Evaluation of procalcitonin-guided antimicrobial stewardship in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Procalcitonin is a biomarker that may be able to identify patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who do not require antimicrobials for bacterial respiratory tract co-infections. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a procalcitonin-guided algorithm in rationalizing empirical antimicrobial prescriptions in non-critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: Retrospective, single-site, cohort study in adults hospitalized with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 pneumonia and receiving empirical antimicrobials for potential bacterial respiratory tract co-infection. Regression models were used to compare the following outcomes in patients with and without procalcitonin testing within 72 h of starting antimicrobials: antimicrobial consumption (DDD); antimicrobial duration; a composite safety outcome of death, admission to HDU/ICU or readmission to hospital within 30 days; and length of admission. Procalcitonin levels of ≤0.25 ng/L were interpreted as negatively predictive of bacterial co-infection. Effects were expressed as ratios of means (ROM) or prevalence ratios (PR) accordingly. RESULTS: 259 patients were included in the final analysis. Antimicrobial use was lower in patients who had procalcitonin measured within 72 h of starting antimicrobials: mean antimicrobial duration 4.4 versus 5.4 days, adjusted ROM 0.7 (95% CI 0.6-0.9); mean antimicrobial consumption 6.8 versus 8.4 DDD, adjusted ROM 0.7 (95% CI 0.6-0.8). Both groups had similar composite safety outcomes (adjusted PR 0.9; 95% CI 0.6-1.3) and lengths of admission (adjusted ROM 1.3; 95% CI 0.9-1.6). CONCLUSIONS: A procalcitonin-guided algorithm may allow for the safe reduction of antimicrobial usage in hospitalized non-critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

SARS-CoV-2 Testing of 11,884 Healthcare Workers at an Acute NHS Hospital Trust in England: A Retrospective Analysis.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are known to be at increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2, although whether these risks are equal across all roles is uncertain. Here we report a retrospective analysis of a large real-world dataset obtained from 10 March to 6 July 2020 in an NHS Foundation Trust in England with 17,126 employees. 3,338 HCWs underwent symptomatic PCR testing (14.4% positive, 2.8% of all staff) and 11,103 HCWs underwent serological testing for SARS-CoV-2 IgG (8.4% positive, 5.5% of all staff). Seropositivity was lower than other hospital settings in England but higher than community estimates. Increased test positivity rates were observed in HCWs from BAME backgrounds and residents in areas of higher social deprivation. A multiple logistic regression model adjusting for ethnicity and social deprivation confirmed statistically significant increases in the odds of testing positive in certain occupational groups, most notably domestic services staff, nurses, and health-care assistants. PCR testing of symptomatic HCWs appeared to underestimate overall infection levels, probably due to asymptomatic seroconversion. Clinical outcomes were reassuring, with only a small minority of HCWs with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization (2.3%) or ICU management (0.7%) and with no deaths. Despite a relatively low level of HCW infection compared to other UK cohorts, there were nevertheless important differences in test positivity rates between occupational groups, robust to adjustment for demographic factors such as ethnic background and social deprivation. Quantitative and qualitative studies are needed to better understand the factors contributing to this risk. Robust informatics solutions for HCW exposure data are essential to inform occupational monitoring.

COVID-19 Management in a UK NHS Foundation Trust with a High Consequence Infectious Diseases Centre: A Retrospective Analysis.

Recent large national and international cohorts describe the baseline characteristics and outcome of hospitalised patients with COVID-19, however there is limited granularity to these reports. We aimed to provide a detailed description of a UK COVID-19 cohort, focusing on management and outcome. We performed a retrospective single-centre analysis of clinical management and 28-day outcomes of consecutive adult inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 from 31 January to 16 April 2020 inclusive. In total, 316 cases were identified. Most patients were elderly (median age 75) with multiple comorbidities. One quarter were admitted from residential or nursing care. Mortality was 84 out of 316 (26.6%). Most deaths occurred in patients in whom a ceiling of inpatient treatment had been determined and for whom end of life care and specialist palliative care input was provided where appropriate. No deaths occurred in patients aged under 56 years. Decisions to initiate respiratory support were individualised after consideration of patient wishes, premorbid frailty and comorbidities. In total, 59 (18%) patients were admitted to intensive care, of which 31 (10% overall cohort) required intubation. Multiple logistic regression identified associations between death and age, frailty, and disease severity, with age as the most significant factor (odds ratio 1.07 [95% CI 1.03-1.10] per year increase, p < 0.001). These findings provide important clinical context to outcome data. Mortality was associated with increasing age. Most deaths were anticipated and occurred in patients with advance decisions on ceilings of treatment.