The University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), along with many academic institutions worldwide, made significant efforts to address the many challenges presented during the COVID-19 pandemic by developing clinical staging and predictive models. Data from patients with a clinical encounter at UIC from July 1, 2019 to March 30, 2022 were abstracted from the electronic health record and stored in the UIC Center for Clinical and Translational Science Clinical Research Data Warehouse, prior to data analysis. While we saw some success, there were many failures along the way. For this paper, we wanted to discuss some of these obstacles and many of the lessons learned from the journey.

Principle investigators, research staff, and other project team members were invited to complete an anonymous Qualtrics survey to reflect on the project. The survey included open-ended questions centering on participants’ opinions about the project, including whether project goals were met, project successes, project failures, and areas that could have been improved. We then identified themes among the results.

Nine project team members (out of 30 members contacted) completed the survey. The responders were anonymous. The survey responses were grouped into four key themes: Collaboration, Infrastructure, Data Acquisition/Validation, and Model Building.

Through our COVID-19 research efforts, the team learned about our strengths and deficiencies. We continue to work to improve our research and data translation capabilities.

To determine whether a structured OPAT program supervised by an infectious disease physician and led by an OPAT nurse decreased hospital readmission rates and OPAT-related complications and whether it affected clinical cure. We also evaluated predictors of readmission while receiving OPAT.

A convenience sample of 428 patients admitted to a tertiary-care hospital in Chicago, Illinois, with infections requiring intravenous antibiotic therapy after hospital discharge.

In this retrospective, quasi-experimental study, we compared patients discharged on intravenous antimicrobials from an OPAT program before and after implementation of a structured ID physician and nurse-led OPAT program. The preintervention group consisted of patients discharged on OPAT managed by individual physicians without central program oversight or nurse care coordination. All-cause and OPAT-related readmissions were compared using the χ2 test. Factors associated with readmission for OPAT-related problems at a significance level of P < .10 in univariate analysis were eligible for testing in a forward, stepwise, multinomial, logistic regression to identify independent predictors of readmission.

In total, 428 patients were included in the study. Unplanned OPAT-related hospital readmissions decreased significantly after implementation of the structured OPAT program (17.8% vs 7%; P = .003). OPAT-related readmission reasons included infection recurrence or progression (53%), adverse drug reaction (26%), or line-associated issues (21%). Independent predictors of hospital readmission due to OPAT-related events included vancomycin administration and longer length of outpatient therapy. Clinical cure increased from 69.8% before the intervention to 94.9% after the intervention (P < .001).

A structured ID physician and nurse-led OPAT program was associated with a decrease in OPAT-related readmissions and improved clinical cure.

The INSYTE study provides an understanding of the management of Parkinson disease psychosis (PDP) in actual practice settings, including use of antipsychotic (APs) and their impact on clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes. Treatment paradigms or the benefits/consequences of various “real world” PDP treatment strategies have not been evaluated. Thus, providers may be using a wide range of AP treatment strategies that contrast with consensus recommendations.

The INSYTE study is enrolling up to 750 patients from up to 100 sites in the US. Data are compiled at the baseline (BL) visit and from standard-of-care follow up visits over 3 years. PDP treatment pathways are defined from 3 BL cohorts reflecting (1) no AP medication, (2) use of pimavanserin (PIM), or (3) other AP treatment. Information about APs used is collected at each follow-up visit: history, duration, dose, adjustment, and rationale for adjustment of treatment. Outcomes assessments (clinical, quality of life, disease burden) by the physician, patient, and caregiver are also collected. AP medication and outcomes data are analyzed for patients completing a BL and 1 follow up visit (FU1).

For 404 patients with BL and FU1 visits (mean 120.7 days from BL), 56.8% used no AP medications, 26.0% used PIM, and 13.6% used other APs at BL. The No Medication group was noted to be less severe in key BL disease parameters. Considering primary PDP treatments at BL and FU1 (including no treatment), 26 distinct pathways were being employed. 12.6% of patients had AP medication adjustments between BL and FU1 visits, most frequently from the non-PIM group. Adjustments of APs occurred in many forms: introduction of a single AP (64.7%%), introduction of multiple APs (5.9%), switching to another AP (3.9%), decreasing the number of APs (5.9%), and discontinuation (19.6%).

Multiple, divergent AP treatment strategies for PDP exist in actual practice. No identifiable BL characteristics correlated with the broad range of AP treatment pathways. The numerous distinct AP treatment pathways utilized (n=26) reflect discordance with the updated 2019 MDS evidence-based recommendations, which recognize only 2 APs as “efficacious” and “clinically useful”: pimavanserin and clozapine. Education of healthcare professionals remains a priority for PDP management.

ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Short-term peripheral venous catheter–related bloodstream infection (PVCR-BSI) rates have not been systematically studied in resource-limited countries, and data on their incidence by number of device days are not available.

Prospective, surveillance study on PVCR-BSI conducted from September 1, 2013, to May 31, 2019, in 727 intensive care units (ICUs), by members of the International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC), from 268 hospitals in 141 cities of 42 countries of Africa, the Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, Europe, South East Asia, and Western Pacific regions. For this research, we applied definition and criteria of the CDC NHSN, methodology of the INICC, and software named INICC Surveillance Online System.

We followed 149,609 ICU patients for 731,135 bed days and 743,508 short-term peripheral venous catheter (PVC) days. We identified 1,789 PVCR-BSIs for an overall rate of 2.41 per 1,000 PVC days. Mortality in patients with PVC but without PVCR-BSI was 6.67%, and mortality was 18% in patients with PVC and PVCR-BSI. The length of stay of patients with PVC but without PVCR-BSI was 4.83 days, and the length of stay was 9.85 days in patients with PVC and PVCR-BSI. Among these infections, the microorganism profile showed 58% gram-negative bacteria: Escherichia coli (16%), Klebsiella spp (11%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6%), Enterobacter spp (4%), and others (20%) including Serratia marcescens. Staphylococcus aureus were the predominant gram-positive bacteria (12%).

PVCR-BSI rates in INICC ICUs were much higher than rates published from industrialized countries. Infection prevention programs must be implemented to reduce the incidence of PVCR-BSIs in resource-limited countries.