To examine variation in antibiotic coverage and detection of resistant pathogens in community-onset pneumonia.

Cross-sectional study.

A total of 128 hospitals in the Veterans Affairs health system.

Hospitalizations with a principal diagnosis of pneumonia from 2009 through 2010.

We examined proportions of hospitalizations with empiric antibiotic coverage for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PAER) and with initial detection in blood or respiratory cultures. We compared lowest- versus highest-decile hospitals, and we estimated adjusted probabilities (AP) for patient- and hospital-level factors predicting coverage and detection using hierarchical regression modeling.

Among 38,473 hospitalizations, empiric coverage varied widely across hospitals (MRSA lowest vs highest, 8.2% vs 42.0%; PAER lowest vs highest, 13.9% vs 44.4%). Detection rates also varied (MRSA lowest vs highest, 0.5% vs 3.6%; PAER lowest vs highest, 0.6% vs 3.7%). Whereas coverage was greatest among patients with recent hospitalizations (AP for anti-MRSA, 54%; AP for anti-PAER, 59%) and long-term care (AP for anti-MRSA, 60%; AP for anti-PAER, 66%), detection was greatest in patients with a previous history of a positive culture (AP for MRSA, 7.9%; AP for PAER, 11.9%) and in hospitals with a high prevalence of the organism in pneumonia (AP for MRSA, 3.9%; AP for PAER, 3.2%). Low hospital complexity and rural setting were strong negative predictors of coverage but not of detection.

Hospitals demonstrated widespread variation in both coverage and detection of MRSA and PAER, but probability of coverage correlated poorly with probability of detection. Factors associated with empiric coverage (eg, healthcare exposure) were different from those associated with detection (eg, microbiology history). Providing microbiology data during empiric antibiotic decision making could better align coverage to risk for resistant pathogens and could promote more judicious use of broad-spectrum antibiotics.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:937–944

To explore differences in the prevalence of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) according to survey methodology.

Repeated point and period prevalence survey strategies.

University-affiliated primary and tertiary care center.

Analysis of data collected from 2006 to 2012 from annual HAI prevalence surveys using definitions proposed by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The study design allowed the analysis of the same data in the format of a point or a period prevalence survey.

Pooled point and period HAI prevalence was 7.46% and 9.84% (+32%), respectively. This additional 32% was mainly attributable to infections of the lower respiratory tract (2.42% vs 3.20% [+32%]) and the urinary tract (1.76% vs 2.62% [+49%]). Differences in surgical site infections (1.02% vs 1.20% [+19%]) and bloodstream infections (0.76% vs 0.86% [+13%]) were smaller. HAI prevalence for the point and period methodology in acute and long-term care were 7.47% versus 9.38 (+26%) and 8.37% versus 11.89% (+42%), respectively. Differences were stable over time. Focusing on the 4 major HAIs (respiratory tract, urinary tract, surgical site, and bloodstream infections) misses one-quarter of all HAIs.

More HAIs are identified by the period prevalence method, especially those of shorter duration (lower respiratory and urinary tract), which would make this method more suitable to be used in long-term care. Results of the 2 study methods cannot be benchmarked against each other.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35(6):674–684