Hospitalists' COVID-19 management roles in hospitals without infectious disease specialists

BACKGROUND

Hospitalists may work in a variety of clinical settings to manage COVID-19 cases. However, the extent of their involvement in COVID-19 care is unknown, particularly in hospitals without infectious disease (ID) specialists.

METHODS

This study aimed to confirm whether hospitalists provided COVID-19 management in various clinical settings when ID specialists were unavailable. We conducted a multicenter cross-sectional study using a web-based questionnaire. The participants were full-time hospitalists working in Japanese academic community-based hospitals. The study period was from 15 January 2021 to 15 February 2021, during Japan's third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was the rate of hospitalists participating in COVID-19 inpatient management in hospitals with or without ID specialists.

RESULTS

ID specialists were absent in 31% of small hospitals (those with fewer than 249 registered beds), but only 4% of large hospitals (p < 0.001). Hospitalists were more likely to manage both COVID-19 inpatient care and emergency department care in hospitals without than with hospitals with ID specialists (76 versus 56% (p = 0.01) and 90 versus 73% (p = 0.01), respectively). After adjusting for confounders by multivariate analysis, hospitalists who worked in hospitals without ID specialists had higher odds of participating in COVID-19 inpatient care than those who worked in hospitals with such specialists (adjusted odds ratio: 3.0, 95% CI: 1.2-7.4).

CONCLUSION

Hospitalists were more likely to provide COVID-19 inpatient care in various clinical settings in hospitals without ID specialists.

A European International Multicentre Survey on the Current Practice of Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Paediatric Liver Transplantations

(1) Background: Postoperative infections are major contributors of morbidity and mortality after paediatric liver transplantation (pLTX). Evidence and recommendations regarding the most effective antimicrobial strategy are lacking. (2) Results: Of 39 pLTX centres, 20 responded. Aminopenicillins plus ß-lactamase inhibitors were used by six (30%) and third generation cephalosporins by three (15%), with the remaining centres reporting heterogenous regimens. Broad-spectrum regimens were the standard in 10 (50%) of centres and less frequent in the 16 (80%) centres with an infectious disease specialist. The duration ranged mainly between 24-48 h and 3-5 days in the absence and 3-5 days or 6-10 days in the presence of risk factors. Strategies regarding antifungal, antiviral, adjunctive antimicrobial, and surveillance strategies varied widely. (3) Methods: This international multicentre survey endorsed by the European Liver Transplant Registry queried all European pLTX centres from the registry on their current practice of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis and antimicrobial strategies via an online questionnaire. (4) Conclusions: This survey found great heterogeneity regarding all aspects of postoperative antimicrobial treatment, surveillance, and prevention of infections in European pLTX centres. Evidence-based recommendations are urgently needed to optimise antimicrobial strategies and reduce the spectrum and duration of antimicrobial exposure.

Antibiotic Stewardship Implementation and Antibiotic Use at Hospitals With and Without On-site Infectious Disease Specialists

BACKGROUND

Many US hospitals lack infectious disease (ID) specialists, which may hinder antibiotic stewardship efforts. We sought to compare patient-level antibiotic exposure at Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals with and without an on-site ID specialist, defined as an ID physician and/or ID pharmacist.

METHODS

This retrospective VHA cohort included all acute-care patient admissions during 2016. A mandatory survey was used to identify hospitals' antibiotic stewardship processes and their access to an on-site ID specialist. Antibiotic use was quantified as days of therapy per days present and categorized based on National Healthcare Safety Network definitions. A negative binomial regression model with risk adjustment was used to determine the association between presence of an on-site ID specialist and antibiotic use at the level of patient admissions.

RESULTS

Eighteen of 122 (14.8%) hospitals lacked an on-site ID specialist; there were 525 451 (95.8%) admissions at ID hospitals and 23 007 (4.2%) at non-ID sites. In the adjusted analysis, presence of an ID specialist was associated with lower total inpatient antibacterial use (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, .85-.99). Presence of an ID specialist was also associated with lower use of broad-spectrum antibacterials (0.61; .54-.70) and higher narrow-spectrum β-lactam use (1.43; 1.22-1.67). Total antibacterial exposure (inpatient plus postdischarge) was lower among patients at ID versus non-ID sites (0.92; .86-.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients at hospitals with an ID specialist received antibiotics in a way more consistent with stewardship principles. The presence of an ID specialist may be important to effective antibiotic stewardship.

Impact of an Infectious Disease Specialist on an Antimicrobial Stewardship Program at a Resource-Limited, Non-Academic Community Hospital in Korea

BACKGROUND

Implementing a successful antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) is difficult for non-academic community (NAC) hospitals due to insufficient infrastructure.

AIM

We evaluated the impact of an infectious disease specialist (IDS) on implementing an ASP in a resource-limited setting in Korea.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed at a NAC hospital between June 2015 and August 2018. An IDS has led an ASP at the hospital since June 2017. We used an interrupted time series analysis to evaluate longitudinal effects of the IDS-led ASP on the amount of antibiotic use and incidence of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) acquisition.

FINDINGS

Total antibiotic use changed from 698.82 ± 74.41 to 602.09 ± 69.94 defined daily dose/1000 patient-days (PDs) after intervention. An immediate reduction in the use of carbapenems, glycopeptides, penicillins, and other antibiotics followed the IDS-led ASP. The 3rd/4th generation cephalosporins and carbapenems prescription rates decreased in slope after the intervention. Incidence of MDRO acquisition changed from 1.38, 0.78, and 0.21/1000 PDs to 1.06, 0.15, and 0.32/1000 PDs in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, and multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, respectively. The incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii acquisition immediately decreased following intervention.

CONCLUSION

An IDS can implement a successful ASP by reducing antibiotic consumption and MDRO acquisition at resource-limited NAC hospitals.