Implementation of indication-based antibiotic order sentences improves antibiotic use in emergency departments.

INTRODUCTION: Prior data have suggested that suboptimal antibiotic prescribing in the emergency department (ED) is common for uncomplicated lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI), urinary tract infections (UTI), and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). The objective of this study was to measure the effect of indication-based antibiotic order sentences (AOS) on optimal antibiotic prescribing in the ED. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved quasi-experiment of adults prescribed antibiotics in EDs for uncomplicated LRTI, UTI, or ABSSSI from January to June 2019 (pre-implementation) and September to December 2021 (post-implementation). AOS implementation occurred in July 2021. AOS are lean process, electronic discharge prescriptions retrievable by name or indication within the discharge order field. The primary outcome was optimal prescribing, defined as correct antibiotic selection, dose, and duration per local and national guidelines. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were performed; multivariable logistic regression was used to determine variables associated with optimal prescribing. RESULTS: A total of 294 patients were included: 147 pre-group and 147 post-group. Overall optimal prescribing improved from 12 (8%) to 34 (23%) (P < 0.001). Individual components of optimal prescribing were optimal selection at 90 (61%) vs 117 (80%) (P < 0.001), optimal dose at 99 (67%) vs 115 (78%) (P = 0.036), and optimal duration at 38 (26%) vs 50 (34%) (P = 0.13) for pre- and post-group, respectively. AOS was independently associated with optimal prescribing after multivariable logistic regression analysis (adjOR, 3.6; 95%CI,1.7-7.2). A post-hoc analysis showed low uptake of AOS by ED prescribers. CONCLUSIONS: AOS are an efficient and promising strategy to enhance antimicrobial stewardship in the ED.

Low- Versus High-Dose Methylprednisolone in Adult Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Less Is More.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids use in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) improves survival; however, the optimal dose is not established. We aim to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 receiving high-dose corticosteroids (HDC) versus low-dose corticosteroids (LDC). METHODS: This was a quasi-experimental study conducted at a large, quaternary care center in Michigan. A corticosteroid dose change was implemented in the standardized institutional treatment protocol on November 17, 2020. All patients admitted with severe COVID-19 that received corticosteroids were included. Consecutive patients in the HDC group (September 1 to November 15, 2020) were compared to the LDC group (November 30, 2020 to January 20, 2021). High-dose corticosteroids was defined as 80 mg of methylprednisolone daily in 2 divided doses, and LDC was defined as 32-40 mg of methylprednisolone daily in 2 divided doses. The primary outcome was all-cause 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included progression to mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay (LOS), discharge on supplemental oxygen, and corticosteroid-associated adverse events. RESULTS: Four-hundred seventy patients were included: 218 (46%) and 252 (54%) in the HDC and LDC groups, respectively. No difference was observed in 28-day mortality (14.5% vs 13.5%, P = .712). This finding remained intact when controlling for additional variables (odds ratio, 0.947; confidence interval, 0.515-1.742; P = .861). Median hospital LOS was 6 and 5 days in the HDC and LDC groups, respectively (P < .001). No differences were noted in any of the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose methylprednisolone had comparable outcomes including mortality to high-dose methylprednisolone for the treatment of severe COVID-19.

Low versus High Dose Methylprednisolone in Adult Patients with COVID-19: Less is More

Background Corticosteroids use in severe COVID-19 improves survival;however, the optimal dose is not established. We aim to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 receiving high-dose corticosteroids (HDC) versus low-dose corticosteroids (LDC). Methods This was a quasi-experimental study conducted at a large, quaternary care center in Michigan. A corticosteroid dose change was implemented in the standardized institutional treatment protocol on 17 November 2020. All patients admitted with severe COVID-19 that received corticosteroids were included. Consecutive patients in the HDC group (1 September to 15 November 2020) were compared to the LDC group (30 November 2020 to 20 January 2021). HDC was defined as methylprednisolone 80 mg daily in two divided doses and LDC was defined as methylprednisolone 32-40 mg daily in two divided doses. The primary outcome was all-cause 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included progression to mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay (LOS), discharge on supplemental oxygen, and corticosteroid-associated adverse events. Results Four-hundred and seventy patients were included;218 (46%) and 252 (54%) in the HDC and LDC groups, respectively. No difference was observed in 28-day mortality (14.5% vs 13.5%, p=0.712). This finding remained intact when controlling for additional variables (OR 0.947, [CI 0.515-1.742], p=0.861). Median hospital LOS was 6 and 5 days in the HDC and LDC groups, respectively (p<0.001). No differences were noted in any of the other secondary outcomes. Conclusions Low-dose methylprednisolone had comparable outcomes including mortality to high-dose methylprednisolone for the treatment of severe COVID-19.

Optimizing preoperative antibiotics in patients with ß-lactam allergies: A role for pharmacy.

PURPOSE: Patients with a reported ß-lactam allergy (BLA) are often given alternative perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, increasing risk of surgical site infections (SSIs), acute kidney injury (AKI), and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). The purpose of this study was to implement and evaluate a pharmacist-led BLA clarification interview service in the preoperative setting. METHODS: A pharmacist performed BLA clarification telephone interviews before elective procedures from November 2018 to March 2019. On the basis of allergy history and a decision algorithm, first-line preoperative antibiotics, alternative antibiotics, or allergy testing referral was recommended. The pharmacist intervention (PI) group was compared to a standard of care (SOC) group who underwent surgery from November 2017 to March 2018. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients were included, with 50 (57%) and 37 (43%) in the SOC and PI groups, respectively. The most common surgeries included orthopedic surgery in 41 patients (47%) and neurosurgery in 17 patients (20%). In the PI group, all BLA labels were updated after interview. Twenty-three patients were referred for allergy testing, 12 of the 23 (52%) completed BLA testing, and penicillin allergies were removed for 9 of the 12 patients. Overall, 28 of the 37 (76%) pharmacy antibiotic recommendations were accepted. Cefazolin use significantly increased from 28% to 65% after the intervention (P = 0.001). SSI occurred in 5 (10%) patients in the SOC group and no patients in the PI group (P = 0.051). All of these SSIs were associated with alternative antibiotics. Incidence of AKI and CDI was similar between the groups. No allergic reactions occurred in either group. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a pharmacy-driven BLA reconciliation significantly increased ß-lactam preoperative use without negative safety outcomes.

COVID-19: disease pathways and gene expression changes predict methylprednisolone can improve outcome in severe cases.

MOTIVATION: COVID-19 has several distinct clinical phases: a viral replication phase, an inflammatory phase, and in some patients, a hyper-inflammatory phase. High mortality is associated with patients developing cytokine storm syndrome. Treatment of hyper-inflammation in these patients using existing, approved therapies with proven safety profiles could address the immediate need to reduce mortality. RESULTS: We analyzed the changes in the gene expression, pathways and putative mechanisms induced by SARS-CoV2 in NHBE, and A549 cells, as well as COVID-19 lung vs. their respective controls. We used these changes to identify FDA approved drugs that could be repurposed to help COVID-19 patients with severe symptoms related to hyper-inflammation. We identified methylprednisolone (MP) as a potential leading therapy. The results were then confirmed in five independent validation data sets including Vero E6 cells, lung and intestinal organoids, as well as additional patient lung sample vs. their respective controls. Finally, the efficacy of MP was validated in an independent clinical study. Thirty-day all-cause mortality occurred at a significantly lower rate in the MP-treated group compared to control group (29.6% vs. 16.6%, p = 0.027). Clinical results confirmed the in silico prediction that MP could improve outcomes in severe cases of COVID-19. A low number needed to treat (NNT = 5) suggests MP may be more efficacious than dexamethasone or hydrocortisone. AVAILABILITY: iPathwayGuide is available at https://ipathwayguide.advaitabio.com/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.