Risk factors for enterococcal urinary tract infections: a multinational, retrospective cohort study.

Complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) is a frequent cause of morbidity. In this multinational retrospective cohort study, we aimed to demonstrate risk factors for enterococcal UTI. Univariate and multivariate analyses of risk factors for enterococcal infection were performed. Among 791 hospitalized patients with cUTI, enterococci accounted for approximately 10% of cases (78/791). Risk factors for enterococcal UTI in multivariable analysis were male gender, age range of 55-75 years, catheter-associated UTI, and urinary retention. This information may assist treating physicians in their decision-making on prescribing empiric anti-enterococcus treatment to hospitalized patients presenting with cUTI and thus improve clinical outcomes.

Clinical outcomes of hospitalised patients with catheter-associated urinary tract infection in countries with a high rate of multidrug-resistance: the COMBACTE-MAGNET RESCUING study.

Background: Although catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CA-UTI) is a major healthcare-related problem worldwide, there is a scarcity of current data from countries with high antimicrobial resistance rates. We aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of patients with CA-UTI compared to those of patients with other sources of complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI), and to assess the impact of antimicrobial resistance. We also aimed to identify the factors influencing 30-day mortality among patients with CA-UTI. Methods: This was a multicentre, multinational retrospective cohort study including hospitalised adults with cUTI between January 2013 and December 2014 in twenty hospitals from eight countries from southern Europe, Turkey and Israel. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. The secondary endpoints were length of hospital stay, symptom improvement after 7 days' treatment, symptom recurrence at 30 days and readmission 60 days after hospital discharge. Results: Of the 807 cUTI episodes, 341 (42.2%) were CA-UTIs. The time from catheter insertion to cUTI diagnosis was less than 2 weeks in 44.6% of cases. Overall, 74.5% of cases had hospital or healthcare-acquired CA-UTI. Compared to patients with other cUTI aetiologies, those with CA-UTI had the following characteristics: they were more frequently males, older, admitted for a reason other than cUTI and admitted from a long-term care facility; had higher Charlson's comorbidity index; and more frequently had polymicrobial infections and multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB). Patients with CA-UTI also had significantly higher 30-day mortality rates (15.2% vs 6%) and longer hospital stay (median 14 [interquartile range -IQR- 7-27] days vs 8 [IQR 5-14] days) than patients with cUTI of other sources. After adjusting for confounders, CA-UTI was not independently associated with an increased risk of mortality (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-2.54), and neither was the presence of MDR-GNB. Conclusions: CA-UTI was the most frequent source of cUTI, affecting mainly frail patients. The mortality of patients with CA-UTI was high, though this was not directly related to the infection.

Predictive factors for multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria among hospitalised patients with complicated urinary tract infections.

Background: Patients with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) frequently receive broad-spectrum antibiotics. We aimed to determine the prevalence and predictive factors of multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria in patients with cUTI. Methods: This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study in south and eastern Europe, Turkey and Israel including consecutive patients with cUTIs hospitalised between January 2013 and December 2014. Multidrug-resistance was defined as non-susceptibility to at least one agent in three or more antimicrobial categories. A mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to determine predictive factors of multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria cUTI. Results: From 948 patients and 1074 microbiological isolates, Escherichia coli was the most frequent microorganism (559/1074), showing a 14.5% multidrug-resistance rate. Klebsiella pneumoniae was second (168/1074) and exhibited the highest multidrug-resistance rate (54.2%), followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (97/1074) with a 38.1% multidrug-resistance rate. Predictors of multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria were male gender (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-2.29), acquisition of cUTI in a medical care facility (OR, 2.59; 95%CI, 1.80-3.71), presence of indwelling urinary catheter (OR, 1.44; 95%CI, 0.99-2.10), having had urinary tract infection within the previous year (OR, 1.89; 95%CI, 1.28-2.79) and antibiotic treatment within the previous 30 days (OR, 1.68; 95%CI, 1.13-2.50). Conclusions: The current high rate of multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria infections among hospitalised patients with cUTIs in the studied area is alarming. Our predictive model could be useful to avoid inappropriate antibiotic treatment and implement antibiotic stewardship policies that enhance the use of carbapenem-sparing regimens in patients at low risk of multidrug-resistance.

Cost of hospitalised patients due to complicated urinary tract infections: a retrospective observational study in countries with high prevalence of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria: the COMBACTE-MAGNET, RESCUING study.

OBJECTIVE: Complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) impose a high burden on healthcare systems and are a frequent cause of hospitalisation. The aims of this paper are to estimate the cost per episode of patients hospitalised due to cUTI and to explore the factors associated with cUTI-related healthcare costs in eight countries with high prevalence of multidrug resistance (MDR). DESIGN: This is a multinational observational, retrospective study. The mean cost per episode was computed by multiplying the volume of healthcare use for each patient by the unit cost of each item of care and summing across all components. Costs were measured from the hospital perspective. Patient-level regression analyses were used to identify the factors explaining variation in cUTI-related costs. SETTING: The study was conducted in 20 hospitals in eight countries with high prevalence of multidrug resistant Gram-negative bacteria (Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Romania, Spain and Turkey). PARTICIPANTS: Data were obtained from 644 episodes of patients hospitalised due to cUTI. RESULTS: The mean cost per case was €5700, with considerable variation between countries (largest value €7740 in Turkey; lowest value €4028 in Israel), mainly due to differences in length of hospital stay. Factors associated with higher costs per patient were: type of admission, infection source, infection severity, the Charlson comorbidity index and presence of MDR. CONCLUSIONS: The mean cost per hospitalised case of cUTI was substantial and varied significantly between countries. A better knowledge of the reasons for variations in length of stays could facilitate a better standardised quality of care for patients with cUTI and allow a more efficient allocation of healthcare resources. Urgent admissions, infections due to an indwelling urinary catheterisation, resulting in septic shock or severe sepsis, in patients with comorbidities and presenting MDR were related to a higher cost.

EUropean prospective cohort study on Enterobacteriaceae showing REsistance to CArbapenems (EURECA): a protocol of a European multicentre observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The rapid worldwide spread of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) constitutes a major challenge. The aim of the EUropean prospective cohort study on Enterobacteriaceae showing REsistance to CArbapenems (EURECA), which is part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking (IMI JU) funded COMBACTE-CARE project, is to investigate risk factors for and outcome determinants of CRE infections to inform randomised clinical trial designs and to provide a historical cohort that could eventually be used for future comparisons with new drugs targeting CRE. METHODS: A multicentre (50 sites), multinational (11 European countries), analytical observational project was designed, comprising 3 studies. The aims of study 1 (a prospective cohort study) include characterising the features, clinical management and outcomes of hospitalised patients with intra-abdominal infection, pneumonia, complicated urinary tract infections and bloodstream infections caused by CRE (202 patients in each group). The main outcomes will be 30-day all-cause mortality and clinical response. Study 2 (a nested case-control study) will identify the risk factors for target infections caused by CRE; 248 selected patients from study 1 will be matched with patients with carbapenem-susceptible Enterobacteriaceae (1:1) and with hospitalised patients (1:3) and will provide a historical cohort of patients with CRE infections. Study 3 (a matched cohort study) will follow patients in study 2 in order to assess mortality, length of stay and hospital costs associated with CRE. All patients will be followed for 30 days. Different, up-to-date statistical methods will be applied to come to unbiased estimates for all 3 studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Before-study sites will be initiated, approval will be sought from appropriate regulatory agencies and local Ethics Committees of Research or Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to conduct the study in accordance with regulatory requirements. This is an observational study and therefore no intervention in the diagnosis, management or treatment of the patients will be required on behalf of the investigation. Any formal presentation or publication of data collected from this study will be considered as a joint publication by the participating physician(s) and will follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) for authorship. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02709408.

Cost-Utility and Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Face-to-Face Versus Telephone-Based Nonpharmacologic Multidisciplinary Treatments for Patients With Generalized Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate, from a societal perspective, the cost utility and cost effectiveness of a nonpharmacologic face-to-face treatment program compared with a telephone-based treatment program for patients with generalized osteoarthritis (GOA). METHODS: An economic evaluation was carried out alongside a randomized clinical trial involving 147 patients with GOA. Program costs were estimated from time registrations. One-year medical and nonmedical costs were estimated using cost questionnaires. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated using the EuroQol (EQ) classification system, EQ rating scale, and the Short Form 6D (SF-6D). Daily function was measured using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI). Cost and QALY/effect differences were analyzed using multilevel regression analysis and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS: Medical costs of the face-to-face treatment and telephone-based treatment were estimated at €387 and €252, respectively. The difference in total societal costs was nonsignificantly in favor of the face-to-face program (difference €708; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] -€5,058, €3,642). QALYs were similar for both groups according to the EQ, but were significantly in favor of the face-to-face group, according to the SF-6D (difference 0.022 [95% CI 0.000, 0.045]). Daily function was similar according to the HAQ DI. Since both societal costs and QALYs/effects were in favor of the face-to-face program, the economic assessment favored this program, regardless of society's willingness to pay. There was a 65-90% chance that the face-to-face program had better cost utility and a 60-70% chance of being cost effective. CONCLUSION: This economic evaluation from a societal perspective showed that a nonpharmacologic, face-to-face treatment program for patients with GOA was likely to be cost effective, relative to a telephone-based program.

Measurement properties of the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index for generalized osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Generalized OA (GOA) is highly prevalent in OA. Individuals with GOA typically suffer from limitations of both upper and lower extremity function, yet we lack a validated instrument to assess their activity limitations. An appropriate instrument might be the HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI). Therefore the aim of this study was to evaluate the measurement properties of the HAQ-DI in GOA. METHODS: Data were used from a randomized controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of two multidisciplinary treatment programmes for patients with GOA. One hundred and thirty-seven of 147 included patients completed a standardized set of questionnaires before and after treatment. Interpretability, validity, reliability and responsiveness of the HAQ-DI were assessed using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments checklist (COSMIN). RESULTS: Floor and ceiling effects were present. The content validity was questionable since the HAQ-DI encompasses activities that are either not relevant or too easy to perform as judged by patients and experts. Construct validity was good since 90% of the hypotheses were confirmed. Factor analysis confirmed the unidimensionality of the HAQ-DI (root mean square error of approximation = 0.057, χ(2)/df ratio = 1.48). Cronbach's α was 0.90, confirming internal consistency and the ICC was 0.81, reflecting good reliability. The minimal important change was 0.25 and the smallest detectable change was 0.60. We could not establish the responsiveness of the HAQ-DI. CONCLUSION: The HAQ-DI showed good construct validity, internal consistency and reliability, whereas its content validity and responsiveness were limited. We recommend updating the items of the HAQ-DI in future research focusing on functional limitations in GOA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR2137, http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2137.

The clinical burden of generalized osteoarthritis represented by self-reported health-related quality of life and activity limitations: a cross-sectional study.

The involvement of multiple joints is common in osteoarthritis (OA), often referred to as generalized osteoarthritis (GOA). However, since research and practice mainly focus on a specific OA localization, the health status of patients with GOA is largely unknown. Therefore, we aimed to describe the clinical burden of GOA in terms of self-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and activity limitations. In this cross-sectional study, individuals clinically diagnosed with GOA and referred to multidisciplinary treatment, completed questionnaires on socio-demographics, joint involvement, HRQoL (SF-36) and activity limitations (HAQ-DI). SF-36 physical (PCS) and mental component summary scores (MCS) were calculated using norm-based data. The patient's specific most important activity limitations were linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. A total of 147 patients participated [85 % female; mean (SD) age 60 (8) years]. The majority (93 %) had symptomatic OA in both the upper and lower extremities. Predominant joints with symptomatic OA were the hands (85 %) and knees (82 %). Mean (SD) SF-36 PCS and MCS scores were 37 (7) and 48 (10), respectively, showing a broad impact of GOA on the physical component of health. The mean (SD) HAQ-DI score was 1.27 (0.50) indicating moderate to severe functional limitations. Activities concerning mobility and domestic life were considered most important activity limitations, especially walking. The results show a high clinical burden of GOA in terms of HRQoL and activity limitations. This study points to the need of developing non-pharmacological interventions for patients with GOA that should target on improving the physical component of health and mobility limitations.

Patient reported barriers and facilitators to using a self-management booklet for hip and knee osteoarthritis in primary care: results of a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: To enhance guideline-based non-surgical management of hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA), a multidisciplinary, stepped-care strategy has been implemented in primary care in a region of the Netherlands. To facilitate this implementation, the self-management booklet "Care for Osteoarthritis" was developed and introduced. The aim of the booklet was to educate patients about OA, to enhance the patient's active role in the treatment course, and to improve the communication with health care providers. To successfully introduce the booklet on a large scale we assessed barriers and facilitators for patients to using this booklet. METHODS: Seventeen primary care patients with hip or knee OA who received the self-management booklet participated in this qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling was used to ensure diversity of the patients' view about the booklet. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Three core themes with patient perceived barriers and facilitators to use the booklet emerged from the interviews: 1) the role of health care providers, 2) the patient's perceptions about OA and its manageability, and 3) the patient's perceptions about the usefulness of the booklet and patient's information needs. Regarding the first theme, a barrier was the lack of encouragement from health care providers to use the booklet in the treatment course of OA. Moreover, patients had doubts concerning the health care providers' endorsement of non-surgical treatment for OA. Barriers from the second theme were: thinking that OA is not treatable or that being pro-active during the treatment course is not important. In contrast, being convinced about the importance of an active participation in the treatment course was a facilitator. Third, patients' perceptions about the usefulness of the booklet and patients' information needs were both identified as barriers as well as facilitators for booklet use. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to the understanding of patient perceived barriers and facilitators to use a self-management booklet in the treatment course of OA. The results offer practical starting points to tailor the implementation activities of the booklet nationwide and to introduce comparable educational tools in OA primary care or in other chronic diseases.

Are people with rheumatoid arthritis who undertake activity pacing at risk of being too physically inactive?

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight into the relationship between activity pacing and physical inactivity. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. SETTING: Outpatient clinic of a rheumatology department. SUBJECTS: Men and women diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis. MAIN MEASURES: Physical activity was assessed using self-reported measures and an accelerometer-based activity monitor. An occupational therapist and specialized nurse analysed the self-reported physical activity data and classified on the basis of consensus the pacing of activities of all patients as 'adequate' or 'not adequate'. RESULTS: Thirty rheumatoid arthritis patients participated in this study of whom nine were categorized as adequate activity pacers. None of these nine undertook sufficient exercise whereas 6 of the 20 people who did not pace activity appropriately did. Physical activity levels assessed by self-reported measures were significantly higher than when assessed by an accelerometer-based activity monitor. CONCLUSIONS: Activity pacing was associated with lower levels of physical activity. Since patients with rheumatoid arthritis are already at risk for inactivity, further inactivation by activity pacing might potentially be harmful.