Community-acquired Pneumonia Guidelines Research Articles

A Service Evaluation of Adherence with Antimicrobial Guidelines in the Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia Before and During the SARS-CoV-2 Outbreak.

Antimicrobial stewardship is essential to reducing antimicrobial resistance, reducing costs, and, crucially, ensuring good patient care. Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a common medical condition, the symptoms of which show a significant overlap with those of COVID-19. Following the COVID-19 outbreak in Ireland, patients presenting to our hospital with features of a respiratory infection were more commonly reviewed within 24 hours (24h) of admission by an infectious disease (ID) or respiratory specialist. We aimed to assess how the change in service provision, involving frequent specialist reviews of patients admitted with features of CAP during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, affected antimicrobial stewardship and prescribing practices. Patients admitted under general medical teams treated for CAP from March–April 2020 were included. Retrospective data including demographics, CURB-65 score, and antimicrobial therapy were collected, as well as information on whether the patient had undergone specialist review by an ID or respiratory physician. Data were compared to a similar cohort treated for CAP between November 2019 and January 2020, though in this cohort, before the era of COVID-19, none of the patients had undergone specialist review. Seventy-six patients were included from the March–April 2020 cohort, with 77 from November 2019–January 2020 for comparison. An ID or respiratory specialist reviewed 35 patients from the March–April cohort within 24 h of admission. There was a higher rate of appropriate escalation, de-escalation, and continuation of antibiotics among those reviewed. Less than 20% of patients were started on antibiotics in accordance with CAP guidelines on admission, though the antibiotics initiated were frequently deemed appropriate in the clinical setting. Specialist review increases rates of appropriate antimicrobial prescribing and adherence with hospital guidelines in patients with CAP.

Antibiotic prescribing patterns among patients admitted to an academic teaching hospital for COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic in Toronto: A retrospective, controlled study.

Empirical antibiotics are not recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this retrospective study, patients admitted to Toronto General Hospital's general internal medicine from the emergency department for COVID-19 between March 1 and August 31, 2020 were compared with those admitted for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in 2020 and 2019 in the same months. The primary outcome was antibiotics use pattern: prevalence and concordance with COVID-19 or CAP guidelines. The secondary outcome was antibiotic consumption in days of therapy (DOT)/100 patient-days. We extracted data from electronic medical records. We used logistic regression to model the association between disease and receipt of antibiotics, linear regression to compare DOT. The COVID-19, CAP 2020, and CAP 2019 groups had 67, 73, and 120 patients, respectively. Median age was 71 years; 58.5% were male. Prevalence of antibiotic use was 70.2%, 97.3%, and 90.8% for COVID-19, CAP 2020, and CAP 2019, respectively. Compared with CAP 2019, the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for receiving antibiotics was 0.23 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.53, p = 0.001) and 3.42 (95% CI 0.73 to 15.95, p = 0.117) for COVID-19 and CAP 2020, respectively. Among patients receiving antibiotics within 48 hours of admission, compared with CAP 2019, the aOR for guideline-concordant combination regimens was 2.28 (95% CI 1.08 to 4.83, p = 0.031) for COVID-19, and 1.06 (95% CI 0.55 to 2.05, p = 0.856) for CAP 2020. Difference in mean DOT/100 patient-days was -24.29 (p = 0.009) comparing COVID-19 with CAP 2019, and +28.56 (p = 0.003) comparing CAP 2020 with CAP 2019. There are opportunities for antimicrobial stewardship to address unnecessary antibiotic use.

1301. Risk Factors for Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in Community Acquired Pneumonia

Abstract Background The 2019 American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America Community-Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) guidelines concluded that the major risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PsA) include prior isolation of these organisms and previous hospitalization with IV antibiotic use within 90 days. However, the guidelines recognized that results may vary by region and recommended local validation of risk factors. The primary objective of this study was to determine which potential risk factors are associated with MRSA and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in CAP in our institution. This study also evaluated appropriateness of antibiotics used for empiric CAP therapy. Methods This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study performed in an urban academic medical center in Cleveland, OH. Adults hospitalized for CAP who had a respiratory culture performed between January 2016 and September 2020 were included. Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio into MRSA, PsA, and non-resistant CAP (NR-CAP) groups. Patients with bacterial co-infections or resistant pathogens other than MRSA or PsA were excluded. Results The study included 111 patients with 37 patients in each group. The median age was 61 years (IQR 52-70), and 58.6% of patients were male. There were no independent risk factors for MRSA (Table 1). Independent risk factors for PsA included prior isolation and enteral feeding (Table 2). MRSA risk factors as defined by the 2019 CAP guidelines were found in 48.6% of patients with MRSA CAP (Figure 1). Guideline-defined PsA risk factors were found in 56.8% of patients with PsA CAP (Figure 2). In NR-CAP, 62.2% received empiric MRSA coverage while only 27% had a guideline-defined risk factor; PsA coverage was administered in 78.4% of NR-CAP patients, but risk factors were found in only 24.3% of this cohort. MRSA and P. aeruginosa Risk Factor Analyses Empiric MRSA and P. aeruginosa Coverage and Guideline-Defined Risk Factors Conclusion Our findings were consistent with the risk factors identified in the 2019 CAP guidelines, but additional risk factors may be present in our patient population. Empiric coverage for MRSA and PsA was disproportionately high relative to the rate of recovery. This study encourages local validation of risk factors; however, further analyses are needed to determine the impact on empiric therapy. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

68. Impact of Streptococcus pneumoniae Urinary Antigen Testing in Patients with Community-Acquired Pneumonia Admitted within a Large Academic Medical System

BackgroundLimited data support the use of pneumococcal urinary antigen testing (PUAT) for patients admitted with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) as a stewardship tool to curtail the use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials. At NYULH, CAP guidelines and admission order set were developed to standardize diagnostic testing, including PUAT. In this study we describe patients with positive versus negative PUAT and evaluate de-escalation and patients’ outcomes. MethodsThis was a retrospective study of adults admitted with diagnosis of CAP between January-December 2019 who had a PUAT performed. The primary outcome was incidence and timing of de-escalation of antimicrobials following PUAT result. Among patients with a positive PUAT we compared hospital length of stay (LOS), incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), infection-related readmission within 30 days, and in-hospital mortality among those who were de-escalated versus those who were not de-escalated/required escalation. ResultsWe evaluated 910 patients, of which 121 (13.3%) were PUAT positive. No difference in baseline characteristics, including severity of illness as represented by the Pneumonia Severity Index (97 [IQR 76-117] vs 89 [IQR 67-115], p=0.083) and Charlson Comorbidity Index, were observed between PUAT positive and negative groups. Time to PUAT testing occurred shortly after presentation to the hospital in both cohorts (16h [IQR 16-27] vs 13h [IQR 8-22], p=0.140). Initial de-escalation occurred in 97/117 (82.9%) and 629/775 (81.2%) of PUAT positive and negative patients, respectively (p = 0.749). Median time to de-escalation was shorter in the PUAT positive cohort (1 [IQR 0-2] vs 1 [IQR 1-2] day, p = 0.01). Among the PUAT positive group, hospital LOS stay was shorter in patients who were de-escalated compared to those who were not de-escalated/required escalation (6 days [IQR 4-10] vs 8 days [IQR 7-12], p=0.0005) with no difference in the incidence of CDI (2 [2.1%] vs 1 [3.7%], p=0.535), in-hospital mortality (4 [4.3%] vs 3 [11.1%], p=0.185), or 30-day infection-related readmission (2 [2.1%] vs 1 [3.7%], p=0.535). ConclusionPUAT positivity resulted in quicker time to targeted therapy for CAP. Among patients with a positive PUAT, initial de-escalation of antimicrobials did not lead to worse patient outcomes. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

1324. Identification of Local Risk Factors for P. aeruginosa in Community-acquired Pneumonia in a Veteran Population

BackgroundThe 2019 ATS/IDSA community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) guidelines recommend empiric P. aeruginosa (PSA) coverage if locally validated risk factors are present. They further recommend obtaining local data on CAP pathogens to quantify risk factors and help guide clinical decision-making. To comply with the current guideline recommendations and to determine which patients may benefit from empiric anti-pseudomonal therapy, we aimed to characterize our institution’s local risk factors for CAP caused by PSA. MethodsThis is a retrospective single-center matched cohort study of patients admitted to our institution with a CAP diagnosis and a positive respiratory culture who received antibiotic treatment in the past 19 years. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess the relationship between PSA and the following risk factors: severe or very severe COPD (FEV1 < 50% predicted), requiring invasive mechanical ventilation or vasopressor support in the first 24 hours of admission, history of PSA infection/colonization in the previous year, tracheostomy, bronchiectasis, long-term care facility residence and admission with receipt of IV antibiotics in the previous 90 days.ResultsA total of 343 patients were screened and 213 were included. Patients were mostly male (99%) with a median (IQR) age of 70 (63-76) years. Long-term care facility residence was removed from the model to prevent it from being over fit as it was related tracheostomy. In the multivariate analysis the only independently associated risk factor for PSA CAP was evidence during the prior year of PSA infection or colonization (OR 3.66; 95% CI 1.26 – 10.56; p = 0.018). Other risk factors that did not reach statistical significance but may be clinically significant included severe or very severe COPD (OR 2.52; 95% CI 2.52 – 6.38; p = 0.055) and tracheostomy (OR 5.28; 95% CI 0.74 – 38.85; p = 0.098).ConclusionThe results of this study provide valuable data to help guide empiric CAP treatment at our institution. Based on these results, patients with PSA infection or colonization in the past year are appropriate to provide empiric anti-pseudomonal therapy for CAP. Further evaluation of severe or very severe COPD and tracheostomy would be beneficial to better characterize their role in PSA CAP.Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

1298. Validation of Local Pseudomonas aeruginosa Risk Factors in Patients with Community-Onset Bacterial Pneumonia

BackgroundClinical guidelines for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) encourage validation of local risk factors for multidrug-resistant organisms. This study aimed to validate previously derived, local risk factors for Pseudomonas aeruginosa in patients with community-onset bacterial pneumonia at Prisma Health-Midlands’ hospitals. MethodsIn this retrospective, observational cohort study, adult patients hospitalized with pneumonia MS-DRG codes from January 1, 2017 to March 31, 2020 were randomly screened. Enrolled subjects were admitted to 1 of 3 Prisma Health-Midlands’ hospitals with: diagnosis of pneumonia; receipt of inpatient antibiotics within 48 hours of symptom onset; receipt of over 48 hours of antibiotic therapy; and a causative bacterial pathogen identified via respiratory or blood culture, urinary antigen, or respiratory multiplex PCR panel. Performance of the locally derived score was compared to the Drug Resistance in Pneumonia (DRIP) Score, IDSA 2019 CAP guideline risk factors, and healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) risk factors. Endpoints included sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, overall accuracy, and over- and undertreatment rates. Overall accuracy was defined as a case in which the gram-negative antibiotic coverage recommended by the scoring schema would have been appropriate for the identified organism, i.e. neither overtreatment (overly broad-spectrum) nor undertreatment (inadequate spectrum). ResultsOf 713 patients screened, 36 patients met criteria and were enrolled. The most common bacterial pathogens identified were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 10, 27.8%) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 10, 27.8%). Performance characteristics for each scoring schema are summarized in Table 1.Table 1. Performance characteristics of risk scores predicting for Pseudomonas aeruginosa community-onset bacterial pneumonia. MDRO=multidrug-resistant organism; DRIP=Drug Resistance in Pneumonia Score; IDSA=Infectious Diseases Society of America 2019 Community-Acquired Pneumonia Guideline risk factors ; HCAP=healthcare-associated pneumonia risk factorsConclusionCompared to DRIP or IDSA 2019 CAP risk scores, the local risk score performed well at ruling out resistant gram-negatives given its higher specificity and lower overtreatment rate; yet, it did not perform as well at ruling in resistant gram-negatives given a lower sensitivity and undertreatment rate. All scores performed better than HCAP risk factors. Data from this study will be utilized to further refine the local risk score algorithm. Disclosures P. Brandon Bookstaver, Pharm D, ALK Abello, Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member)Biomerieux (Speaker’s Bureau)Kedrion Biopharma (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member) Hana Winders, PharmD, BCIDP, biomerieux (Grant/Research Support) Julie Ann Justo, PharmD, MS, BCPS-AQ ID, bioMerieux (Speaker’s Bureau)Merck & Co. (Advisor or Review Panel member)Therapeutic Research Center (Speaker’s Bureau)Vaxart (Shareholder)

Antimicrobial prescribing and outcomes of community-acquired pneumonia in Australian hospitalized patients: a cross-sectional study.

ObjectiveWe aimed to assess prescribing practices, compliance with guidelines, and outcomes for patients who were admitted to the authors’ institution with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).MethodsWe performed a single-center retrospective cross-sectional study of adults with CAP presenting during the 2019 influenza season. CAP severity was assessed using the CURB-65 risk score. The effect of CURB-65 risk score use on the rate of appropriate antimicrobial prescribing was assessed using the chi-square test and reported as odds ratio (OR). Fisher’s exact test was used to assess the relationship between prescribing appropriateness and patient outcomes.ResultsPatients with low-risk CAP were most likely to be inappropriately prescribed antimicrobials (OR: 4.77; 95% confidence interval: 2.44–10.47). In low-risk CAP, the most common prescribing error was overuse of ceftriaxone. In high-risk CAP, the most common errors were ceftriaxone underdosing and missed atypical coverage with azithromycin. Overall, 80% of patients were considered to have been inappropriately prescribed antimicrobials. No effect on mortality was observed.ConclusionsIn this study, we found low use of CAP risk scores and low adherence to antimicrobial prescribing guidelines for CAP at the authors’ institution.

Impact of Streptococcus pneumoniae Urinary Antigen Testing in Patients With Community-Acquired Pneumonia Admitted Within a Large Academic Health System.

BackgroundLimited data support use of pneumococcal urinary antigen testing (PUAT) for patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) as an antimicrobial stewardship tool. At our institution, CAP guidelines and admission order set were standardized to include universal PUAT.MethodsThis was a retrospective study of adults hospitalized in 2019 who had PUAT performed. We compared incidence and timing of de-escalation in PUAT- positive vs -negative groups and described patients’ outcomes.ResultsWe evaluated 910 patients, 121 (13.3%) of whom were PUAT positive. No difference in baseline characteristics, including severity of illness, was observed between groups. Initial de-escalation occurred in 82.9% and 81.2% of PUAT-positive and -negative patients, respectively (P = .749). Median time to de-escalation was shorter in the PUAT-positive group (1 [interquartile range {IQR}, 0–2] day vs 1 [IQR, 1–2] day, P = .01). Within 24 hours of PUAT, more patients in the PUAT-positive group had atypical coverage discontinued (61.3% vs 47.2%, P = .026) without difference in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) agent discontinuation (or antipseudomonal de-escalation). Among the PUAT-positive group, unadjusted analysis demonstrated shorter median length of stay in patients who were de-escalated compared to those who were not (6 [IQR, 4–10] vs 8 [IQR, 7–12] days, P = .0005), without difference in the incidence of Clostridioides difficile, in-hospital mortality, or 30-day infection-related readmission.ConclusionsWe observed earlier de-escalation in the PUAT-positive group. This seems to be due to discontinuation of atypical rather than anti-MRSA or antipseudomonal coverage. Further antimicrobial stewardship interventions are warranted.

Comparative Analysis of Drug Interactions with Antibacterial Agents in the Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia

According to the World Health Organisation, pneumonia and other lower respiratory tract infections are one of the leading causes of death all over the world. Simultaneous treatment of pneumonia with antibacterial drugs and concomitant medicines may result in adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The aim of the study was to analyse ADRs resulting from drug-drug interactions in different empiric antibiotic treatment regimens used for mild community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), taking into account the concomitant symptomatic non-antibacterial treatment and chronic disease treatment. Materials and methods: the authors analysed spontaneous reports in the VigiBase global database (starting from the date the database was created and until 15 February 2021) on ADRs resulting from interactions of medicinal products included in the Russian clinical guidelines for CAP. Results: the authors compiled a list of antibacterial drugs (amoxicillin+clavulanic acid, amoxicillin, ampicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, linezolid), as well as lists of medicinal products for symptomatic and concomitant treatment, based on the approved guidelines for management of CAP and frequent comorbid chronic diseases. They searched VigiBase for ADRs that may have resulted from drug-drug interactions involving these medicinal products. Conclusions: the analysis of adverse reactions used for mild CAP treatment demonstrated that the largest number of ADRs were associated with drug-drug interactions involving azithromycin, while the smallest number of ADRs were associated with cefotaxime and ceftriaxone. Further study of drug-drug interactions will help to prevent potential ADRs, identify rational drug combinations, and improve the existing patient management strategies.

Antibiotic prescription consistent with guidelines in emergency department is associated with 30-day survival in severe community-acquired pneumonia

BackgroundThe selection of initial empirical antibiotics is an important issue in the treatment of severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). This study aimed to investigate whether empirical antibiotic prescription concordant with guidelines in the emergency department (ED) affects 30-day mortality in patients with severe CAP.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of adult patients with severe CAP who were hospitalized in the ED. Severe CAP was defined according to the criteria of the 2007 Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society guidelines. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they were prescribed empirical antibiotics concordant with guidelines. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to identify the independent association between the prescription of initial empirical antibiotics concordant with the guidelines and 30-day mortality. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce selection bias between groups and Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was performed to analyze the time-to-event of 30-day survival.ResultsIn total, 630 patients were hospitalized in the ED for severe CAP, and 179 (28.4%) died within 30 days. Antibiotics consistent with guidelines were prescribed to 359 (57.0%) patients. The 30-day mortality was significantly higher in the guideline-discordant group (p = 0.003) and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis revealed that the prescription of antibiotics discordant with the guidelines was independently associated with 30-day mortality (hazard ratio 1.43, 95% CI 1.05–1.93). After propensity score matching, there were 255 patients in each group. The 30-day mortality was lower in the group prescribed guideline-concordant antibiotics than in the group prescribed guideline-discordant antibiotics (23.9% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.024). Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed that antibiotic prescription concordant with the guidelines resulted in higher survival rates at 30 days (p = 0.002).ConclusionsThe prevalence of antibiotic prescription consistent with guidelines for severe CAP seemed to be low in the ED, and this variable was independently associated with 30-day survival.

Adaptation of Adult Pathways to Improve the Care of Adult Patients at Pediatric Hospitals.

Adaptation of Adult Pathways to Improve the Care of Adult Patients at Pediatric Hospitals.

Pediatricians' Compliance to the Clinical Management Guidelines for Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Infants and Young Children in Pakistan.

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is among the most commonly prevailing acute infections in children that may require hospitalization. Inconsistencies among suggested care and actual management practices are usually observed, which raises the need to assess local clinical practices. The current study was conducted to evaluate pediatricians’ compliance with the standard clinical practice guidelines and their antibiotic-prescribing behavior for the management of CAP in children. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using a self-administered questionnaire; which was provided to pediatricians by the researchers. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 25 Statistics; χ2 tests (or Fisher-exact tests) with the p-value set at < 0.05 as the threshold for statistical significance. Results: The overall response rate was 59.2%. Male respondents were (n = 101; 42.6%), and the respondents (n = 163; 68.7%) were under 30 years of age. Amoxicillin (n = 122; 51.5%) was considered as the most commonly used first-line treatment for non-severe pneumonia, whereas a smaller proportion (n = 81; 34.2%) of respondents selected amoxicillin–clavulanate. Likewise, amoxicillin (n = 100; 42.2%) was the most popular choice for non-severe pneumonia in hospitalized children; however, if children had used antibiotics earlier to admission, respondents showed an inclination to prescribe a macrolide (n = 95; 40.0%) or second-generation cephalosporin (n = 90; 37.9%). More than 90% responded that children <6 months old with suspected bacterial CAP will probably receive better therapeutic care by hospitalization. Restricting exposure to the antibiotic as much as possible (n = 71; 29.9%), improving antibiotic prescribing (n = 59; 24.8%), and using the appropriate dose of antimicrobials (n = 29; 12.2%) were considered the major factors by the respondents to reduce antimicrobials resistance. Conclusions: The selection of antibiotics and diagnostic approach was as per the recommendations, but indication, duration of treatment, and hospitalization still can be further improved.

Editorial introductions.

Editorial introductions.

Validation of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Risk Factors in Predicting MRSA Community-Acquired Pneumonia at an Academic Medical Center.

Background: The 2019 Infectious Diseases Society of America community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) guidelines recommend antimethicillin- resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) therapy in patients with CAP based on previously identified risk factors for MRSA with an emphasis on local epidemiology and institutional validation of risk. Thus, we sought to assess the ability of guideline-recognized risk factors to predict MRSA CAP at our institution. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study from January 2016 to March 2020. Patients were included if they were >18 years old, diagnosed with CAP, and had a MRSA nasal screen and respiratory culture obtained on admission. Patients were excluded if CAP diagnosis was not met, respiratory cultures were not obtained within 48 hours of antibiotic initiation, or they had cystic fibrosis. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and likelihood ratios (LR) were calculated using Vasser Stats 2019. Pre/post-test odds and pre/post-test probabilities were calculated using Excel 2019. Results: Of 705 screened patients, 221 were included. MRSA prevalence in CAP patients at our institution was 3.6%. History of MRSA isolated from a respiratory specimen had high specificity (98%), high positive LR of 20 (95% CI 5.3-74.8), and high post-test probability of 42.8%. Receipt of IV antibiotics during hospitalization within the past 90 days had a positive LR of 1.9 (95% CI 0.74-4.84). A positive MRSA nasal screen on admission had a positive LR of 6.9 (95% CI 4.0-12.1), negative LR 0.28 (95% CI 0.08-0.93), positive post-test probability of 20.7%, and negative post-test probability of 1.04%. Conclusion: Our study utilized institutional data to validate guideline recognized risk factors for MRSA CAP specifically at our institution. Risk factors including history of MRSA isolated from a respiratory specimen, and positive post-admission MRSA nasal screen were validated as significant risk factors; receipt of IV antibiotics during hospitalization within the past 90 days was not shown to be a risk factor for MRSA CAP based on our institutional data. Validated risk factors may help providers discern which patients with CAP at our institution would benefit most from empiric MRSA treatment.

Corticosteroids for CAP, influenza and COVID-19: when, how and benefits or harm?

PurposeCorticosteroids have been considered in medicine for a long time, and they are broadly prescribed. In infectious diseases, corticosteroids have been regarded as a thread due to their immunosuppressive effects and therefore their anti-inflammatory properties.MainIn recent years, there have been several studies published that aimed to determine the role of corticosteroids in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), because, despite significant advances in new antibiotics and supportive care, deaths of patients with CAP remain unacceptably high. While the 2007 Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA)/American Thoracic Society (ATS) CAP guidelines did not mention the use of corticosteroids in the management of CAP, the recently published 2019 IDSA/ATS guidelines recommended their use in patients with septic shock refractory to vasopressors and fluid resuscitation. Regarding viral infection, the use of corticosteroids in patients with influenza has shown to be associated with significantly higher mortality and higher incidence of nosocomial infection, while in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) there is a good body of evidence of the benefit of corticosteroids in terms of mortality.ConclusionsThe use of corticosteroids has been considered as a potential alternative co-adjuvant treatment in patients with pneumonia. In patients with COVID-19, the evidence is quite strong and there is a clear benefit of the use of corticosteroids in those patients presenting severe forms of disease.

Simulated Adoption of 2019 Community-Acquired Pneumonia Guidelines Across 114 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers: Estimated Impact on Culturing and Antibiotic Selection in Hospitalized Patients.

The 2019 American Thoracic Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) revised recommendations for culturing and empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics. We simulated guideline adoption in Veterans Affairs (VA) inpatients. For all VA acute hospitalizations for CAP from 2006-2016 nationwide, we compared observed with guideline-expected proportions of hospitalizations with initial blood and respiratory cultures obtained, empiric antibiotic therapy with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (anti-MRSA) or Pseudomonas aeruginosa (antipseudomonal), empiric "overcoverage" (receipt of anti-MRSA/antipseudomonal therapy without eventual detection of MRSA/P. aeruginosa on culture), and empiric "undercoverage" (lack of anti-MRSA/antipseudomonal therapy with eventual detection on culture). Of 115 036 CAP hospitalizations over 11 years, 17 877 (16%) were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Guideline adoption would slightly increase respiratory culture (30% to 36%) and decrease blood culture proportions (93% to 36%) in hospital wards and increase both respiratory (40% to 100%) and blood (95% to 100%) cultures in ICUs. Adoption would decrease empiric selection of anti-MRSA (ward: 27% to 1%; ICU: 61% to 8%) and antipseudomonal (ward: 25% to 1%; ICU: 54% to 9%) therapies. This would correspond to greatly decreased MRSA overcoverage (ward: 27% to 1%; ICU: 56% to 8%), slightly increased MRSA undercoverage (ward: 0.6% to 1.3%; ICU: 0.5% to 3.3%), with similar findings for P. aeruginosa. For all comparisons, P < .001. Adoption of the 2019 CAP guidelines in this population would substantially change culturing and empiric antibiotic selection practices, with a decrease in overcoverage and slight increase in undercoverage for MRSA and P. aeruginosa.

Applying the lessons learned from coronavirus disease 2019 to improve pneumonia management.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has produced an extraordinary amount of literature in a short time period. This review focuses on what the new literature has provided in terms of more general information about the management of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Measures taken to reduce the spread of COVID-19 have caused a significant drop in influenza worldwide. Improvements in imaging, especially ultrasound, and especially in the application of rapid molecular diagnosis are likely to have significant impact on the management of CAP. Therapeutic advances are so far limited. COVID-19 has taught us that we can do far more to prevent seasonal influenza and its associated mortality, morbidity and economic cost. Improvements in imaging and pathogen diagnosis are welcome, as is the potential for secondary benefits of anti-COVID-19 therapies that may have reach effect on respiratory viruses other than severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. As community-transmission is likely to persist for many years, recognition and treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 will need to be incorporated into CAP guidelines moving forward.

Validation of a Community-Acquired Pneumonia Score To Improve Empiric Antibiotic Selection at an Academic Medical Center.

The 2019 American Thoracic Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) guidelines recommend that drug-resistant pathogens (DRP) be empirically covered if locally validated risk factors are present. This retrospective case-control validation study evaluated the performance of the drug resistance in pneumonia (DRIP) clinical prediction score. Two hundred seventeen adult patients with ICD-10 (https://www.who.int/classifications/classification-of-diseases) pneumonia diagnosis, positive confirmed microbiologic data, and clinical signs and symptoms were included. A DRIP score of ≥4 was used to assess model performance. Logistic regression was used to select for significant predictors and create a modified DRIP score, which was evaluated to define clinical application. The DRIP score predicted pneumonia due to a DRP with a sensitivity of 67% and specificity of 73%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 0.82). From regression analysis, prior infection with a DRP and antibiotics in the last 60 days, yielding scores of 2 points and 1 point, respectively, remained local risk factors in predicting drug-resistant pneumonia. Sensitivity (47%) and specificity (94%) were maximized at a threshold of ≥2 in the modified DRIP model. Therefore, prior infection with a DRP remained the only clinically relevant predictor for drug-resistant pneumonia. The original DRIP score demonstrated a decreased performance in our patient population and behaved similarly to other clinical prediction models. Empiric CAP therapy without anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and antipseudomonal coverage should be considered for noncritically ill patients without a drug resistant pathogen infection in the past year. Our data support the necessity of local validation to authenticate clinical risk predictors for drug-resistant pneumonia.

New guidelines for severe community-acquired pneumonia.

We highlight the recent advances in the guidelines for treating patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP). sCAP is a significant cause of hospital admissions. We performed an extensive review of the literature, covering studies from the last several years, to summarise the most important points in the diagnosis and treatment of patients hospitalised with sCAP. sCAP is associated with a high clinical burden. Therefore, deep knowledge is necessary for its management. In general, diagnosis, treatment and management are based on many published guidelines. However, the mortality rate is still unacceptably high, indicating the need for clear recommendations in the management of patients with sCAP. The choice of empirical antibiotic therapy for sCAP depends on multiple factors, such as national and local antimicrobial susceptibility data and the characteristics of the patients, including their risk factors for acquiring infections caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens. Currently, there are several published international guidelines. The aim of this review is to explore the areas that require further knowledge and new recommendations for current clinical practice.

1476. Impact of an Educational Campaign on Rates of Sputum Culture Acquisition as an Opportunity for Antibiotic De-escalation

BackgroundThe 2019 community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) guidelines recommend obtaining a sputum culture in patients who are empirically treated for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or Pseudomonas aeruginosa to assist clinicians in optimizing antimicrobial therapy. A previous study at our institution found respiratory cultures were rarely obtained in patients with CAP. As a result of these findings, an educational campaign was implemented to promote the use of an induced sputum protocol.MethodsThis was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study that included patients who were ≥18 years of age, had a diagnosis of CAP, and received ≥48 hours of anti-pseudomonal antibiotics. Patients were excluded if mechanically ventilated within 48 hours of admission or diagnosed with hospital-acquired or ventilator-associated pneumonia. Patients were grouped into pre- and post-intervention time periods. The intervention involved education on obtaining respiratory cultures including technique on induced sputums and updates to CAP order sets. The primary outcome was the rate of sputum culture acquisition. Secondary outcomes included duration of anti-pseudomonal and anti-MRSA therapy, in-hospital mortality, and length of stay.ResultsA total of 143 patients met inclusion criteria, 72 in the pre-implementation group and 71 in the post-implementation group. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. More patients in the post-implementation group had a sputum culture obtained but the difference was not statistically significant (38.9% vs 53.5%; p=0.08). Anti-pseudomonal therapy was continued for an average of 5.6 days pre-implementation and 5.2 days post-implementation (p=0.499). There was also not a significant difference in anti-MRSA duration between the two groups (3.4 days vs 3.2 days; p=0.606). In-hospital mortality and length of stay were similar between the two groups.ConclusionAn educational campaign focusing on the acquisition of induced sputums led to an increase in rates of sputum cultures collected. However, this did not correlate with a decrease in duration of anti-MRSA or anti-pseudomonal therapy. Further interventions should be made to optimize de-escalation of broad spectrum antibiotics based on sputum culture results.Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures