Dalbavancin During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic, which started in March of 2020, and its associated surges have had an immense impact on the ability of medical staff to perform their daily activities. Thus, we sought to direct patients who had gram-positive Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections (ABSSSI) to our Outpatient Department/Wound Care Center for treatment. We met the challenge of the pandemic by shifting care in the treatment of ABSSSI using a new antibiotic delivery system. We examined the use and cost-effectiveness of Dalbavancin, a unique long-acting lipoglycopeptide antibiotic that is used in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, during the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 631 patients were treated in the Outpatient Department/Wound Care Center, with re-evaluation at the Wound Care Center on Day 3 post-infusion. The primary test of cure or major improvement was based on a 4- to 6-week re-assessment by the Wound Care Center Faculty (i.e., Podiatric, Vascular, Plastics, and Infectious Diseases). Treatment effectiveness was determined by examining documentation at follow-up. We also looked at the number of Outpatient Department treatments at the Wound Care Center for the periods 2018-2019 and 2020-2021. The shift of patients from the Emergency Department/Inpatient Department to the Outpatient Department/Wound Care Center was made possible by the use of the novel, streamlined, safe, Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved, well-tolerated antibiotic Dalbavancin. Dalbavancin is not prescribed for gram-negative infections, or for random prescribing, contamination, colonization, or prophylaxis. Dalbavancin has a low infusion reaction, low toxicity, long half-life, and low incidence of adverse reactions. Use of this medication was helpful for decreasing the inpatient burden in our facility.

Use of Telehealth in Substance Use Disorder Services During and After COVID-19: Online Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Social distancing guidelines for COVID-19 have caused a rapid transition to telephone and video technologies for delivering treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs). OBJECTIVE: This study examined the adoption of these technologies across the SUD service continuum, acceptance of these technologies among service providers, and intent of providers to use these technologies after the pandemic. Additional analysis using the validated technology acceptance model (TAM) was performed to test the potential applications of these technologies after the pandemic. The study objectives were as follows: (1) to assess the use of telehealth (telephone and video technologies) for different SUD services during COVID-19 in May-June 2020, (2) to assess the intended applications of telehealth for SUD services beyond COVID-19, (3) to evaluate the perceived ease of use and value of telehealth for delivering SUD services, and (4) to assess organizational readiness for the sustained use of telehealth services. METHODS: An online survey on the use of telephonic and video services was distributed between May and August 2020 to measure the current use of these services, perceived organizational readiness to use these services, and the intent to use these services after COVID-19. In total, 8 of 10 regional Addiction Technology Transfer Centers representing 43 states distributed the survey. Individual organizations were the unit of analysis. RESULTS: In total, 457 organizations responded to the survey. Overall, the technology was widely used; >70% (n>335) of organizations reported using telephone or video platforms for most services. The odds of the intent of organizations to use these technologies to deliver services post COVID-19 were significantly greater for all but two services (ie, telephonic residential counseling and buprenorphine therapy; mean odds ratio 3.79, range 1.87-6.98). Clinical users preferred video technologies to telephone technologies for virtually all services. Readiness to use telephone and video technologies was high across numerous factors, though telephonic services were considered more accessible. Consistent with the TAM, perceived usefulness and ease of use influenced the intent to use both telephone and video technologies. CONCLUSIONS: The overall perceived ease of use and usefulness of telephonic and video services suggest promising post-COVID-19 applications of these services. Survey participants consistently preferred video services to telephonic services; however, the availability of telephonic services to those lacking easy access to video technology is an important characteristic of these services. Future studies should review the acceptance of telehealth services and their comparative impact on SUD care outcomes.