Physicians' attitude and knowledge regarding antibiotic use and resistance in ambulatory settings.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this survey was to assess the attitudes of physicians toward antibiotic prescribing and explore their knowledge about antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in ambulatory care settings. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey that was administered to physicians who work primarily in ambulatory care settings in the United States. The survey was self-administered, voluntary, and anonymous, and was delivered through electronic mail and online forums using a 35-item questionnaire. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 323 physicians. Ninety-nine percent of respondents agreed that AMR is a national problem, but only 63% agreed that AMR is a local problem within their own facilities. Ninety-four percent of the respondents reported that each antibiotic prescription can impact AMR; however, 23% still believed that aggressive prescribing is necessary to avoid clinical failures. Factor perceived to have a low to moderate impact on the physicians' choice of antibiotic was the presence of prescription guidelines (54%). Top measures reported to be effective in reducing the emergence of AMR were institution specific guidelines (94%), institution specific antibiogram (92%), educating health care providers (87%), and regular audits and feedback on antibiotic prescribing (86%). CONCLUSIONS: AMR awareness campaigns and antibiotic stewardships incorporating interactive education and feedback, along with input of local experts, are critically needed to address the problem of AMR in both inpatient and ambulatory settings.

The Hypothetical Impact of Accelerate Pheno on Time to Effective Therapy and Time to Definitive Therapy for Bloodstream Infections Due to Drug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacilli.

Strategies are needed to improve time to optimal therapy in patients with bloodstream infections (BSI) due to resistant Gram-negative (GN) pathogens. Accelerate Pheno (ACC) can provide antimicrobial susceptibility results within 7 h of a positive culture and may more rapidly optimize therapy. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the hypothetical impact of ACC on time to effective therapy (TTET) and time to definitive therapy (TTDT) among patients with BSI due to resistant GN pathogens. ACC was performed on resistant GN BSI isolates, and results were not available to clinicians in real time. A potential benefit of having ACC on TTET or TTDT was determined if modifications to antimicrobial regimens could have been made sooner with ACC. Comparisons on the impact of ACC in the presence or absence of testing by the Verigene Gram-negative blood culture test (Verigene GN-BC) were performed. Sixty-one patients with resistant GN BSI were evaluated. The median actual TTET and TTDT in the cohort were 25.9 h (interquartile range [IQR], 18.5, 42.1) and 47.6 h (IQR, 24.9, 79.6), respectively. Almost half of the patients had potential improvement in TTET and/or TTDT with ACC. In patients who would have had a benefit the median potential decreases in TTET and TTDT were 16.6 h (IQR, 5.5 to 30.6) and 29.8 h (IQR, 13.6 to 43), respectively. The largest potential improvements were seen in patients for whom Verigene results were not available. In conclusion, among patients with resistant GN BSI in a setting where other rapid diagnostic technologies are utilized, ACC results could have further improved TTET and TTDT.

Impact of a Multidisciplinary Infection Prevention Initiative on Central Line and Urinary Catheter Utilization in a Long-term Acute Care Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged central line (CL) and urinary catheter (UC) use can increase risk of central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI). METHODS: This interventional study conducted in a 76-bed long-term acute care hospital (LTACH) in Southeast Michigan was divided into 3 periods: pre-intervention (January 2015-June 2015), intervention (July-November 2015), and postintervention (December 2015-March 2017). During the intervention period, a multidisciplinary infection prevention team (MIPT) made weekly recommendations to remove unnecessary CL/UC or switch to alternate urinary/intravenous access. Device utilization ratios (DURs) and infection rates were compared between the study periods. Interrupted time series (ITS) and 0-inflated poisson (ZIP) regression were used to analyze DUR and CLABSI/CAUTI data, respectively. RESULTS: UC-DUR was 31% in the pre- and postintervention periods and 21% in the intervention period. CL-DUR decreased from 46% (pre-intervention) to 39% (intervention) to 37% (postintervention). The results of ITS analysis indicated nonsignificant decrease and increase in level/trend in DURs coinciding with our intervention. The CAUTI rate per catheter-days did not decrease during intervention (4.36) compared with pre- (2.49) and postintervention (1.93). The CLABSI rate per catheter-days decreased by 73% during intervention (0.39) compared with pre-intervention (1.45). Rates again quadrupled postintervention (1.58). ZIP analysis indicated a beneficial effect of intervention on infection rates without reaching statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that a workable MIPT initiative focusing on removal of unnecessary CL and UC can be easily implemented in an LTACH requiring minimal time and resources. A rebound increase in UC-DURs to pre-intervention levels after intervention end indicates that continued vigilance is required to maintain performance.

Comparison of complications in midlines versus central venous catheters: Are midlines safer than central venous lines?

BACKGROUND: With the rising use of midline catheters (MCs), validation of their safety is essential. Our study aimed to evaluate the incidence of bloodstream infections (BSIs) and other complications related to the use of MCs and central venous catheters (CVCs). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed at a tertiary care hospital in Detroit, Michigan, from March-September 2016. Adult patients with either MC or CVC were included. Outcomes assessed were catheter-related BSI (CRBSI), mechanical complications, hospital length of stay, readmission within 90 days of discharge (RA), and mortality. Statistical analysis was performed using SAS software. RESULTS: A total of 411 patients with MC and 282 patients with CVC were analyzed. More CRBSIs were seen in patients with CVC (10/282) than MC (1/411) (3.5% vs 0.2%, respectively; P = .0008). More mechanical complications were seen in patients with MC (2.6%) than CVC (0.3%; P = .03). Patients with CVC had a higher crude mortality (17.3% vs 5.3%; P < .0001), RA (58% vs 35%; P ≤ .0001), line-related RA (2.8% vs 0.2%; P = .0041), and transfer to intensive care unit after line placement (9% vs 5%; P = .01). CVC was a significant exposure for a composite of mortality, CRBSI, mechanical issues, thrombosis, and readmission because of a line-related complication (odds ratio, 3.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-5.8). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show use of MC is safer than CVC, but larger studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Implementing an antibiotic stewardship program at a long-term acute care hospital in Detroit, Michigan.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to assess health care providers' (HCPs) knowledge and attitude toward antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and implement an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) in a long-term acute care hospital (LTACH). METHODS: A questionnaire on antibiotic use and resistance was administered to HCP in an LTACH in Detroit, Michigan, between August 2011 and October 2011. Concurrently, a retrospective review of common antibiotic prescription practices and costs was conducted. Then, a tailored ASP was launched at the LTACH followed by 2-phase postimplementation assessment aiming at evaluating the impact of the ASP on antibiotic expenditure. RESULTS: Of all respondents (N = 26), 65% viewed AMR as a national problem, but only 38% perceived AMR as a problem at their facility. Most respondents were familiar with infections caused by resistant organisms such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, and extended-spectrum ß-lactamase; however, only 35% expressed confidence in treating infected patients. In the preimplementation phase, 15% of antimicrobial doses were inappropriate and 10 of 13 de-escalation opportunities were missed, resulting in additional $23,524.00 expenditure. In the first postimplementation phase, there was a 42% and 58% decrease in the use of daptomycin and tigecycline, respectively, resulting in $55,000 savings. In the second postintervention phase, total antimicrobial cost for treating a cohort of 28 patients in 2016 and 2017 was $26,837.85 and $22,397.15, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of an ASP in an LTACH improves antimicrobial prescribing practices, reduces cost, and is sustainable.