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.

Supportive care needs of adults living with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) at home: a qualitative content analysis

BACKGROUND

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are common vascular access devices inserted for adults undergoing intravenous treatment in the community setting. Individuals with a PICC report challenges understanding information and adapting to the device both practically and psychologically at home. There is a lack of research investigating the supportive care needs of individuals with a PICC to inform nursing assessment and the provision of additional supports they may require to successfully adapt to life with a PICC. The aim of this study was to identify the supportive care needs of adults with cancer or infection living with a PICC at home.

METHOD

Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were used to identify supportive care needs of adults living with a PICC at home. Participants were recruited from cancer and infectious diseases outpatient units. Two researchers independently analysed transcripts using content analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 15 participants were interviewed (30-87 years old). There were 5 males and 10 females interviewed, 9 participants had a cancer diagnosis and most lived in a metropolitan area. Many participants lived with a partner/spouse at home and three participants had young children. Participants identified supportive care needs in the following eight categories (i (i) Adapting daily life (ii) Physical comfort (iii) Self-management (iv) Emotional impact (v) Information content (vi) Understanding information (vii) Healthcare resources and (viii) Social supports.

CONCLUSIONS

Adults living with a PICC at home report a broad range of supportive care needs. In addition to practical and information needs, health consumers may also require support to accept living with a device inside their body and to assume responsibility for the PICC. These findings may provide nurses with a greater understanding of individual needs and guide the provision of appropriate supports.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT): A systematic review and meta-analysis

The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is not fully understood and the optimal strategy for thromboprophylaxis remains unclear. This systematic review investigated the incidence of VTE in OPAT settings (PROSPERO CRD42022381523). MEDLINE, CINAHL, Emcare, Embase, Cochrane Library and grey literature were searched from earliest records to 18 January 2023. Primary studies reporting non-catheter-related VTE or catheter-related thromboembolism (CRT) events in adults who received parenteral antibiotics in home or outpatient settings were eligible. In total, 43 studies involving 23 432 patient episodes were reviewed, of which 4 studies reported non-catheter-related VTE and 39 included CRT. Based on generalised linear mixed-effects models, pooled risk estimates of non-catheter-related VTE and CRT were 0.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.0-0.7%] and 1.1% [95% CI 0.8-1.5%; prediction interval (PI) 0.2-5.4%]. Heterogeneity was largely attributed to risk of bias by meta-regression (R2 = 21%). Excluding high-risk-of-bias studies, CRT risk was 0.8% (95% CI 0.5-1.2%; PI 0.1-4.5%). From 25 studies, the pooled CRT rate per 1000 catheter-days was 0.37 (95% CI 0.25-0.55; PI 0.08-1.64). These findings do not support universal thromboprophylaxis or routine use of an inpatient VTE risk assessment model in the OPAT setting. However, a high index of suspicion should be maintained, especially for patients with known risk factors for VTE. An optimised protocol of OPAT-specific VTE risk assessment should be sought.

Community-based Intravenous Treatment and Central Venous Access Devices: A Scoping Review of the Consumer and Caregiver Experience, Information Preferences, and Supportive Care Needs

PURPOSE

Map existing research and describe the consumer/caregiver experience of community-based intravenous treatment, central venous access devices (CVADs), supportive care needs, and information preferences.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

Five databases (Joanna Briggs Institute, Cochrane library, Emcare, Embase, and Medline) were searched. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers.

FINDINGS

Forty-eight studies were included.

CONCLUSIONS

Although community-based intravenous treatment and CVADs have a significant impact on consumers and caregivers, there is scant research on their supportive care needs and information preferences.

CLINICAL EVIDENCE

Some consumers and caregivers may require additional support while undergoing community-based intravenous treatment.

The MOBILISE study: utilisation of ambulatory pumps in the inpatient setting to administer continuous antibiotic infusions-a randomised controlled trial

In the inpatient setting, antibiotics are generally administered via bedside pumps with multiple daily dosing. Utilisation of a continuous antibiotic infusion (CAI) instead might have patient and nursing satisfaction, workflow efficiencies and infection control benefits. We aimed to study the utilisation of CAI in the inpatient setting for routine antibiotic administration. Patients receiving a peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) for antibiotic administration were screened for the study. The patients were randomised to either (1) standard pump and intermittent antibiotic administration (IAA) or (2) CAI via an ambulatory pump. An accelerometer placed on the ankle was used to assess patient activity. Nursing and patient satisfaction surveys were also carried out. Forty patients met the study criteria for enrolment with 21 patients being enrolled in the CAI arm of the study. One hundred and five days of accelerometer recordings were available for analysis. The geometric mean activity was 45 min/day in the standard arm and 64 min/day in the CAI arm. This represented a 42% (95% CI: -14 to 133%, p = 0.16) difference in activity between the two groups. Nursing staff reported that they spent less time throughout their shift attending the antibiotic line or pump in patients who were in the CAI arm of the study (p < 0.001). In addition, patients in this arm of the study were more likely to recommend this method of administration of antibiotics to a family member (p =0.0001). The MOBILISE study showed nursing and patient satisfaction when CAI were utilised in the inpatient setting. A statistically non-significant difference in mobility was seen. The trial was registered (28/03/2018) with the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12618000452291).