), followed by osteomyelitis in 16 patients (17.2%). Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase E.coli was the highest common isolated microorganism (44.9%), followed by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus MRSA (16.9%). The readmission to the hospital during therapy was required for 12 patients (13.3%). Shifting from hospital care to OPAT care resulted in cost savings of 18 million SAR in the overall assessment period and avoided a total of 1984 patient days of hospitalization. (4) Conclusion: The findings have shown that OPAT therapy was effective with minimum hospital readmissions and therapy complications. OPAT programs can reduce healthcare costs and should be integrated into practice.

Assessment of risk factors associated with outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) complications: A retrospective cohort study

Objective:

To characterize factors associated with increased risk of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) complication.

Design:

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting:

Four hospitals within NYU Langone Health (NYULH).

Patients:

All patients aged ≥18 years with OPAT episodes who were admitted to an acute-care facility at NYULH between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2020, who had an infectious diseases consultation during admission.

Results:

Overall, 8.45% of OPAT patients suffered a vascular complication and 6.04% suffered an antimicrobial complication. Among these patients, 19.95% had a 30-day readmission and 3.35% had OPAT-related readmission. Also, 1.58% of patients developed a catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI). After adjusting for key confounders, we found that patients discharged to a subacute rehabilitation center (SARC) were more likely to develop a CRBSI (odds ratio [OR], 4.75; P = .005) and to be readmitted for OPAT complications (OR, 2.89; P = .002). Loss to follow-up with the infectious diseases service was associated with increased risks of CRBSI (OR, 3.78; P = .007) and 30-day readmission (OR, 2.59; P < .001).

Conclusions:

Discharge to an SARC is strongly associated with increased risks of readmission for OPAT-related complications and CRBSI. Loss to follow-up with the infectious diseases service is strongly associated with increased risk of readmission and CRBSI. CRBSI prevention during SARC admission is a critically needed public health intervention. Further work must be done for patients undergoing OPAT to improve their follow-up retention with the infectious diseases service.

Failure modes and effects analysis to improve transitions of care in patients discharged on outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy

PURPOSE

To identify barriers to safe and effective completion of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) in patients discharged from an academic medical center and to develop targeted solutions to potentially resolve or improve the identified barriers.

SUMMARY

A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) was conducted by a multidisciplinary OPAT task force to evaluate the processes for patients discharged on OPAT to 2 postdischarge dispositions: (1) home and (2) skilled nursing facility (SNF). The task force created 2 process maps and identified potential failure modes, or barriers, to the successful completion of each step. Thirteen and 10 barriers were identified in the home and SNF process maps, respectively. Task force members created 5 subgroups, each developing solutions for a group of related barriers. The 5 areas of focus included (1) the OPAT electronic order set, (2) critical tasks to be performed before patient discharge, (3) patient education, (4) patient follow-up and laboratory monitoring, and (5) SNF communication. Interventions involved working with information technology to update the electronic order set, bridging communication and ensuring completion of critical tasks by creating an inpatient electronic discharge checklist, developing patient education resources, planning a central OPAT outpatient database within the electronic medical record, and creating a pharmacist on-call pager for SNFs.

CONCLUSION

The FMEA approach was helpful in identifying perceived barriers to successful transitions of care in patients discharged on OPAT and in developing targeted interventions. Healthcare organizations may reproduce this strategy when completing quality improvement planning for this high-risk process.

Discharge Delays and Costs Associated With Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy for High-Priced Antibiotics

BACKGROUND

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is a widely used, safe, and cost-effective treatment. Most public and private insurance providers require prior authorization (PA) for OPAT, yet the impact of the inpatient PA process is not known. Our aim was to characterize discharge barriers and PA delays associated with high-priced OPAT antibiotics.

METHODS

This was an institutional review board-approved study of adult patients discharged with daptomycin, ceftaroline, ertapenem, and novel beta-lactam-beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations from January 2017 to December 2017. Patients with an OPAT PA delay were compared with patients without a delay. The primary endpoint was total direct hospital costs from the start of treatment.

RESULTS

Two-hundred patients were included: 141 (71%) no OPAT delay vs 59 (30%) OPAT delay. More patients with a PA delay were discharged to a subacute care facility compared with an outpatient setting: 37 (63%) vs 52 (37%), P = .001. Discharge delays and median total direct hospital costs were higher for patients with OPAT delays: 31 (53%) vs 21 (15%), P < .001 and $19 576 (interquartile range [IQR], 10 056-37 038) vs $7770 (IQR, 3031-13 974), P < .001. In multiple variable regression, discharge to a subacute care facility was associated with an increased odds of discharge delay, age >64 years was associated with a decreased odds of discharge delay.

CONCLUSIONS

OPAT with high-priced antibiotics requires significant care coordination. PA delays are common and contribute to discharge delays. OPAT transitions of care represent an opportunity to improve patient care and address access barriers.

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy: updated recommendations from the UK

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) offers safe, effective and patient-centred care for adults and children. The OPAT UK good practice recommendations for adults and children have recently been updated through a process of literature review, expert consensus and extensive stakeholder consultation. Here we discuss the key changes in the updated recommendations in the context of recent developments, including novel antimicrobial agents and delivery devices, the place of oral antimicrobials as an alternative to intravenous therapy, new OPAT service models and the broader antimicrobial stewardship agenda.

Diabetic Foot Infection and Select Comorbidities Drive Readmissions in Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy

BACKGROUND

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) facilitates early patient discharge, but readmissions prior to completion of therapy may offset its advantages. The objective of this study was to evaluate unplanned readmissions of patients undergoing OPAT at our institution and to identify risk factors. We hypothesized that host factors were most relevant.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified all patients discharged to receive OPAT during 2017 who experienced at least one unplanned readmission to the hospital prior to its completion. We determined the proportion of patients readmitted, and the causes for readmission. Using a control group, we identified risk factors through multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 684 patients, 17% had an unplanned readmission while receiving OPAT. Causes included worsening infection in 18%, venous access problems in 11%, acute events unrelated to infection in 19%, treatment intolerance in 19%, progression of underlying comorbidity in 20%, and social and other problems in 13%. In multivariate analysis diabetic foot infection (OR 3.24; 95%CI 1.38-8.31; p = 0.01), the presence of chronic kidney disease, decubitus ulcer or heart failure (OR 2.65; 95% CI 1.51-4.70; p < 0.001), and narcotics prescribed at discharge (OR 1.93; 95% CI 1.06-3.60; p = 0.049) were independent risk factors for readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Unplanned hospital readmissions were frequent and due to very heterogeneous causes. Diabetic foot infection, selected comorbidities, and discharge on opioids were identified as independent risk factors. In the efforts to decrease readmissions among patients receiving outpatient parenteral antimicrobial a focus on these high-risk groups is a priority.

Outcomes of Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy With Ceftriaxone for Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infections-A Single-Center Observational Study

Background

Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections (BSIs) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Ceftriaxone is convenient for outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT), but data for this indication are limited.

Methods

Adult patients with methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) BSI discharged on OPAT with cefazolin, oxacillin, or ceftriaxone for at least 7 days were included. We compared outcomes of ceftriaxone vs either oxacillin or cefazolin. Ninety-day all-cause mortality, readmission due to MSSA infection, and microbiological failure were examined as a composite outcome and compared among groups. Rates of antibiotic switches due to intolerance were assessed.

Results

Of 243 patients included, 148 (61%) were discharged on ceftriaxone and 95 (39%) were discharged on either oxacillin or cefazolin. The ceftriaxone group had lower rates of intensive care unit care, endocarditis, and shorter duration of bacteremia, but higher rates of cancer diagnoses. There was no significant difference in the composite adverse outcome in the oxacillin or cefazolin group vs the ceftriaxone group (18 [19%] vs 31 [21%]; P = .70), comprising microbiological failure (6 [6.3%] vs 9 [6.1%]; P = .94), 90-day all-cause mortality (7 [7.4%] vs 15 [10.1%]; P = .46), and readmission due to MSSA infection (10 [10.5%] vs 13 [8.8%]; P = .65). Antibiotic intolerance necessitating a change was similar between the 2 groups (4 [4.2%] vs 6 [4.1%]; P = .95).

Conclusions

For patients with MSSA BSI discharged on OPAT, within the limitations of the small numbers and retrospective design we did not find a significant difference in outcomes for ceftriaxone therapy when compared with oxacillin or cefazolin therapy.

Out of Sight but Not Out of Mind: Caring for Patients Receiving OPAT During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

In an effort to “flatten the curve” of SARS-CoV-2, society is urged to practice social distancing. However, the management of other disease states may require some patients to undergo outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT). Practical considerations for OPAT management during an infectious pandemic are reviewed. These include shortening durations of therapy, utilizing the oral route, avoiding medications requiring therapeutic drug monitoring, selecting antimicrobials with long durations, decreasing frequency of laboratory blood draws, and performing tele-health visits.

Assessing the utilization and impact of a newly established outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) program

BACKGROUND

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is a safe and effective alternative to hospitalization for many patients with infectious disease. The objective of this study was to describe the experience with a newly established formal OPAT program at a Canadian academic centre.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study including all patients referred to the OPAT clinic between July 2016 and June 2017 and a contemporary cohort of patients who received home parenteral therapy without clinic referral. A quasi-experimental design was used to assess the impact of the clinic on patient outcomes compared with a pre-intervention cohort of patients from 2012 to 2013.

RESULTS

Between July 2016 and June 2017, 334 patients were referred to the OPAT clinic; 33% of the patients visited the emergency department (ED), and 21% required readmission within 60 days. Compared with the clinic patients, urinary tract infection diagnoses were more common among the 39 contemporary patients who were treated with home parenteral antibiotics without OPAT clinic referral (51% versus 4%, respectively; p < 0.001) and treatment durations were shorter (median 10 days versus 42 days; p < 0.001). Compared with a pre-intervention cohort, OPAT clinic implementation was associated with a trend toward decreased ED visits (33% versus 43%; p = 0.07). On multivariable analysis, this translated to an overall adjusted odds ratio of 0.64 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.04, p = 0.07) for readmission and ED visits.

CONCLUSIONS

The OPAT clinic served a high volume of patients in its first year of operation and may be helpful in reducing unfavourable patient outcomes.

Updated good practice recommendations for outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) in adults and children in the UK

UK good practice recommendations for outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) were published in 2012 and 2015 for adult and paediatric patients, respectively. Here we update the initial good practice recommendations in a combined document based on a further review of the OPAT literature and an extensive consultation process. As with the previous good practice recommendations, these updated recommendations are intended to provide pragmatic guidance for new and established OPAT services across a range of settings and to act as a set of quality indicators for service evaluation and quality improvement.

Perspectives of United States-based Infectious Diseases Physicians on Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy Practice

BACKGROUND

While outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is generally considered safe, patients are at risk for complications and thus require close monitoring. The purpose of this study is to determine how OPAT programs are structured and how United States-based infectious diseases (ID) physicians perceive barriers to safe OPAT care.

METHODS

We queried members of the Emerging Infections Network (EIN) between November and December 2018 about practice patterns and barriers to providing OPAT.

RESULTS

672 members of the EIN (50%) responded to the survey. Seventy-five percent of respondents were actively involved in OPAT, although only 37% of respondents reported ID consultation was mandatory for OPAT. The most common location for OPAT care was at home with home-health support, followed by post-acute-care facilities. Outpatient and inpatient ID physicians were identified as being responsible for monitoring laboratory results (73% and 54% of respondents, respectively), but only 36% had a formal OPAT program. The majority of respondents reported a lack of support in data analysis (80%), information technology (66%), financial assistance (65%), and administrative assistance (60%). Perceived amount of support did not differ significantly across employment models. Inability to access laboratory results in a timely manner, lack of leadership awareness of OPAT value, and failure to communicate with other providers administering OPAT were reported as the most challenging aspects of OPAT care.

CONCLUSION

ID providers are highly involved in OPAT, but only a third of respondents have a dedicated OPAT program. Lack of financial and institutional support are perceived as significant barriers to providing safe OPAT care.

Dalbavancin Use in Vulnerable Patients Receiving Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Therapy for Invasive Gram-Positive Infections

Introduction

Dalbavancin is approved for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) but offers a potential treatment option for complicated invasive gram-positive infections. Importantly, dalbavancin’s real benefits may be in treating complicated infections in vulnerable patient populations, such as persons who inject drugs (PWID).

Methods

A multicenter retrospective analysis was performed from March 2014 to April 2017 to assess 30- and 90-day clinical cure and adverse drug events (ADEs) in adult patients who received ≥ 1 dose of dalbavancin for a non-ABSSSI indication.

Results

During the study period, 45 patients received dalbavancin, 28 for a non-ABSSSI indication. The predominant infections treated included osteomyelitis (46%), endovascular infection (25%) and uncomplicated bacteremia (14%). Half of the patients had positive Staphylococcus aureus in cultures, 29% methicillin resistant and 21% methicillin susceptible. Most patients were prescribed dalbavancin as sequential treatment with a median of 13.5 days of prior antibiotic therapy. The most common reason for choosing dalbavancin over standard therapy use was PWID (54%). Seven patients were lost to follow-up at day 30. Of the remaining evaluable patients, 30-day clinical cure was achieved in 15/21 (71%) patients. The most common reason for failure was lack of source control (4/6, 67%). At day 90, relapse occurred in two patients. Three patients had a potential dalbavancin-associated ADE: two patients with renal dysfunction and one patient with pruritus.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates a possible role for dalbavancin in the treatment of non-ABSSSI invasive gram-positive infections in select vulnerable OPAT patients.

A retrospective analysis of adverse events among patients receiving daptomycin versus vancomycin during outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy

OBJECTIVE

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is a safe and effective alternative to prolonged inpatient stays for patients requiring long-term intravenous antimicrobials, but antimicrobial-associated adverse events remain a significant challenge. Thus, we sought to measure the association between choice of antimicrobial agent (vancomycin vs daptomycin) and incidence of adverse drug events (ADEs).

METHODS

Patients receiving OPAT treatment with vancomycin or daptomycin for skin and soft-tissue infections, bone and joint infections, endocarditis, and bacteremia or endovascular infections during the period from July 1, 2013, through September 30, 2016, were included. Demographic and clinical data were abstracted from the medical record. Logistic regression was used to compare ADEs requiring a change in or early discontinuation of therapy, hospital readmission, and emergency room visits between groups. Time from OPAT enrollment to ADE was compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

In total, 417 patients were included: 312 (74·8%) received vancomycin and 105 (25·2%) received daptomycin. After adjusting for age, Charlson comorbidity index, location of OPAT treatment, receipt of combination therapy with either β-lactam or fluoroquinolone, renal function, and availability of safety labs, patients receiving vancomycin had significantly higher incidence of ADEs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3·71; 95% CI, 1·64-8·40). ADEs occurred later in the treatment course for patients treated with daptomycin (P<·01). Rates of readmission and emergency room visits were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

In the OPAT setting, vancomycin use was associated with higher incidence of ADEs than daptomycin use. This finding is an important policy consideration for programs aiming to optimize outcomes and minimize cost. Careful selection of gram-positive agents for prolonged treatment is necessary to limit toxicity.