1036. Clinical impact of an antibiotic time out initiative at an academic medical center

Abstract

BackgroundThe Infectious Diseases Society of America’s guideline for implementing antibiotic (abx) stewardship recommends routine review of abx use. Several studies demonstrate antibiotic time out (ATO) programs result in de-escalation, but there is limited evidence of improved outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact of ATO.MethodsThis retrospective study included hospitalized patients at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center receiving abx and a documented ATO from 7/1/2017 to 6/30/2018. ATO patients were matched by infection type to abx-treated patients lacking an ATO note. Patients were excluded if they were identified as a protected population, were in the ICU at the time of ATO, had an ATO within 48 hours of discharge, cystic fibrosis, or febrile neutropenia. The primary objective was to evaluate abx optimization in patients with documented ATO vs. those without ATO. Abx optimization was defined as the selection of ideal abx based on guidelines, culture and susceptibility results, or expert opinion when undefined. Secondary outcomes included vancomycin-associated acute kidney injury (VAN-AKI), infection-related length of stay (LOS), all-cause 30-day readmission or mortality, abx days, and nosocomial C. difficile infection (CDI) rates. The Student t-test/Fisher’s exact test and Wilcoxon-rank sum were utilized as appropriate.ResultsOne hundred ATO patients were compared with 100 non-ATO patients. Baseline characteristics and infection types were similar between groups. ATO resulted in improved optimization of abx selection (P = 0.05) and duration (P < 0.01), and reduced piperacillin/tazobactam (P/T) and vancomycin (VAN) utilization. No difference was observed in VAN-AKI (22 vs. 20%, P = 0.73), 30-day readmission (28 vs. 27%, P = 0.87), mortality (5 vs. 5%, P = 1), or CDI rates (6 vs. 5%, p = 0.76) in the ATO vs. non-ATO group. However, inpatient abx days (12 vs. 8, P = 0.004) and infection-related LOS (10 vs. 8, P = 0.0006) were shorter in the non-ATO group.ConclusionATO improved optimization of abx selection and duration, and reduced P/T and VAN use. Despite this, clinical outcomes were not improved.Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.