Executive Summary: Implementing an Antibiotic Stewardship Program: Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America.

Evidence-based guidelines for implementation and measurement of antibiotic stewardship interventions in inpatient populations including long-term care were prepared by a multidisciplinary expert panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. The panel included clinicians and investigators representing internal medicine, emergency medicine, microbiology, critical care, surgery, epidemiology, pharmacy, and adult and pediatric infectious diseases specialties. These recommendations address the best approaches for antibiotic stewardship programs to influence the optimal use of antibiotics.

Implementing an Antibiotic Stewardship Program: Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America.

Evidence-based guidelines for implementation and measurement of antibiotic stewardship interventions in inpatient populations including long-term care were prepared by a multidisciplinary expert panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. The panel included clinicians and investigators representing internal medicine, emergency medicine, microbiology, critical care, surgery, epidemiology, pharmacy, and adult and pediatric infectious diseases specialties. These recommendations address the best approaches for antibiotic stewardship programs to influence the optimal use of antibiotics.

Mythbusting Medical Writing: Goodbye, Ghosts! Hello, Help!

To meet ethical and scientific obligations, authors should submit timely, high-quality manuscripts. Authors, however, can encounter ethical (e.g., authorship designation) and practical (e.g., time and resource limitations) challenges during manuscript preparation. Could professional medical writers-not ghostwriters-help authors address these challenges? This essay summarizes evidence countering three myths that may have hindered authors from considering the use of professional medical writers. Authors with sufficient time, writing expertise, and reporting guideline knowledge may meet their obligations without writing assistance. Unfortunately, not all authors are in this position. Decisions about writing support should be based on evidence, not myths.

Aerosolized antibiotics: do they add to the treatment of pneumonia?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The increasing rate of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens warrants the development of new treatment strategies. Carefully engineered delivery systems are undergoing evaluation to test the hypothesis that aerosolized administration of antibiotics will provide high local concentrations and fast clearance, which in turn may improve efficacy and decrease the risk of microbial resistance. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies indicate that aerosolized delivery systems for specially formulated antibiotics yield high local concentrations with rapid clearance and low systemic exposure. Preliminary clinical studies reveal that aerosolized delivery of antibiotics is well tolerated and active, when combined with intravenous antibiotics. No single aerosolized antibiotic is likely to provide broad-spectrum activity against both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria. SUMMARY: Large multicenter trials are needed to determine whether preliminary findings will translate to improved clinical activity and decreased microbial resistance in VAP patients, and to optimize the use of aerosolized antibiotics.

Time to finger point or fix? An invitation to join ongoing efforts to promote ethical authorship and other good publication practices.

In this commentary, we present evidence that unethical authorship (eg, guest and ghost authoring) and other publication practices are not restricted to the pharmaceutical industry; they also occur in academia. Such practices are not an industry problem--they are a research problem. To enhance trust in industry-sponsored research, companies have made rapid and far-reaching changes to their publication guidelines, policies, and procedures. Professional medical writers have adopted, and continue to implement, these changes. Although evidence indicates that industry practices are improving, there is certainly more to do, both in industry and academia. We invite readers to join ongoing efforts to promote ethical publication practices.

Economic impact of ventilator-associated pneumonia in a large matched cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economic impact of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) on length of stay and hospital costs. Design. Retrospective matched cohort study. SETTING: Premier database of hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: Eligible patients were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs), received mechanical ventilation for ≥2 calendar-days, and were discharged between October 1, 2008, and December 31, 2009. METHODS: VAP was defined by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9), code 997.31 and ventilation charges for ≥2 calendar-days. We matched patients with VAP to patients without VAP by propensity score on the basis of demographics, administrative data, and severity of illness. Cost was based on provider perspective and procedural cost accounting methods. RESULTS: Of 88,689 eligible patients, 2,238 (2.5%) had VAP; the incidence rate was 1.27 per 1,000 ventilation-days. In the matched cohort, patients with VAP ([Formula: see text]) had longer mean durations of mechanical ventilation (21.8 vs 10.3 days), ICU stay (20.5 vs 11.6 days), and hospitalization (32.6 vs 19.5 days; all [Formula: see text]) than patients without VAP ([Formula: see text]). Mean hospitalization costs were $99,598 for patients with VAP and $59,770 for patients without VAP ([Formula: see text]), resulting in an absolute difference of $39,828. Patients with VAP had a lower in-hospital mortality rate than patients without VAP (482/2,144 [22.5%] vs 630/2,144 [29.4%]; [Formula: see text]). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that VAP continues to occur as defined by the new specific ICD-9 code and is associated with a statistically significant resource utilization burden, which underscores the need for cost-effective interventions to minimize the occurrence of this complication.

Preoperative screening/decolonization for Staphylococcus aureus to prevent orthopedic surgical site infection: prospective cohort study with 2-year follow-up.

We quantified surgical site infections (SSIs) after preoperative screening/selective decolonization before elective total joint arthroplasty (TJA) with 2-year follow-up and 2 controls. Concurrent controls (n = 2284) were patients of surgeons not participating in screening/decolonization. Preintervention controls (n = 741) were patients of participating surgeons who underwent TJA the previous year. Staphylococcus aureus nasal carriers (321/1285 [25%]) used intranasal mupirocin and chlorhexidine baths as outpatients. Staphylococcal SSIs occurred in no intervention patients (0/321) and 19 concurrent controls. If all SSIs occurred in carriers and 25% of controls were carriers, staphylococcal SSI rate would have been 3.3% in controls (19/571; P = .001). Overall SSI rate decreased from 2.7% (20/741) in preintervention controls to 1.2% (17/1440) in intervention patients (P = .009). Preoperative screening/selective decolonization was associated with fewer SSIs after elective TJA.

Don't get spooked! How to collaborate with a professional medical communicator (and avoid ghostwriting).

Substantial confusion exists about the role of medical writers and editors (hereafter, medical communicators) in medical publication. Much of the confusion is due to the failure to recognize the difference between terms. Ghostwriting is unethical, whereas professional medical communication refers to legitimate writing and editing services provided by individuals who comply with ethical guidelines. The purpose of this article is to shed light on this subject by reviewing relevant guidelines and by providing practical tips for authors interested in collaborating with medical communicators. Specifically, this article addresses a series of questions, such as what to expect from medical communicators, how to evaluate them, and how to collaborate ethically and efficiently with them. To ensure that the process is ethical, authors should begin collaborating with the medical communicator early in the process, continue doing so throughout manuscript development, and control manuscript content. In addition, authors should disclose substantial contributions and funding sources of the medical communicator and all other individuals not meeting authorship criteria. To ensure that the process is efficient, authors should delegate time-consuming technical writing and editing tasks to the medical communicator.

Efficacy and safety of linezolid for Gram-positive orthopedic infections: a prospective case series.

Linezolid is an attractive alternative for orthopedic infections because of oral bioavailability and activity against methicillin-resistant staphylococci and vancomycin-resistant enterococci. To determine efficacy and safety, we prospectively monitored 51 consecutive adults who were not vancomycin candidates and who received linezolid for 53 Gram-positive orthopedic infections, usually chronic osteomyelitis (n = 25) or prosthetic joint infection (n = 23). Pathogens were usually Staphylococcus aureus (n = 27) or coagulase-negative staphylococci (n = 19); 38 were methicillin resistant. After remission, 17 infections required long-term suppression, usually because of retained hardware. Clinical and microbiologic failure occurred in only one patient. The most common adverse events were thrombocytopenia (n = 5) and anemia (n = 5), necessitating treatment discontinuation in 3 patients. One patient developed reversible optic and irreversible peripheral neuropathy after 24 months of linezolid. Linezolid, with surgery, may be a reasonable alternative for Gram-positive orthopedic infections. We recommend weekly hematologic monitoring, and, if therapy lasts >2 months, periodic ophthalmologic monitoring.