A Scoping Review of Bacterial Resistance Among Inpatients Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention operations worldwide, raising concerns for an acceleration of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Therefore, we aimed to define the scope of peer reviewed research comparing AMR in inpatient bacterial clinical cultures before and after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review and searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science through June 15, 2023. Our inclusion criteria were: (1) English language, (2) primary evidence, (3) peer-reviewed, (4) clinical culture data from humans, (5) AMR data for at least one bacterial order/species, (6) inpatient setting, (7) use of statistical testing to evaluate AMR data before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Reviewers extracted country, study design, type of analysis, study period, setting & population, number of positive cultures or isolates, culture type(s), method of AMR analysis, organisms, and AMR results. Study results were organized by organism and antibiotic class or resistance mechanism. AMR results are also summarized by individual study and across all studies. RESULTS: In total, 4,805 articles were identified with 55 papers meeting inclusion criteria. Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus were the most commonly studied organisms. There were 464 bacterial AMR results across all studies with 82 (18%) increases, 71 (15%) decrease, and 311 (67%) no change results. CONCLUSION: The literature examining the impact of COVD-19 on AMR among inpatients is diverse with most results reflecting no change pre/post pandemic. Ongoing inquiry is needed into examine evolving patterns in AMR post COVID-19.

Optimizing Antimicrobial Stewardship in the Emergency Department.

Antibiotic stewardship is a core component of emergency department (ED) practice and impacts patient safety, clinical outcomes, and public health. The unique characteristics of ED practice, including crowding, time pressure, and diagnostic uncertainty, need to be considered when implementing antibiotic stewardship interventions in this setting. Rapid advances in pathogen detection and host response biomarkers promise to revolutionize the diagnosis of infectious diseases in the ED, but such tests are not yet considered standard of care. Presently, clinical decision support embedded in the electronic health record and pharmacist-led interventions are the most effective ways to improve antibiotic prescribing in the ED.

Dysphagia Is an Underrecognized Risk Factor for Viral Pneumonia Severity.

The aim of this study was to examine the role of pre-existing dysphagia as a risk factor for COVID-19 severity among adults ≥50 years of age presenting to the emergency department (ED). This was a retrospective cohort study that used electronic health record data from two Midwestern EDs in the same health care system. The sample included patients ≥50 years of age who tested positive for SARS-COV-2 during an ED visit between March 15, 2020 and November 19, 2020. Patients were dichotomized based on documented history of dysphagia. The primary outcome was the highest World Health Organization COVID-19 clinical severity score within 30-days of ED arrival. Patients with a score of <4 were classified as non-severe whereas a score ≥4 was considered severe. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences in clinical severity scores between patients with and without dysphagia. A logistic regression model was created to estimate the odds of a severe COVID-19 clinical score. The sample included 126 patients without dysphagia and 40 patients with dysphagia. Patients with a history of dysphagia were more likely to develop severe COVID-19 disease compared to patients without (65.0% vs. 41.3%, p = 0.015). In multivariable analysis, patients with preexisting dysphagia (OR 2.38, 95% CI: 1.05-5.42; p = 0.038) and diabetes (OR 2.42 95% CI: 1.15-5.30; p = 0.021) had significantly increased odds of developing severe COVID-19. This study showed that a pre-existing diagnosis of dysphagia was independently associated with COVID-19 severity in adults ≥50 years of age.

Inappropriate Diagnosis of Pneumonia Among Hospitalized Adults.

Importance: Little is known about incidence of, risk factors for, and harms associated with inappropriate diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Objective: To characterize inappropriate diagnosis of CAP in hospitalized patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study, including medical record review and patient telephone calls, took place across 48 Michigan hospitals. Trained abstractors retrospectively assessed hospitalized patients treated for CAP between July 1, 2017, and March 31, 2020. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were adults admitted to general care with a discharge diagnostic code of pneumonia who received antibiotics on day 1 or 2 of hospitalization. Data were analyzed from February to December 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Inappropriate diagnosis of CAP was defined using a National Quality Forum-endorsed metric as CAP-directed antibiotic therapy in patients with fewer than 2 signs or symptoms of CAP or negative chest imaging. Risk factors for inappropriate diagnosis were assessed and, for those inappropriately diagnosed, 30-day composite outcomes (mortality, readmission, emergency department visit, Clostridioides difficile infection, and antibiotic-associated adverse events) were documented and stratified by full course (>3 days) vs brief (≤3 days) antibiotic treatment using generalized estimating equation models adjusting for confounders and propensity for treatment. Results: Of the 17 290 hospitalized patients treated for CAP, 2079 (12.0%) met criteria for inappropriate diagnosis (median [IQR] age, 71.8 [60.1-82.8] years; 1045 [50.3%] female), of whom 1821 (87.6%) received full antibiotic courses. Compared with patients with CAP, patients inappropriately diagnosed were older (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.08; 95% CI, 1.05-1.11 per decade) and more likely to have dementia (AOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.55-2.08) or altered mental status on presentation (AOR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.39-2.19). Among those inappropriately diagnosed, 30-day composite outcomes for full vs brief treatment did not differ (25.8% vs 25.6%; AOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.23). Full vs brief duration of antibiotic treatment among patients was associated with antibiotic-associated adverse events (31 of 1821 [2.1%] vs 1 of 258 [0.4%]; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, inappropriate diagnosis of CAP among hospitalized adults was common, particularly among older adults, those with dementia, and those presenting with altered mental status. Full-course antibiotic treatment of those inappropriately diagnosed with CAP may be harmful.

Validation of Thermal Imaging and the ALT-70 Prediction Model to Differentiate Cellulitis From Pseudocellulitis.

Importance: Cellulitis is misdiagnosed in up to 30% of cases due to mimic conditions termed pseudocellulitis. The resulting overuse of antibiotics is a threat to patient safety and public health. Surface thermal imaging and the ALT-70 (asymmetry, leukocytosis, tachycardia, and age ≥70 years) prediction model have been proposed as tools to help differentiate cellulitis from pseudocellulitis. Objectives: To validate differences in skin surface temperatures between patients with cellulitis and patients with pseudocellulitis, assess the optimal temperature measure and cut point for differentiating cellulitis from pseudocellulitis, and compare the performance of skin surface temperature and the ALT-70 prediction model in differentiating cellulitis from pseudocellulitis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective diagnostic validation study was conducted among patients who presented to the emergency department with acute dermatologic lower extremity symptoms from October 11, 2018, through March 11, 2020. Statistical analysis was performed from July 2020 to March 2021 with additional work conducted in September 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Temperature measures for affected and unaffected skin were obtained. Cellulitis vs pseudocellulitis was assessed by a 6-physician, independent consensus review. Differences in temperature measures were compared using the t test. Logistic regression was used to identify the temperature measure and associated cut point with the optimal performance for discriminating between cellulitis and pseudocellulitis. Diagnostic performance characteristics for the ALT-70 prediction model, surface skin temperature, and both combined were also assessed. Results: The final sample included 204 participants (mean [SD] age, 56.6 [16.5] years; 121 men [59.3%]), 92 (45.1%) of whom had a consensus diagnosis of cellulitis. There were statistically significant differences in all skin surface temperature measures (mean temperature, maximum temperature, and gradients) between cellulitis and pseudocellulitis. The maximum temperature of the affected limb for patients with cellulitis was 33.2 °C compared with 31.2 °C for those with pseudocellulitis (difference, 2.0 °C [95% CI, 1.3-2.7 °C]; P < .001). The maximum temperature was the optimal temperature measure with a cut point of 31.2 °C in the affected skin, yielding a mean (SD) negative predictive value of 93.5% (4.7%) and a sensitivity of 96.8% (2.3%). The sensitivity of all 3 measures remained above 90%, while specificity varied considerably (ALT-70, 22.0% [95% CI, 15.8%-28.1%]; maximum temperature of the affected limb, 38.4% [95% CI, 31.7%-45.1%]; combination measure, 53.9% [95% CI, 46.5%-61.2%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this large diagnostic validation study, significant differences in skin surface temperature measures were observed between cases of cellulitis and cases of pseudocellulitis. Thermal imaging and the ALT-70 both demonstrated high sensitivity, but specificity was improved by combining the 2 measures. These findings support the potential of thermal imaging, alone or in combination with the ALT-70 prediction model, as a diagnostic adjunct that may reduce overdiagnosis of cellulitis.

Diagnostic testing and antibiotic utilization among inpatients evaluated for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia.

We evaluated diagnostic test and antibiotic utilization among 252 patients from 11 US hospitals who were evaluated for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia during the severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) omicron variant pandemic wave. In our cohort, antibiotic use remained high (62%) among SARS-CoV-2-positive patients and even higher among those who underwent procalcitonin testing (68%).

Patient-centered care outcomes for patients in the emergency department with a non-English language preference: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: This review highlights what is known about patient-centered care outcomes (PCCOs) for emergency department (ED) patients with non-English language preferences (NELP). METHODS: Four databases were searched and included article were written in English, presented primary evidence, published in a peer-reviewed journal, and reported PCCOs from the perspective of ED patients with NELP. PCCOs were defined using the Institute of Medicine definition, outcomes that evaluate respect and responsiveness to patient preferences, needs and values. Two reviewers assessed all articles, extracted data, and resolved discrepancies. PCCOs were grouped in categories (needs, preferences, and values) based on the definition's domains. RESULTS: Of the 6524 potentially eligible studies, 20 met inclusion criteria. Of these, 16 focused on needs; 4 on preferences and 8 on values. Within patient need, five studies found a large unmet need for language services. Within patient value, three found that language discordance negatively influenced perceptions of care. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies in this review found that not speaking English negatively influenced perceptions of care and highlighted a large unmet need for language services in the ED. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: More work needs to be done to characterize PCCOs in ED patients with NELP and develop interventions to improve care.

Satisfaction of Older Patients With Emergency Department Care: Psychometric Properties and Construct Validity of the Consumer Emergency Care Satisfaction Scale.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of quality of care, but its measurement remains challenging. The Consumer Emergency Care Satisfaction Scale (CECSS) was developed to measure patient satisfaction in the emergency department (ED). Although this is a valid and reliable tool, several aspects of the CECSS need to be improved, including the definition, dimension, and scoring of scales. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the construct validity of the CECSS and make suggestions on how to improve the tool to measure overall satisfaction with ED care. METHODS: We administered 2 surveys to older adults who presented with a fall to the ED and used electronic health record data to examine construct validity of the CECSS and ceiling effects. RESULTS: Using several criteria, we improved construct validity of the CECSS, reduced ceiling effects, and standardized scoring. CONCLUSION: We addressed several methodological issues with the CECSS and provided recommendations for improvement.

Multisite evaluation of prediction models for emergency department crowding before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a machine learning framework to forecast emergency department (ED) crowding and to evaluate model performance under spatial and temporal data drift. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We obtained 4 datasets, identified by the location: 1-large academic hospital and 2-rural hospital, and time period: pre-coronavirus disease (COVID) (January 1, 2019-February 1, 2020) and COVID-era (May 15, 2020-February 1, 2021). Our primary target was a binary outcome that is equal to 1 if the number of patients with acute respiratory illness that were ED boarding for more than 4 h was above a prescribed historical percentile. We trained a random forest and used the area under the curve (AUC) to evaluate out-of-sample performance for 2 experiments: (1) we evaluated the impact of sudden temporal drift by training models using pre-COVID data and testing them during the COVID-era, (2) we evaluated the impact of spatial drift by testing models trained at location 1 on data from location 2, and vice versa. RESULTS: The baseline AUC values for ED boarding ranged from 0.54 (pre-COVID at location 2) to 0.81 (COVID-era at location 1). Models trained with pre-COVID data performed similarly to COVID-era models (0.82 vs 0.78 at location 1). Models that were transferred from location 2 to location 1 performed worse than models trained at location 1 (0.51 vs 0.78). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that ED boarding is a predictable metric for ED crowding, models were not significantly impacted by temporal data drift, and any attempts at implementation must consider spatial data drift.

Lopinavir/ritonavir for treatment of non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Effective and widely available therapies are still needed for outpatients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) for early treatment of non-hospitalized individuals diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: This randomized, placebo (Plb)-controlled, double-blind, multi-site decentralized clinical trial enrolled non-hospitalized adults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and six or fewer days of acute respiratory infection symptoms who were randomized to either twice-daily oral LPV/r (400 mg/100 mg) or Plb for 14 days. Daily surveys on study days 1 through 16 and again on study day 28 evaluated symptoms, daily activities, and hospitalization status. The primary outcome was longitudinal change in an ordinal scale based on a combination of symptoms, activity, and hospitalization status through day 15 and was analyzed by use of a Bayesian longitudinal proportional odds logistic regression model for estimating the probability of a superior recovery for LPV/r over Plb (odds ratio >1). RESULTS: Between June 2020 and December 2021, 448 participants were randomized to receive either LPV/r (n = 216) or Plb (n = 221). The mean symptom duration before randomization was 4.3 days (SD 1.3). There were no differences between treatment groups through the first 15 days for the ordinal primary outcome (odds ratio 0.96; 95% credible interval: 0.66 to 1.41). There were 3.2% (n = 7) of LPV/r and 2.7% (n = 6) of Plb participants hospitalized by day 28. Serious adverse events did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: LPV/r did not significantly improve symptom resolution or reduce hospitalization in non-hospitalized participants with COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04372628.

Risk Factors for Dysphagia in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 may be at risk for dysphagia and vulnerable to associated consequences. We investigated predictors for dysphagia and its severity in a cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at a single hospital center. A large level I trauma center database was queried for all patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Demographics, medical information associated with COVID-19, specific to dysphagia, and interventions were collected. 947 patients with confirmed COVID-19 met the criteria. 118 (12%) were seen for a swallow evaluation. Individuals referred for evaluation were significantly older, had a lower BMI, more severe COVID-19, and higher rates of intubation, pneumonia, mechanical ventilation, tracheostomy placements, prone positioning, and ARDS. Pneumonia (OR 3.57, p = 0.004), ARDS (OR 3.57, p = 0.029), prone positioning (OR 3.99, p = 0.036), ventilation (OR 4.01, p = 0.006), and intubation (OR 4.75, p = 0.007) were significant risk factors for dysphagia. Older patients were more likely to have more severe dysphagia such that for every 1-year increase in age, the odds of severe dysphagia were 1.04 times greater (OR 1.04, p = 0.028). Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 are at risk for dysphagia. We show predictive variables that should be considered when referring COVID-19 patients for dysphagia services to reduce time to intervention/evaluation.

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist workforce: A multicenter survey.

Objective: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has required healthcare systems and hospitals to rapidly modify standard practice, including antimicrobial stewardship services. Our study examines the impact of COVID-19 on the antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist. Design: A survey was distributed nationally to all healthcare improvement company members. Participants: Pharmacist participants were mostly leaders of antimicrobial stewardship programs distributed evenly across the United States and representing urban, suburban, and rural health-system practice sites. Results: Participants reported relative increases in time spent completing tasks related to medication access and preauthorization (300%; P = .018) and administrative meeting time (34%; P = .067) during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to before the pandemic. Time spent rounding, making interventions, performing pharmacokinetic services, and medication reconciliation decreased. Conclusion: A shift away from clinical activities may negatively affect the utilization of antimicrobials.

Characterizing barriers to antibiotic stewardship for skin and soft-tissue infections in the emergency department using a systems engineering framework.

Objective: Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) account for 3% of all emergency department (ED) encounters and are frequently associated with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. We characterized barriers and facilitators to optimal antibiotic use for SSTIs in the ED using a systems engineering framework and matched them with targeted stewardship interventions. Design and participants: We conducted semistructured interviews with a purposefully selected sample of emergency physicians. Methods: An interview guide was developed using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) framework. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed iteratively until conceptual saturation was achieved. Themes were identified using deductive directed content analysis guided by the SEIPS model. Results: We conducted 20 interviews with physicians of varying experience and from different practice settings. Identified barriers to optimal antibiotic prescribing for SSTIs included poor access to follow-up (organization), need for definitive diagnostic tools (tools and technology) and fear over adverse outcomes related to missed infections (person). Identified potential interventions included programs to enhance follow-up care; diagnostic aides (eg, rapid MRSA assays for purulent infections and surface thermal imaging for cellulitis); and shared decision-making tools. Conclusions: Using a systems engineering informed qualitative approach, we successfully characterized barriers and developed targeted antibiotic stewardship interventions for SSTIs managed in the ED work system. The interventions span multiple components of the ED work system and should inform future efforts to improve antibiotic stewardship for SSTIs in this challenging care setting.

Diagnostic Accuracy of a Bacterial and Viral Biomarker Point-of-Care Test in the Outpatient Setting.

Importance: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) account for most outpatient visits. Discriminating bacterial vs viral etiology is a diagnostic challenge with therapeutic implications. Objective: To investigate whether FebriDx, a rapid, point-of-care immunoassay, can differentiate bacterial- from viral-associated host immune response in ARI through measurement of myxovirus resistance protein A (MxA) and C-reactive protein (CRP) from finger-stick blood. Design, Setting, and Participants: This diagnostic study enrolled adults and children who were symptomatic for ARI and individuals in a control group who were asymptomatic between October 2019 and April 2021. Included participants were a convenience sample of patients in outpatient settings (ie, emergency department, urgent care, and primary care) who were symptomatic, aged 1 year or older, and had suspected ARI and fever within 72 hours. Individuals with immunocompromised state and recent vaccine, antibiotics, stroke, surgery, major burn, or myocardial infarction were excluded. Of 1685 individuals assessed for eligibility, 259 individuals declined participation, 718 individuals were excluded, and 708 individuals were enrolled (520 patients with ARI, 170 patients without ARI, and 18 individuals who dropped out). Exposures: Bacterial and viral immunoassay testing was performed using finger-stick blood. Results were read at 10 minutes, and treating clinicians and adjudicators were blinded to results. Main Outcomes and Measures: Bacterial- or viral-associated systemic host response to an ARI as determined by a predefined comparator algorithm with adjudication classified infection etiology. Results: Among 520 participants with ARI (230 male patients [44.2%] and 290 female patients [55.8%]; mean [SD] age, 35.3 [17.7] years), 24 participants with missing laboratory information were classified as unknown (4.6%). Among 496 participants with a final diagnosis, 73 individuals (14.7%) were classified as having a bacterial-associated response, 296 individuals (59.7%) as having a viral-associated response, and 127 individuals (25.6%) as negative by the reference standard. The bacterial and viral test correctly classified 68 of 73 bacterial infections, demonstrating a sensitivity of 93.2% (95% CI, 84.9%-97.0%), specificity of 374 of 423 participants (88.4% [95% CI, 85.0%-91.1%]), positive predictive value (PPV) of 68 of 117 participants (58.1% [95% CI, 49.1%-66.7%), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 374 of 379 participants (98.7% [95% CI, 96.9%-99.4%]).The test correctly classified 208 of 296 viral infections, for a sensitivity of 70.3% (95% CI, 64.8%-75.2%), a specificity of 176 of 200 participants (88.0% [95% CI, 82.8%-91.8%]), a PPV of 208 of 232 participants (89.7% [95% CI, 85.1%-92.9%]), and an NPV of 176 of 264 participants (66.7% [95% CI, 60.8%-72.1%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, a rapid diagnostic test demonstrated diagnostic performance that may inform clinicians when assessing for bacterial or viral etiology of ARI symptoms.

Dysphagia Profiles Among Inpatients with Dementia Referred for Swallow Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) patients who are hospitalized often develop oropharyngeal dysphagia, increasing risk for adverse outcomes, such as aspiration pneumonia. However, prevalence estimates of dysphagia are highly variable and often based on patient report or clinical testing rather than visualization of the swallow. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to determine prevalence and severity of dysphagia among inpatients with ADRD referred for swallowing evaluation. METHODS: Electronic health record (EHR) abstraction of ADRD diagnosis and presence and severity of clinically-determined dysphagia on bedside swallow evaluation (BSE) and videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS). RESULTS: 16% (n = 268) had an ADRD diagnosis or were taking dementia-specific medication based on the EHR. 75% (n = 202) were diagnosed with dysphagia on the BSE. 60% subsequently underwent VFSS (n = 122) with dysphagia confirmation in 92% (n = 112). ADRD inpatients were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with dysphagia based on the BSE (p < 0.0001) than those without ADRD. Additionally, dysphagia on the VFSS was more severe in the ADRD group (p < 0.03). DISCUSSION: ADRD individuals may be vulnerable to developing or worsening dysphagia during hospitalization. Results underscore the importance of evaluating swallowing function in hospitalized patients with ADRD in order to facilitate targeted intervention.

Older Adult Patients and Care Partners as Knowledge Brokers in Fragmented Health Care.

OBJECTIVE: To describe older adult patients' and care partners' knowledge broker roles during emergency department (ED) visits. BACKGROUND: Older adult patients are vulnerable to communication and coordination challenges during an ED visit, which can be exacerbated by the time and resource constrained ED environment. Yet, as a constant throughout the patient journey, patients and care partners can act as an information conduit, or knowledge broker, between fragmented care systems to attain high-quality, safe care. METHODS: Participants included 14 older adult patients (≥ 65 years old) and their care partners (e.g., spouse, adult child) who presented to the ED after having experienced a fall. Human factors researchers collected observation data from patients, care partners and clinician interactions during the patient's ED visit. We used an inductive content analysis to determine the role of patients and care partners as knowledge brokers. RESULTS: We found that patients and care partners act as knowledge brokers by providing information about diagnostic testing, medications, the patient's health history, and care accommodations at the disposition location. Patients and care partners filled the role of knowledge broker proactively (i.e. offer information) and reactively (i.e. are asked to provide information by clinicians or staff), within-ED work system and across work systems (e.g., between the ED and hospital), and in anticipation of future knowledge brokering. CONCLUSION: Patients and care partners, acting as knowledge brokers, often fill gaps in communication and participate in care coordination that assists in mitigating health care fragmentation.