Antimicrobial Stewardship Program Team Research Articles

A nationwide mixed-methods study of gaps and barriers to implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programmes in hospitals in Indonesia

There is an urgent need to understand the implementation barriers of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) in low- and middle-income countries. We conducted a mixed-methods study in public and private hospitals across all provinces in Indonesia (March-December 2023). We used a self-assessment questionnaire with a scoring system, and multilevel ordinal regression to assess associations with hospital and district-level characteristics. Focus group discussions (FGD) with hospital stakeholders examined barriers and enablers. We applied a patient safety framework to integrate results. 575 (19%) of 3026 hospitals completed the self-assessment, of whom 516 (89.7%) had a formal ASP (median 4 [IQR1-5] years), and 14 participated in FGD. The median overall ASP development score was 48.4% (35.9-62.5%), classifying 41 (8.0%) hospitals as inadequate (0-25%), 237 (45.9%) as basic (26-50%), 179 (34.7%) as intermediate (51-75%) and 59 (11.4%) as advanced (76-100%). Scores were highest for hospital leadership support (83.4% [66.7-100%]), followed by ASP team and infectious disease training (66.7% [55.6-77.8%]); education (50% [0.0-75.0%]); ASP interventions (43.8% [18.7-68.7%]); hospital infrastructure (42.9% [14.3-71.4%]); and monitoring, reporting and feedback (40.9% [27.3-54.5%]). A higher ASP development score was associated with higher hospital tiered level, longer ASP duration, and higher district-level public health development index and per capita domestic expenditure, but not with hospital ownership or geographic region. FGDs highlighted barriers related to hospital leadership support, staff technical and behavioral skills, cross-disciplinary collaboration, fear of loss of prescriber autonomy, microbiology and IT support, and hospital accreditation. Identified implementation barriers can inform actions for context-specific, sustainable improvement of ASPs.

The experience of an antimicrobial stewardship program and antibiotic consumption and resistance trends during the COVID-19 pandemic at a tertiary care center in Beirut

BackgroundAntimicrobial Resistance, a global concern, worsened with the COVID-19 pandemic that caused a surge of critically ill patients, increased antimicrobial consumption, and the spread of infections with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASP) aim to optimize antimicrobial utilization to fight resistance. We aim to describe the ASP experience and to study antimicrobial consumption and MDRO rates among COVID-19 patients at a tertiary care center in Beirut. MethodsWe compiled the ASP interventions, defined as ASP team recommendations, from January 2019 until December 2021. Data on antimicrobial consumption, expressed as a defined daily dose (DDD) per 100 patient days, was collected per quarter for all antimicrobials and restricted antimicrobials per ASP guidance. Our primary objective was to report on the ASP experience, and the secondary objective was to reflect on the rates of MDROs among hospitalized COVID-19 patients with respiratory or bloodstream bacterial co-infections between March 2020 and September 2021. Results9922 ASP interventions were documented during this study period, with a noticeable correlation between COVID-19 surges in Lebanon and the number of ASP interventions. Acceptance rates for these recommendations improved over time, with a noticeable decrease in the proportion of interventions related to de-escalation and discontinuation of broad-spectrum antimicrobials. We noted an increase in all antimicrobial consumption after the onset of the pandemic, peaking in Q4 2020 (142.8 DDD of anti-infectives/100 patient days) and Q1 2021 (79.1 DDD of restricted anti-infectives/100 patient days). As expected, MDROs, particularly ESKAPE organisms (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae) accounted for 24% of isolates obtained from this cohort. ConclusionThis study highlights the experience of the ASP as we adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic. The ASP team maintained its operations and continued to monitor antibiotic consumption and provide recommendations to limit antibiotic misuse in an effort to mitigate the impact of the pandemic on antimicrobial resistance.

1235. A Retrospective Review of Antimicrobial Stewardship Audit and Feedback: Assessing Acceptance of Stewardship Recommendations During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract Background Antimicrobial stewardship is an underutilized strategy to mitigate the impact of antimicrobial resistance. It is well documented that many Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) were tasked with assisting healthcare teams in navigating the COVID-19 pandemic, leaving less time/fewer resources for day-to-day ASP activities. The aim of this study was to evaluate the acceptance of stewardship recommendations during a season when the ASP had less time to perform regular educational activities and handshake stewardship. Methods A retrospective study of patients receiving antimicrobial therapy at Saint Francis Hospital during 12/30/2020-10/01/2022, for which audit and feedback by the ASP was conducted. A well-established ASP existed prior to the pandemic. Independent variables included the reason for intervention, type of infection by organ system, and type of intervention. Interventions included recommendations to stop antibiotics, de-escalation, duration of therapy, ID consultation, or change the route of administration. The primary outcome was the audit and feedback acceptance rate, and the secondary outcome was whether the intervention resulted in infectious disease consultation. Results 297 patients underwent audit and feedback. Interventions most accepted by providers included changing the route of administration (100%) and consulting ID formally (92%). Adjusting the duration of therapy was the least accepted intervention at 78%. Regardless of intervention, 33% of providers requested a formal ID consult. The number of interventions varied sporadically, coinciding with periods of decreased availability by the ASP team and during peak waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion Our ASP team, despite decreased resources while battling an ongoing pandemic, were still able to perform audit and feedback to providers with a good acceptance rate of recommendations, consistent with current literature. Having not only an existing but robust ASP prior to the pandemic, allowed continued success with ASP intervention acceptance rates, despite less dedicated time for typical ASP activities during the pandemic. Fostering good relationships between providers and ASP teams, as well as continued support and funding from hospital leadership, are vital to ongoing success. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Lessons from the field: Supporting infection prevention and control and antimicrobial stewardship in Amman, Jordan

BackgroundTo reduce antimicrobial resistance (AMR), appropriate antimicrobial prescribing is critical. In conjunction with Infection Prevention & Control (IPC) programs, Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASP) have been shown to improve prescribing practices and patient outcomes. Low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) face challenges related to inadequate ASP policies and guidelines at both the national and healthcare facility (HCF) levels. MethodsTo address this challenge, the World Health Organization (WHO) created a policy guidance and practical toolkit for implementation of ASPs in LMIC. We utilized this document to support a situational analysis and two-day ASP-focused workshop. In follow-up, we invited these attendees, additional HCF and hospital directors to attend a workshop focused on the benefits of supporting these programs. ResultsOver the course of a total three days, we recruited hospital directors, ASP team members, and IPC officers from fifteen different healthcare facilities in Jordan. We describe the courses and coordination, feedback from participants, and lessons learned for future implementation. ConclusionsFuture efforts will include more time for panel-type discussion. which will assist in further delineating enablers and barriers. Also planned is a total three-day workshop; with the first two days being with ASP/IPC teams, and the final third day being with hospital directors and leadership. The WHO policy guidance and toolkit are useful tools to address overuse of antimicrobial agents. Strong leadership support is needed for successful implementation of ASP and IPC. Discussions on quality/safety, as well as cost analyses, are important to generate interest of stakeholders.

Hospital Mexico's preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis protocol for orthopedic patients: a compliance analysis

ObjectiveTo analyze compliance with a prescribed pre-surgical antibiotic prophylaxis protocol established by the Antimicrobial Stewardship Program team and the Orthopedics Department of Hospital Mexico, a public hospital located in Costa Rica, from February to March 2019. No assessments of compliance with the protocol had been conducted since its introduction in 2018, nor had variations in surgical site infection rates been determined. MethodThis is a retrospective observational study that extended from February 1st to March 31st, 2019. We identified patients hospitalized during the study period in the hospital's Orthopedics Department. We reviewed each patient's medical record to record their prescribed antibiotic prophylaxis. Following an analysis of the overall compliance with the protocol, we made an estimation of the surgical site infection rate as well as a descriptive analysis of the studied population. ResultsThe study included 110 clinical records. The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were clindamycin and gentamicin. Compliance with the protocol ranged between 89.1% and 100% across the different criteria, except for dosing appropriateness and prescription of antibiotics at discharge (14.3% and 65.8%, respectively). The most common non-compliance factor was gentamicin's dosing. The surgical site infection rate was 5%. ConclusionsThe preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis protocol established between the Antimicrobial Stewardship Program team and the Orthopedic Department reduced the length of exposure to postoperative antibiotics to only 24 hours and enjoyed widespread acceptance and a high compliance rate. However, compliance with some criteria must be improved, such as dosing appropriateness and prescription of antibiotics at discharge. Involvement of the pharmacist is vital for the compliance with and auditing of these types of protocols as pharmacists are uniquely positioned to ensure that high-quality antibiotic prophylaxis is provided in all surgical procedures that require it.

How does the antimicrobial stewardship provider role affect prospective audit and feedback acceptance for restricted antibiotics in a Canadian tertiary-care center?

Of 731 restricted antimicrobial prescriptions subject to antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) prospective audit and feedback (PAF) over a 3-year period, 598 PAF recommendations (82%) were fully accepted. Physician auditors had an increased odds of PAF recommendation acceptance, reinforcing the complementary role of the ASP physician in the multidisciplinary ASP team.

A joint program of antimicrobial stewardship and hospital-acquired infection control to reduce healthcare-associated infections after kidney transplantation: The Hipomenes study

Infection is a common complication in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). The usefulness of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) and hospital-acquired infection control (HAIC) initiatives in the general inpatient population is well established. We performed a quasi-experimental study to evaluate a joint ASP/HAIC initiative focused on KTRs. A dedicated ASP team optimized antimicrobial prescriptions in consecutive KTRs during the intervention period (June 2015-March 2016). A multifaceted, evidence-based HAIC program was concurrently implemented. Results were compared with the preceding period (June 2014-March 2015). We included 96 and 100 KTRs in the intervention and preintervention periods, respectively. There was a reduction in the consumption of meropenem (rate ratio [RR]: 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53-0.75; P <.0001), ceftazidime (RR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.21-0.45; P <.0001), vancomycin (RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53-0.8; P <.0001), and ciprofloxacin (RR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.55-0.81; P <.0001) and an increase of fosfomycin (RR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.17-2.76; P =.008) during the intervention period. The incidence of cystitis (RR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.28-0.33; P <.001) and upper urinary tract infection (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.33-0.95; P =.04) decreased. A specific ASP/HAIC initiative was effective in optimizing antimicrobial use and reducing the incidence of common bacterial infections among KTRs.

The effect of Telehealth Antimicrobial Stewardship Program (Tele-ASP) on antimicrobial use in a pediatric intensive care unit: Pre- and post-implementation single center study

BackgroundOveruse or misuse of antimicrobials is common in pediatric intensive care units (PICU) and may be associated with poor clinical outcomes. Although an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) has been found to improve this practice, the required expertise in infectious diseases may be limited in some centers. We aimed to evaluate the effect of telehealth ASP on the rate of PICU antimicrobial use in a center without a local Infectious Diseases consultation service. MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed between October 1st, 2018, and October 31st, 2020, in Farwaniya Hospital PICU, a 20-bed unit. All pediatric patients who were admitted to PICU and received systemic antimicrobials during the study period were included and followed until hospital discharge. The ASP team provided weekly prospective audit and feedback on antimicrobial use starting October 8th, 2019. A pediatric infectious diseases specialist joined the ASP rounds remotely. Descriptive analyses and a pre-post intervention comparison of days of therapy (DOT) were used to assess the effectiveness of the ASP intervention. ResultsThere were 272 and 156 PICU admissions received systemic antimicrobial before and after the initiation of ASP, respectively. Bronchiolitis and pneumonia were the most common admission diagnoses, together compromising 60.7% and 61.2% of cases pre- and post-ASP. The requirement for respiratory support was higher post-ASP (76.5% vs. 91.5%, p < 0.001). Average monthly antimicrobial use decreased from 922 (95%CI 745–1000) to 485 DOT/1000 patient-days (95%CI 246–722, P < 0.05). A decline in DOT was observed across most antibiotic classes, except for ceftriaxone. No effect on the length of PICU stay, length of hospitalization, or mortality was observed. Most (89.7%) ASP recommendations were followed either fully or partially. ConclusionIn settings where Infectious Diseases consultation services are unavailable, PICU telehealth ASP can be effectively implemented and associated with significantly reducing antimicrobial use.

Pharmacist-Led Antimicrobial Stewardship and Antibiotic Use in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a significant increase in the use of empiric antibiotic therapy has been observed especially in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Improving antibiotic prescribing is one of the main goals of the antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP). The ASP pharmacists have a scope of practice that authorizes changes in anti-infective therapy. We aimed to describe antibiotic prescribing in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at Veterans Affairs Southern Nevada Healthcare System with a pharmacist-led ASP and to determine the prevalence of bacterial coinfection in this patient population. We performed a retrospective chart review of patients admitted to the facility from November 1, 2020, to January 31, 2021. A total of 199 patients were admitted to the hospital for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection during the study period and 61 patients (31%) received ≥ 1 antibiotic on hospital admission and 138 (69%) did not receive antibiotics. Forty-seven patients (77%) had antibiotics discontinued by the ASP team within 72 hours of admission. Of the 199 admitted, 6 (3%) had microbiologically confirmed bacterial coinfection. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most common organism (3 sputum cultures) followed by Klebsiella oxytoca (2 sputum cultures). Sixteen patients (8%) developed a nosocomial infection during their hospital stay. Up to 31% of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection received empiric antibiotic treatment for concern of bacterial coinfection. Pharmacist-led ASP led to early discontinuation of antibiotics in many patients. A thorough clinical workup to determine the risk of bacterial coinfection in patients with COVID-19 is important before starting empiric antibiotic therapy. It is essential to continue promoting the ASP during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure responsible antibiotic use and prevent antimicrobial resistance.

In-depth assessment of critical access hospital stewardship program adherence to the CDC Core elements in Iowa and Nebraska

Background: Critical-access hospitals (CAHs) are required to meet the CDC 7 Core Elements of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs). CAHs have lower adherence to the core elements than larger acute-care hospitals, and literature defining which core-element deficiencies exist within CAHs as well as barriers to adherence is lacking. Methods: We evaluated 21 CAH ASPs (5 in Nebraska and 15 in Iowa) that self-identified as potentially deficient in the Core Elements, via self-assessment followed by in-depth interviews with local ASP team members to assess adherence to the CDC Core Elements for ASPs. Core-element compliance was rated as either full (1 point), partial (0.5), or deficient (0), with a maximum score of 7 per ASP. High-priority recommendations to ensure core-element compliance were provided to facilities as written feedback. Self-reported barriers to implementation were thematically categorized. Results: Among the 21 CAH ASPs, none fully met all 7 core elements (range, 2.5–6.5), with a median of 5 full core elements met (Fig. 1). Only 6 ASPs (28.6%) had at least partial adherence to each of the 7 core elements. Action (21 of 21, 100%) and leadership commitment (16 of 21, 76.2%) were the core elements with the highest adherence, and accountability (4 of 21, 19%) and education (9 of 21, 42.9%) were the lowest. The most frequent high-priority recommendations were to provide physician and pharmacist leader ASP training (19 of 21, 90.5%), to track antimicrobial stewardship interventions (12 of 21, 57.1%), and to provide or track educational activities (12 of 21, 57.1%) (Fig. 2). One-third of programs were recommended to establish a physician leader. The most commonly self-identified barriers to establishing and maintaining an ASP were a lack of dedicated resources such as time of personnel (15 of 20, 75%), lack of infectious diseases expertise and training (8 of 20, 40%), and electronic medical record limitations (5 of 20, 25%) (Fig. 3). Conclusions: CAH ASPs demonstrate several critical gaps in achieving adherence to the CDC Core Elements, primarily in training for physician and pharmacist leaders and providing stewardship-focused education. Further resources and training customized to the issues present in CAH ASPs should be developed.Disclosures: None

Implementing a health-system–wide antibiotic stewardship program in ambulatory surgery centers

Background: In 2016, the CDC released the Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship, which extended the requirements previously released for hospital facilities and nursing homes to the outpatient setting. Several regulatory agencies focused on outpatient antimicrobial use. However, The Joint Commission and the Ambulatory Surgery Center (ASC) Leapfrog Group excluded ambulatory surgery centers from their medication management standards and questions. Due to the public health and patient safety benefits of implementing an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) and increasing regulatory interest in the matter, the Hospital Corporation of America (HCA) Ambulatory Surgery Division formally launched a nationwide ASP for its ambulatory surgery centers in March 2021. Methods: HCA is a large healthcare system with 146 ASCs in 16 states in 2021. The structure of the ASCs are local surgery centers with a medical director, a nurse responsible for infection prevention, and a pharmacist at a regional level. The types of surgeries vary based on location and ASC site. In 2019, a multidisciplinary team formed the corporate planning committee. The program was modeled after the CDC Core Elements and The Joint Commission’s requirements for an ASP. Each ASC was asked to build a local ASP team, led by a local physician and a regionally based pharmacist. In addition, a stewardship goal was established to update all preoperative antibiotic surgical-site infection prophylaxis order sets. The corporate committee provided educational resources, including evidence-based guidelines for appropriate antibiotic selection for surgical-site infections. They collected antibiotic cost per case as a baseline metric to track and analyze. Pediatric, ophthalmic, and gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures were excluded from the program. Results: From January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021, including only centers that were operational during this period and excluding single specialty endoscopy centers, antibiotic cost per case decreased annually from $2.38 to $1.84 (t = 4.157; P &lt; .005), and the postoperative infection rate also declined from 0.370 to 0.304 (t = 2.079; P = .040). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that implementing a health-system–wide outpatient antibiotic stewardship program in the ambulatory surgery center setting is feasible and may contribute to decreased antibiotic cost per case and improved postoperative surgical site infection rates.Disclosures: None

Analysis of a beta-lactam allergy assessment protocol challenging diverse reported allergies managed by an antimicrobial stewardship program.

To assess the safety and efficacy of a novel beta-lactam allergy assessment algorithm managed by an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) team. Retrospective analysis. One quaternary referral teaching hospital and one tertiary care teaching hospital in a large western Pennsylvania health network. Patients who received a beta-lactam challenge dose under the beta-lactam allergy assessment algorithm. A beta-lactam allergy assessment protocol was designed and implemented by an ASP team. The protocol risk stratified patients' reported allergies to identify patients appropriate for a challenge with a beta-lactam antibiotic. This retrospective analysis assessed the safety and efficacy of this protocol among patients receiving a challenge dose from November 2017 to July 2021. Over a 45-month period, 119 total patients with either penicillin or cephalosporin allergies entered the protocol. Following a challenge dose, 106 (89.1%) patients were treated with a beta-lactam. Eleven patients had adverse reactions to a challenge dose, one of which required escalation of care to the intensive care unit. Of the patients with an unknown or low-risk reported allergy, 7/66 (10.6%) had an observed adverse reaction compared to 3/42 (7.1%) who had an observed reaction with a reported high-risk or anaphylactic allergy. Our implemented protocol was safe and effective, with over 90% of patients tolerating the challenge without incident and many going on to receive indicated beta-lactam therapy. This protocol may serve as a framework for other inpatient ASP teams to implement a low-barrier allergy assessment led by ASP teams.

Establishing an effective antimicrobial stewardship program at four secondary-care hospitals in India using a hub-and-spoke model.

The high burden of antimicrobial resistance in India necessitates the urgent implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in all healthcare settings in India. Most ASPs are based at tertiary-care centers, with sparse data available regarding the effectiveness of an ASP in a low-resource primary/secondary-care setting. We adopted a hub-and-spoke model to implement ASPs in 4 low-resource, secondary-care healthcare settings. The study included 3 phases measuring antimicrobial consumption data. In the baseline phase, we measured days on antimicrobial therapy (DOTs) with no feedback provided. This was followed by the implementation of a customized intervention package. In the postintervention phase, prospective review and feedback were offered by a trained physician or ASP pharmacist, and days of therapy (DOT) were measured. In the baseline phase, 1,459 patients from all 4 sites were enrolled; 1,233 patients were enrolled in the postintervention phase. Both groups had comparable baseline characteristics. The key outcome, DOT per 1,000 patient days, was 1,952.63 in the baseline phase and significantly lower in the post-intervention period, at 1,483.06 (P = .001). Usage of quinolone, macrolide, cephalosporin, clindamycin, and nitroimidazole significantly decreased in the postintervention phase. Also, the rate of antibiotic de-escalation was significantly higher in the postintervention phase than the baseline phase (44% vs 12.5%; P < .0001), which suggests a definite trend toward judicious use of antibiotics. In the postintervention phase, 79.9% of antibiotic use was justified. Overall, the recommendations given by the ASP team were fully followed in 946 cases (77.7%), partially followed in 59 cases (4.8%), and not followed in 137 cases (35.7%). No adverse events were noted. Our hub-and-spoke model of ASP was successful in implementing ASPs in secondary-care hospitals in India, which are urgently needed.

946. Establishing Antimicrobial Stewardship Programme at Four Secondary Care Hospitals in India through Hub and Spoke Model with Christian Medical College, Vellore as Guiding Centre

Abstract Background The high burden of antimicrobial resistance in India necessitates an urgent implementation of Antimicrobial Stewardship programs (ASP). Most ASP are based at tertiary care centres, with sparse data available regarding the effectiveness of an ASP in a low resource primary/secondary care setting. Methods We adopted a hub and spoke model to implement ASP in these low resource settings. The study consisted of three phases. Initial phase captured baseline antimicrobial days of therapy DOTs data with no feedback, followed by intervention phase wherein a few chosen interventions were implemented. Physicians of four chosen hospitals were trained via a blended customized distance education training programme, assisted with development of antibiogram based on their local hospital microbial resistance patterns via WHONET, followed by development of hospital specific antibiotic policy and augmentation of the existing laboratory skills by training personnel at the central facility. This was followed by a post intervention phase with a prospective review and feedback by trained personnel with assessment of DOTs. Results During the baseline phase, 1459 patients from all four sites were enrolled; 1233 patients were enrolled in the intervention phase. Both groups had comparable baseline characteristics. The key outcome, DOT per 1,000 patient days, was 1952.63 in the baseline phase. The DOT/1000 patient days was significantly lower in the post intervention period, at 1483.06 (P =0.001). Quinolones, Macrolides, Cephalosporins, Clindamycin, and Nitroimidazole use significantly decreased in the post intervention phase. Rate of de-escalation was significantly higher in the intervention phase compared to the baseline phase (44% vs 12.5%; P &amp;lt; .0001), suggesting a definite trend with regard to the judicious use of antibiotics. Post intervention phase revealed that 79.9% of antibiotic use was justified. Overall, the recommendations given by the ASP team were fully followed in 946 cases (77.7%), partially followed in 59 cases (4.8%), and not followed in 137 cases (35.7%). No adverse events were noted. Conclusion Our Hub and Spoke model of ASP was successful in implementing ASP in secondary care hospitals in India which is the need of the hour. Disclosures Priscilla Rupali, MD, DTM&amp;H, PFIZER: Grant/Research Support|PFIZER: Grant/Research Support.

907. Impact of Antimicrobial Stewardship Prospective Audit and Feedback on Antibiotic Utilization in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

Abstract Background Studies have consistently shown a high proportion of antimicrobial usage in hospitalized COVID-19 patients despite low prevalence of bacterial co-infection. Improving antibiotic utilization is one of the main goals of antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP). This study aimed to determine the impact of prospective audit and feedback intervention (PAF) performed by ASP pharmacists on antibiotic utilization in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted at a 90-bed Veteran Affairs hospital. This study included patients who were admitted to the hospital due to laboratory confirmed COVID-19 infection from November 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021. The primary outcome of this study was to evaluate the impact of ASP PAF on avoiding the unnecessary use of antibiotics in hospitalized patients with acute COVID-19. The secondary outcomes included the prevalence of bacterial co-infection in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and the clinical outcomes. Results A total of 199 patients were included in this study. Sixty-one patients (30.7%) had antibiotics started empirically upon hospital admission. Fifty (82%) out of 61 patients had antibiotics discontinued due to the lack of indication for antibiotics during their hospital admission, with 47 (94%) was done by ASP team versus 3 of them (6%) was done by Internal Medicine. Fifty-eight of these patients were followed by ASP team, with 28 patients (48.3%) met SIRS criteria upon admission and 25 (43.1%) with elevated procalcitonin level. The overall readmission rate was 5.8%, with readmission rate of the intervention group to be 6.4% and the non-intervention group to be 5.6% (p = 0.29). The overall mortality rate was 13.1% in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, with 19% reported in the intervention group and 10.1% in the non-intervention group (p = 0.09). Overall, only 5 patients (2.5%) had laboratory-confirmed bacterial co-infection upon admission. Sixteen patients (8%) were found to have microbiologically confirmed nosocomial infection. Conclusion The findings suggested that ASP PAF safely and effectively avoided the unnecessary use of antibiotics in hospitalized patients with acute COVID-19 infection. In addition, low prevalence of microbiologically confirmed bacterial co-infection was observed. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

2144. Duration of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in ventriculoperitoneal shunt surgery in children

Abstract Background Placement of ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt is an important treatment for pediatric hydrocephalus. Although prolonged perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis has theoretically no benefit in reducing device-associated infections, duration of antibiotic prophylaxis for VP shunt placement in pediatrics is not well established. As a part of antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP), our ASP team recommended to stop perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for sterile medical placement within 48 hours following surgery in April 2017. Our aim of this study was to evaluate rate of VP shunt-associated infections following shunt placement between children received &amp;lt; 48 hours and ≧ 48 hours of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Methods Children aged 15 years old or younger who underwent VP shunt insertion between April 2014 and November 2021 were enrolled at Tokyo Metropolitan Children's Medical Center. Children with co-existing infection at time of surgery were excluded. Rates of VP shunt-associated infections following 1 month and 6 months of post-surgical periods were compared between children who received &amp;lt; 48 hours and ≧ 48 hours of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Results A total of 110 children were identified. Among them, 11 cases with VP shunt-associated meningitis and 15 cases with other infections were excluded. Girl ratio was 44%. Median age was 4.5 months old (IQR 8-40). Numbers of children with cefazolin and vancomycin-contained regimen were 83 (98.8%) and 1 (1.2%), respectively. Numbers of children who received perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for &amp;lt; 48 hours and ≧ 48 hours were 43 (51.2%) and 41 (48.8%), respectively. Incidence of VP shunt-associated infections for 1 month of post-surgical period in &amp;lt; 48 hours and ≧ 48 hours antibiotic prophylaxis groups were 4.65% (2/43) and 12.2% (5/41), respectively. (P=0.211) Incidence of VP shunt-associated infections for 6 months of post-surgical period in &amp;lt; 48 hours and ≧ 48 hours antibiotic prophylaxis groups were 11.6% (5/43) and 12.2% (5/41), respectively. (P=0.936). Conclusion Shorter duration of &amp;lt; 48 hours of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis did not increase rates of VP shunt-associated infections among children in short and long terms. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

916. Increased efficiency and impact of implementing ILUM insight within an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) at an academic medical center

Abstract Background An ASP is mandated for all hospitals and requires extensive resources with multidisciplinary collaboration. We measured the impact of implementing real-time decision support software (ILUM Insight) within our ASP. Methods Our ASP has relied on prior authorization since 2002 and focused audit and feedback since 2015. In August 2021 we implemented to bring actionable data to front-line stewards. ILUM provides real-time notifications, organizes communications, and tracks patient-and provider-level data. We hypothesized that ILUM would increase the efficiency of ASP workflow and result in decreased antimicrobial utilization. We compared data 6 months before (8/20 – 1/21) and after (8/21 – 1/22) implementation. There were no significant staffing changes during either period. Results Existing notifications within ILUM were tailored to local practices, including alerts with intervention for positive blood cultures, antibiotic de-escalation, and bug-drug mismatches. New notifications were built for restricted antimicrobials, antibiotic timeouts, and MRSA screening. ASP pharmacists and physicians received training in July and November, respectively. A breakdown of all notifications received during the post-implementation period is provided in Fig 1. With increased ILUM usage, the number of interventions made by our ASP increased while missed opportunities decreased (Fig 2.). During the same time period, ASP communications rose from 205 to 1200 per month. Comparing pre- and post-implementation periods, antimicrobial days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 patient days (PD) decreased by 14.5% from a median of 969 to 846 per month (Fig 3;P=0.002). Antimicrobial expenditures were decreased by a median 21% per month during the post-intervention period compared to baseline. Among patients prescribed antimicrobials during an index admission, 30-day re-admissions decreased from 330 to 262 and re-admissions associated with re-ordering of antimicrobials decreased from 235 to 182 (Fig 4). Conclusion Custom-designed, task-specific software improves the efficiency of daily ASP workflow and significantly decreased antimicrobial utilization without the need for additional ASP team members. Disclosures Ryan K. Shields, PharmD, MS, Infectious Disease Connect: Advisor/Consultant|Merck: Advisor/Consultant|Merck: Grant/Research Support|Roche: Grant/Research Support J Ryan Bariola, MD, Infectious Disease Connect: Salary support|Merck: Grant/Research Support Caley Yakemowicz, n/a, Infectious Disease Connect: Employee Courtney Simonick, n/a, Infectious Disease Connect: Stocks/Bonds Riaan Erwee, na, Infectious Disease Connect: Employee Erin K. McCreary, PharmD, Infectious Disease Connect: Advisor/Consultant Rima Abdel-Massih, MD, Infectious Disease Connect: Co founder and Chief Medical Officer|Infectious Disease Connect: Ownership Interest.

Implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs

Background: The antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) is a coordinated intervention designed to improve and measure the appropriate antibiotics use by selecting an optimal antibiotic drug regimen, including dosing, therapy duration, and administration route. The implementation of ASPs decreases the consumption, cost, and adverse effects of antibiotic use. Additionally, it improves the clinical outcomes, and decreases Clostridium difficile infection and antimicrobial resistance.Current Concepts: To overcome the antimicrobial resistance and implement ASPs worldwide, various efforts are underway, such as enacting ASP guidelines, developing core elements for ASP implementation, introducing ASPs to the healthcare accreditation system, and providing healthcare facilities with adequate incentives to implement ASPs. In Korea, ASP guidelines were published in September 2021, and core elements for ASP implementation are being developed at the time of writing. However, there is a shortage of personnel required for the ASP team, including healthcare workforce and infectious disease specialists for leading the team Moreover, financial support for ASP implementation in the National Health Insurance Service is not provided yet. The awareness of hospital leadership and clinicians prescribing antibiotics for ASP implementation is still low. The reimbursement system establishment and workforce for ASPs are prerequisite for the implementation of ASPs.Discussion and Conclusion: At the national level, it is necessary to provide financial support for ASPs in healthcare facilities, nurture the healthcare workforce in performing ASPs, and advocate ASP education and publicity.

Implementing Leading antimicrobial stewardship practices in United States hospitals – A qualitative study

Background: In May 2018, The Joint Commission, The Pew Charitable Trusts, and the CDC cosponsored a meeting of experts who identified 6 evidence-based leading practices that antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) should be doing beyond having basic infrastructure for improving antibiotic prescribing. The Joint Commission Department of Research working with external experts in 2020 conducted a prevalence study to assess what proportion of Joint Commission-accredited hospitals had implemented the 6 leading practices identified (results presented at SHEA Spring 2021). In this qualitative study, we collected information about how hospitals implemented ASP leading practices to identify facilitators and barriers to implementation among diverse hospitals. Methods: We conducted in-depth telephone interviews with a subset of ASP leaders from hospitals that participated in the 2020 prevalence study. We used purposive sampling to select 30 hospitals from 288 hospitals based on leading practices implemented, hospital size, and system membership. An experienced qualitative researcher (M.K.) not previously affiliated with the Joint Commission interviewed all participants using a semistructured interview guide. The framework method of analysis was used to review and organize data. We used the constant comparative approach to ensure that factors were not missed. Each transcript was reviewed by at least 2 researchers who compared coded findings in group discussion sessions. Two researchers independently identified key factors and combined findings following discussion and review. We focused on super factors that are relevant to implementing multiple leading practices. Results: ASP leaders from 30 hospitals were interviewed. Participating hospitals were evenly distributed across hospital size (10 small, 10 medium, 10 large) and membership in a health system (16 system, 14 nonsystem). At least 14, (46.7%) interviewees had pharmacist in their title; 11 (36.7%) had pharmacist-antimicrobial stewardship; and 5 (16.6%) had other titles (eg, infection preventionist). Super factors included ASP team capacity, ID expertise, having a physician champion, relationships with clinicians and relevant departments, structure of electronic health records, adequate software, and information technology resources. Small and rural nonsystem hospitals often lacked resources related to ID expertise, dedicated staff, and software tools, whereas hospitals that belong to a system benefit from centralized ID expertise and technical infrastructure provided. Conclusions: Specific factors related to personnel, relationships and IT resources have an outsized impact on implementing multiple leading antimicrobial stewardship practices in hospitals. Hospital ASPs could benefit by targeting resources toward these areas.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Impact of the Acceptance of the Recommendations Made by a Meropenem Stewardship Program in a University Hospital: A Pilot Study.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) promote appropriate antimicrobial use. We present a 4-year retrospective study that evaluated the clinical impact of the acceptance of the recommendations made by a meropenem-focused ASP. A total of 318 meropenem audits were performed. The ASP team (comprising infectious disease physicians, pharmacists and microbiologists) considered meropenem use in 96 audits (30.2%) to be inappropriate. The reasons to consider these uses inappropriate were the possibility of de-escalating to a narrower-spectrum antibiotic, in 66 (68.7%) audits, and unnecessary meropenem use, in 30 (31.3%) audits. The ASP team recommended de-escalation in 66 audits (68.7%) and discontinuation of meropenem in 30 audits (31.3%). ASP interventions were stratified according to whether or not recommendations were followed. The group in which recommendations were accepted and followed (i.e., accepted audit, AA) included 66 audits (68.7%) and the group in which recommendations were not followed (i.e., rejected audit, RA) included 30 (31.3%) audits. The comorbidity of the AA group (Charlson score) was higher than in the RA group (7.0 (5.0–9.0) vs. 6.0 (4.0–7.0), p = 0.02). Discontinuation of meropenem was recommended in 83.3% of audits in the AA group vs. 62.2% in the RA group (OR 3.05 (1.03–8.99), p = 0.04). Ertapenem de-escalation resulted in a 100% greater rate of follow-up compared with the non-carbapenem option (100% vs. 51.9%, OR 1.50 (1.21–1.860), p = 0.001). Significant differences were observed in the AA group when cultures were taken before antibiotic prescription—98.5% vs. 83.3% (p = 0.01, OR 13.0 (1.45–116.86))—or when screening cultures were taken—45.5% vs. 19.2% (p = 0.03, OR 3.5 (1.06–11.52)). There were no differences between the groups in terms of overall mortality and 30-day mortality, length of stay, Clostridiodes difficile infection, 30-day readmission or hospitalization costs. In conclusion, meropenem ASP recommendations contributed to a decrease in meropenem prescription without worsening clinical and economic outcomes.