Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a medical emergency with significant morbidity and mortality for oncology patients, requiring comprehensive workup and timely antibiotic administration. We evaluated concordance with locally developed FN guidelines and outcomes of cancer patients admitted to general internal medicine at an academic teaching hospital.

We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of patients admitted between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, for FN. Patients were classified as having low-risk or high-risk FN according to their malignancy and chemotherapy. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving guideline-concordant antibiotics within 48 hours of admission to general internal medicine. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients in whom empirical antibiotics were active against pathogens isolated, rate of antibiotic-associated adverse events, and in-hospital mortality. We used logistic regression to model relationship between FN risk and guideline-concordant antibiotics.

Among 100 patients included, 34 (34%) were low-risk FN and 66 (66%) were high-risk. Proportion of guideline-concordant empirical antibiotics was significantly lower among low-risk FN patients than high-risk patients: 12 (35%) of 34 versus 47 (71%) of 66 (P = .001). Empirical antibiotics were active against 17 (94%) of 18 isolated pathogens. The mortality rate was 3%, and 16% of patients experienced antibiotic-associated adverse events. Hematological malignancy and infectious diseases–trained physician involvement were associated with guideline-concordant prescribing, with adjusted odds ratios of 3.76 (95% CI, 1.46–9.70; P = .006) and 3.71 (95% CI, 1.49–9.23; P = .005), respectively.

Guideline concordance was low compared to published reports. Factors influencing appropriate antimicrobial prescribing in patients with FN warrant further exploration.

To evaluate the clinical impact of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (PNA panel) in critically ill patients.

Single-center, preintervention and postintervention retrospective cohort study.

Tertiary-care academic medical center.

Adult ICU patients.

Patients with quantitative bacterial cultures obtained by bronchoalveolar lavage or tracheal aspirate either before (January–March 2021, preintervention period) or after (January–March 2022, postintervention period) implementation of the PNA panel were randomly screened until 25 patients per study month (75 in each cohort) who met the study criteria were included. Antibiotic use from the day of culture collection through day 5 was compared.

The primary outcome of median time to first antibiotic change based on microbiologic data was 50 hours before the intervention versus 21 hours after the intervention (P = .0006). Also, 56 postintervention regimens (75%) were eligible for change based on PNA panel results; actual change occurred in 30 regimens (54%). Median antibiotic days of therapy (DOTs) were 8 before the intervention versus 6 after the intervention (P = .07). For the patients with antibiotic changes made based on PNA panel results, the median time to first antibiotic change was 10 hours. For patients who were initially on inadequate therapy, time to adequate therapy was 67 hours before the intervention versus 37 hours after the intervention (P = .27).

The PNA panel was associated with decreased time to first antibiotic change and fewer antibiotic DOTs. Its impact may have been larger if a higher percentage of potential antibiotic changes had been implemented. The PNA panel is a promising tool to enhance antibiotic stewardship.

Rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) are several times above those of high-income countries. The objective of this study was to identify risk factors (RFs) for VAP cases in ICUs of LMICs.

Prospective cohort study.

This study was conducted across 743 ICUs of 282 hospitals in 144 cities in 42 Asian, African, European, Latin American, and Middle Eastern countries.

The study included patients admitted to ICUs across 24 years.

In total, 289,643 patients were followed during 1,951,405 patient days and acquired 8,236 VAPs. We analyzed 10 independent variables. Multiple logistic regression identified the following independent VAP RFs: male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16–1.28; P < .0001); longer length of stay (LOS), which increased the risk 7% per day (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.07–1.08; P < .0001); mechanical ventilation (MV) utilization ratio (aOR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.23–1.31; P < .0001); continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), which was associated with the highest risk (aOR, 13.38; 95% CI, 11.57–15.48; P < .0001); tracheostomy connected to a MV, which was associated with the next-highest risk (aOR, 8.31; 95% CI, 7.21–9.58; P < .0001); endotracheal tube connected to a MV (aOR, 6.76; 95% CI, 6.34–7.21; P < .0001); surgical hospitalization (aOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.17–1.29; P < .0001); admission to a public hospital (aOR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.35-1.86; P < .0001); middle-income country (aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 15–1.29; P < .0001); admission to an adult-oncology ICU, which was associated with the highest risk (aOR, 4.05; 95% CI, 3.22–5.09; P < .0001), admission to a neurologic ICU, which was associated with the next-highest risk (aOR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.78–3.45; P < .0001); and admission to a respiratory ICU (aOR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.79–3.07; P < .0001). Admission to a coronary ICU showed the lowest risk (aOR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.51–0.77; P < .0001).

Some identified VAP RFs are unlikely to change: sex, hospitalization type, ICU type, facility ownership, and country income level. Based on our results, we recommend focusing on strategies to reduce LOS, to reduce the MV utilization ratio, to limit CPAP use and implementing a set of evidence-based VAP prevention recommendations.

In early 2017, the University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands, had an outbreak of 2 strains of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) that spread to various wards. In the summer of 2018, the hospital was again hit by a VRE outbreak, which was detected and controlled early. However, during both outbreaks, fewer patients were admitted to the hospital and various costs were incurred. We quantified the costs of the 2017 and 2018 VRE outbreaks.

Using data from various sources in the hospital and interviews, we identified and quantified the costs of the 2 outbreaks, resulting from tests, closed beds (opportunity costs), cleaning, additional personnel, and patient isolation.

The University Medical Center Groningen, an academic hospital in the Netherlands.

The total costs associated with the 2017 outbreak were estimated to be €335,278 (US $356,826); the total costs associated with the 2018 outbreak were estimated at €149,025 (US $158,602).

The main drivers of the costs were the opportunity costs due to the reduction in admitted patients, testing costs, and cleaning costs. Although the second outbreak was considerably shorter, the costs per day were similar to those of the first outbreak. Major investments are associated with the VRE control measures, and an outbreak of VRE can lead to considerable costs for a hospital. Aggressively screening and isolating patients who may be involved in an outbreak of VRE may reduce the overall costs and improve the continuity of care within the hospital.

To review methodologies and outcomes reporting among these studies and to develop a conceptual framework of outcomes to assist in guiding studies and production of clinical metrics.

PubMed and Embase from January 1, 2012, thru December 1, 2021.

Studies evaluating highly multiplex molecular respiratory diagnostics and their impact on either clinical or economic outcomes.

A systematic literature review (SLR) of methodologies and outcomes reporting was performed. A qualitative synthesis of identified SLRs and associated primary studies was conducted to develop conceptual framework for outcomes.

Ultimately, 4 systemic literature reviews and their 12 associated primary studies were selected for review. Most primary studies included patient outcomes focusing on antimicrobial exposure changes such as antibiotic (80%) and antiviral use (50%) or occupancy changes such as hospital length of stay (60%). Economic outcomes were infrequently reported, and societal outcomes, such as antibiotic resistance impact, were absent from the reviewed literature. Qualitative evidence synthesis of reported outcomes yielded a conceptual framework of outcomes to include operational, patient, economic, and societal domains.

Our review highlights the significant heterogeneity in outcomes reporting among clinical impact studies for highly multiplex molecular respiratory diagnostics. Furthermore, we developed a conceptual framework of outcomes domains that may act as a guide to improve considerations in outcomes selection and reporting when evaluating clinical impact of these tests. These improvements may be important in synthesizing the evidence for informing clinical decision making, guidelines, and financial reimbursement.

Penicillin (PCN) allergy labels affect antimicrobial selection for surgical prophylaxis. We aimed to increase the percentage of cefazolin usage in patients with PCN allergy labels undergoing orthopedic surgery from 50% to 80%.

Quality improvement initiative.

Children’s Mercy Kansas City (CMKC), a freestanding children’s hospital.

Children scheduled for an orthopedic surgery (excluding spinal surgery) at CMKC who had a PCN allergy label and received a perioperative antibiotic.

No standardized process existed to identify and clarify PCN-allergic–labeled patients preoperatively. We developed a process for patient identification combined with a pharmacist phone interview for PCN allergy clarification. In plan–do–study–act (PDSA) part 1, we implemented a computer-generated patient list. In PDSA part 2, we combined automated identification with a phone interview. In PDSA part 3, we enhanced the patient list, making it timely and concise. In PDSA part 4, we included a PCN allergy clarification electronic survey to caregivers via the electronic medical record.

Cefazolin use in PCN-allergic surgical patients increased from 50% to 74% following interventions. Patients who had their PCN allergy label clarified were 4 times more likely to receive cefazolin compared to those whose allergy labels were not clarified (OR, 4.21; 95% CI, 1.68–11.61; P = 0.003). Moreover, 90% of patients received cefazolin when their PCN allergy was clarified and cefazolin was recommended. When a PCN allergy label was not clarified, only 59% of patients received cefazolin.

Appropriate clarification and documentation of PCN allergy labels increases the use of cefazolin for surgical prophylaxis.

Antibiotics are essential medications for treating life-threatening infections. However, incorrect prescribing can lead to adverse events and contribute to antibiotic resistance. We sought to develop a utilization quality measure that could be used by health insurance plans to track overall prescribing for respiratory conditions.

A consensus-based process that included evidence review, testing, and stakeholder input was used to develop a measure and assess its usefulness for the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS), a national quality measurement tool.

Guidelines and literature were reviewed to establish the rationale for the measure. The measure was tested in claims data for commercial, Medicaid and Medicare Advantage enrollees to assess feasibility of collecting and reporting needed information. The measure was vetted with multistakeholder advisory panels and posted for public comment to solicit wide input on relevance and usability.

Respiratory conditions are frequent reasons for outpatient care in the data assessed. On average, across all lines of business, the measure revealed that approximately one-third of outpatient visits for respiratory conditions are followed by antibiotics. Stakeholders supported the measure as a tool for monitoring antibiotic prescribing across health plans alongside existing measures that assess inappropriate prescribing for specific conditions. The final measure assesses the number of antibiotic prescriptions dispensed across all outpatient respiratory-related encounters at a health-plan level.

The measure on antibiotic prescribing for respiratory conditions was relevant, feasible, and useful. Stakeholders strongly supported the newly developed measure and recommended its integration into HEDIS.

To use interrupted time-series analyses to investigate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). We hypothesized that the pandemic would be associated with higher rates of HAIs after adjustment for confounders.

We conducted a cross-sectional study of HAIs in 3 hospitals in Missouri from January 1, 2017, through August 31, 2020, using interrupted time-series analysis with 2 counterfactual scenarios.

The study was conducted at 1 large quaternary-care referral hospital and 2 community hospitals.

All adults ≥18 years of age hospitalized at a study hospital for ≥48 hours were included in the study.

In total, 254,792 admissions for ≥48 hours occurred during the study period. The average age of these patients was 57.6 (±19.0) years, and 141,107 (55.6%) were female. At hospital 1, 78 CLABSIs, 33 CAUTIs, and 88 VAEs were documented during the pandemic period. Hospital 2 had 13 CLABSIs, 6 CAUTIs, and 17 VAEs. Hospital 3 recorded 11 CLABSIs, 8 CAUTIs, and 11 VAEs. Point estimates for hypothetical excess HAIs suggested an increase in all infection types across facilities, except for CLABSIs and CAUTIs at hospital 1 under the “no pandemic” scenario.

The COVID-19 era was associated with increases in CLABSIs, CAUTIs, and VAEs at 3 hospitals in Missouri, with variations in significance by hospital and infection type. Continued vigilance in maintaining optimal infection prevention practices to minimize HAIs is warranted.

Outpatient antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is managed by a variety of teams, but primarily through an infectious disease clinic. At our medical center, OPAT monitoring is performed telephonically by pharmacists through a collaborative practice agreement under the supervision of an infectious disease physician. The effect of telephonic monitoring of OPAT by pharmacists on patient outcomes is unknown.

This retrospective cohort study was conducted between July 2017 and July 2018 at a 350-bed academic medical center and included adult patients discharged home on IV antibiotics or oral linezolid. The experimental group comprised patients discharged with a consultation for the OPAT management program, whereas the control group comprised patients discharged home without a consultation. The primary outcome was 30-day readmission.

In total, 399 patients were included: 243 patients in the OPAT management program group and 156 patients in the control group. The 30-day readmission rates were similar in each cohort (20% vs 19%; P = .8193); however, the 30-day readmission rates were lower in the OPAT management program for patients discharged on vancomycin (19.4% vs 39.1%; P = .004).

We did not find a difference in 30-day readmissions between patients receiving pharmacy-driven OPAT management services and those who did not. Patients receiving vancomycin via OPAT had lower 30-day readmissions when included in the pharmacist-driven OPAT management program. Institutions with limited resources may consider reserving OPAT management services for patients receiving antimicrobials that require pharmacokinetic dosing and/or close monitoring.

To conduct a systematic review of published real-world evidence describing the cost and healthcare resource use for Clostridiodes difficile infection (CDI) in the United States.

A systematic literature review was conducted searching for terms for CDI and healthcare costs. Titles of articles and abstracts were reviewed to identify those that met study criteria. Studies were evaluated to examine overall design and comparison groups in terms of healthcare resource use and cost for CDI.

In total, 28 articles met the inclusion criteria. Moreover, 20 studies evaluated primary CDI or did not specify, and 8 studies 1–8 evaluated both primary CDI and recurrent (rCDI). Data from Medicare were used in 6 studies. Nearly all studies used a comparison group, either controls without CDI (N = 20) or comparison between primary CDI and rCDI (N = 7). Two studies examined costs of rCDI by the number of recurrences. Overall, the burden of CDI is significant, with higher aggregate costs for patients with rCDI. Compared with non-CDI controls, hospital length of stay increased in patients with both primary and rCDI compared to patients without CDI. Patients with primary CDI cost healthcare systems $24,000 more than patients without CDI. Additionally, 2 studies that evaluated the impact of recurrence among those patients with an index case of CDI demonstrated significantly higher direct all-cause medical costs among those with rCDI compared to those without.

CDI, and particularly rCDI, is a costly condition with hospitalizations being the main cost driver.

Examine the impact of vaccination status on hospital cost and course for patients admitted with COVID-19 infection.

Retrospective cohort study characterizing vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals hospitalized for COVID-19 between April 2021 to January 2022.

Large academic medical center.

Patients were included if they were greater than 18 years old, fully vaccinated or unvaccinated against COVID-19, and admitted for COVID-19 infection.

437 consecutively admitted patients for COVID-19 infection met inclusion criteria. Of these, 79 were excluded for unknown or partial vaccination status, transfer from an outside hospital, or multiple COVID-19 related admissions.

Overall, 279 (77.9%) unvaccinated patients compared to 79 (22.1%) vaccinated patients were hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19. Average length of stay was significantly lower in the vaccinated group (6.47 days versus 8.92 days, P = 0.03). Vaccinated patients experienced a 70.6% lower risk of ICU admission (OR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.12–0.71, P = 0.006). The unadjusted cost of hospitalization was not found to be statistically significant ($119,630 versus $191,146, P = 0.06). After adjusting for age and comorbidities, vaccinated patients experienced a 26% lower cost of hospitalization compared to unvaccinated patients (P = 0.004). Unvaccinated patients incurred a significantly higher cost of hospitalization per day ($29,425 vs $13,845 P < 0.0001). Unvaccinated patients (n = 118, 42.9%) were more likely than vaccinated patients (n = 16, 20.3%) to require high-flow oxygen or mechanical ventilation (OR = 2.95, 95% CI 1.62–5.38, P = 0.0004).

Vaccinated patients experienced a lower cost of hospitalization after adjusting for age and comorbidities and shorter length of stay compared to unvaccinated patients admitted for COVID-19.

Hospital employees are at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection through transmission in 3 settings: (1) the community, (2) within the hospital from patient care, and (3) within the hospital from other employees. We evaluated probable sources of infection among hospital employees based on reported exposures before infection.

A structured survey was distributed to participants to evaluate presumed COVID-19 exposures (ie, close contacts with people with known or probable COVID-19) and mask usage. Participants were stratified into high, medium, low, and unknown risk categories based on exposure characteristics and personal protective equipment.

Tertiary-care hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.

Hospital employees with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test result between March 2020 and January 2021. During this period, 573 employees tested positive, of whom 187 (31.5%) participated.

We did not detect a statistically significant difference in the proportion of employees who reported any exposure (ie, close contacts at any risk level) in the community compared with any exposure in the hospital, from either patients or employees. In total, 131 participants (70.0%) reported no known high-risk exposure (ie, unmasked close contacts) in any setting. Among those who could identify a high-risk exposure, employees were more likely to have had a high-risk exposure in the community than in both hospital settings combined (odds ratio, 1.89; P = .03).

Hospital employees experienced exposure risks in both community and hospital settings. Most employees were unable to identify high-risk exposures prior to infection. When respondents identified high-risk exposures, they were more likely to have occurred in the community.