Injection-related Infections Research Articles

Patients With Serious Injection Drug Use-Related Infections who Experience Patient-Directed Discharges on Oral Antibiotics Have High Rates of Antibiotic Adherence but Require Multidisciplinary Outpatient Support for Retention in Care.

BackgroundPersons who inject drugs (PWID) are frequently admitted for serious injection-related infections (SIRIs). Outcomes and adherence to oral antibiotics for PWID with patient-directed discharge (PDD) remain understudied.MethodsWe conducted a prospective multicenter bundled quality improvement project of PWID with SIRI at 3 hospitals in Missouri. All PWID with SIRI were offered multidisciplinary care while inpatient, including the option of addiction medicine consultation and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). All patients were offered oral antibiotics in the event of a PDD either at discharge or immediately after discharge through an infectious diseases telemedicine clinic. Additional support services included health coaches, a therapist, a case manager, free clinic follow-up, and medications in an outpatient bridge program. Patient demographics, comorbidities, 90-day readmissions, and substance use disorder clinic follow-up were compared between PWID with PDD on oral antibiotics and those who completed intravenous (IV) antibiotics using an as-treated approach.ResultsOf 166 PWID with SIRI, 61 completed IV antibiotics inpatient (37%), while 105 had a PDD on oral antibiotics (63%). There was no significant difference in 90-day readmission rates between groups (P = .819). For PWID with a PDD on oral antibiotics, 7.6% had documented nonadherence to antibiotics, 67% had documented adherence, and 23% were lost to follow-up. Factors protective against readmission included antibiotic and MOUD adherence, engagement with support team, and clinic follow-up.ConclusionsPWID with SIRI who experience a PDD should be provided with oral antibiotics. Multidisciplinary outpatient support services are needed for PWID with PDD on oral antibiotics.

Design and protocol of the Buprenorphine plus Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy (B-OPAT) study: a randomized clinical trial of integrated outpatient treatment of opioid use disorder and severe, injection-related infections.

Introduction:A marked increase in hospitalizations for severe, injection-related infections (SIRI) has been associated with the opioid epidemic. Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) is typically not offered to persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) and SIRI, though increasing evidence suggests it may be feasible and safe. This study evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an integrated care model combining Buprenorphine treatment of OUD with OPAT for SIRI (B-OPAT) compared with treatment as usual on key OUD, infectious disease, and health economic outcomes. B-OPAT expands and incorporates key elements of established clinical models, including inpatient initiation of buprenorphine for OUD, inpatient infectious disease consultation for SIRI, office-based treatment of OUD, and OPAT, and includes more frequent clinical outpatient visits than standard OPAT. A qualitative evaluation is included to contextualize effectiveness outcomes and identify barriers and facilitators to intervention adoption and implementation.Methods:B-OPAT is a single-site, randomized, parallel-group, superiority trial recruiting 90 adult inpatients hospitalized with OUD and SIRI who require at least 2 weeks of intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy. After screening, eligible participants are randomized 1:1 to either discharge once medically stable to an integrated outpatient treatment care model combining Buprenorphine and OPAT (B-OPAT) or to Treatment As Usual (TAU). The primary outcome measure is the proportion of urine samples negative for illicit opioids in the 12 weeks after discharge from the hospital. Key secondary OUD outcomes include self-reported number of days of illicit opioid abstinence and 12-week retention in buprenorphine treatment. The infection outcomes are completion of recommended IV antibiotic therapy, peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) complications, and readmission related to primary SIRI.Conclusions:The B-OPAT study will help address the important question of whether it is clinically effective and cost-effective to discharge persons with OUD and SIRI to an integrated outpatient care model combining OUD treatment with OPAT relative to TAU (Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04677114).

Impact of safe consumption facilities on individual and community outcomes: A scoping review of the past decade of research

Globally, the rate of injection drug use has increased, leading to a rise in injection-related injuries, infections, disease transmission, and death. Safe consumption facilities (SCFs) were developed with the aim of reducing injection-related disease transmission and death. There is a rapidly growing body of literature related the individual and community level outcomes associated with SCFs that warrants a comprehensive review. Thus, this scoping review examined the impact and effectiveness of SCFs related to: (1) individual outcomes for people who inject drugs; (2) community outcomes associated with SCFs; and (3) the cost-effectiveness of SCFs. The search strategy, developed by the lead author and a social work librarian, followed the PRISMA scoping review extension guidelines. We searched eight databases for peer-reviewed qualitative and quantitative articles published in English over the past decade, returning a total of 1255 articles. After screening, we extracted data from 24 articles. Findings indicate that SCFs were associated with reducing drug use related infection and disease transmission, enhancing access to addiction and other health services, reducing the risk of non-fatal overdoses, and were not associated with a significant increase in drug use, an increased rate of drug-related crime. Both qualitative and quantitative research support SCFs as a cost-effective approach to harm reduction for people who inject drugs with positive community outcomes as well. This review discusses the current state of the evidence and provides recommendations for future research directions.

868. HIV, Opioid Use Disorder, and Injection related Infections: Clinical Outcomes in 4 Academic Hospitals

BackgroundBecause hospitals are a safety net for persons with injection drug use (IDU), they play a valuable role towards ending the HIV epidemic. The objective of this study is to evaluate the hospital outcomes of persons with HIV (PWH) and opioid use disorder (OUD).MethodsCHOICE is a retrospective review of hospitalized persons with an infectious complication of OUD and IDU at University of Maryland, George Washington University, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Grady Memorial Hospital. Participants were hospitalized between 1/2/2018-12/21/2018, had ICD9/10 diagnosis codes consistent with OUD and acute bacterial/fungal infection, and verification of OUD-associated infection. HIV was defined by chart review. We explored HIV viral load (VL), antiretroviral therapy (ART) and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) on admission, discharge, consultation, and community care. Overall CHOICE Study Enrollment ResultsOverall, 287 were admitted with OUD and infections over the study period; 22 had HIV of whom 3 (14%) were diagnosed during the admission. Of the HIV negative, 1 was discharged on PrEP. Of PWH, most were Black (55%), male (68%), and Medicaid recipients (77%); median age was 48. Median length of stay was 10 days. Common bacterial infections were skin/soft tissue (55%), Bacteremia (41%), and Osteomyelitis (18%). On admission, few were on antiretroviral therapy (ART; 32%) or MOUD (23%). Of the 13 with a VL during admission, 100% had viremia (median VL 6,226 copies/mL). During the admission, 81% were evaluated by Infectious Diseases consultant and 50% by Addiction Medicine. At discharge, 11 and 6 had documentation of an ART plan and MOUD receipt, respectively. In the year following the admission, of 21 with follow up data, a majority were evaluated in the emergency department (68%) and readmitted (57%). HIV Outcomes for Hospitalized Persons with Injection Related Bacterial Infections ConclusionFor patients with IDU, hospitalization is a missed opportunity to address HIV treatment and prevention through PrEP, VL surveillance, and ART linkage. Because addiction treatment improves HIV outcomes, Addiction consultation should be standard of care but was under-utilized. Subsequent ED visits and readmissions suggest that hospitals provide continuity of care for patients with IDU who would benefit from HIV, HCV, and other services in acute settings.Disclosures Greer A. Burkholder, MD, MSPH, Eli Lilly (Grant/Research Support) Elana S. Rosenthal, MD, Gilead Sciences (Research Grant or Support)Merck (Research Grant or Support) Ellen Eaton, MD , Gilead (Grant/Research Support) Ellen Eaton, MD , Gilead (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Research Grant or Support

139. Social Support Decreases No-Show Rates Among Patients with Injection-Drug-Use-Related Infections and Opioid Use Disorder

Abstract Background Opioid overdose is the leading cause of injury-related death in the United States. Kentucky ranks in the top 5 states for overdose death and has one of the highest rates of acute hepatitis C (HCV). Fifty-four of Kentucky’s counties are among the 220 U.S. counties identified as high risk for rapid dissemination of HIV and HCV. Poverty, legal issues, and transportation are barriers to effective treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) and related infections. The WRAP project (Wrap-around Recovery for Addiction and infectious Diseases project) is an ongoing multi-disciplinary program to expand access to OUD treatment at University of Kentucky HealthCare. This program provides social support including transportation assistance, case management, and counseling. Missed visits have been associated with multiple adverse outcomes. Methods We compared missed infectious diseases clinic visits (n=620) of patients enrolled in WRAP to those of patients who were referred and eligible, but not enrolled using chi-square tests for odds ratios. Results We enrolled 35% of eligible, referred patients. The majority (70%) of patients not enrolled were referred while inpatient and discharged before they could be enrolled. WRAP-enrolled patients missed 21% of visits, whereas WRAP-eligible, non-enrolled patients missed 31% of visits (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.72, p-value < 0.001), Figure 1. This finding was consistent for WRAP-referred patients with a diagnosis of HIV who were also eligible for Ryan White support services: WRAP-enrolled patients missed 17% of visits and WRAP-eligible, non-enrolled patients missed 25% of visits (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.35, p-value 0.002). For HCV patients who were mostly referred as outpatients, WRAP-enrolled patients missed 25% of visits while WRAP-eligible, non-enrolled patients missed 39% (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.72 , p-value 0.0003), Figure 2. Figure 1. ID clinic visit attendance among WRAP eligible, non-enrolled and WRAP enrolled patients. WRAP-enrolled patients missed 21% of visits, whereas WRAP-eligible, non-enrolled patients missed 31% of visits (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.72, p-value < 0.001). Figure 2. ID clinic attendance among WRAP eligible, non-enrolled and WRAP enrolled patients with HIV and hepatitis C primary diagnoses. A. WRAP-enrolled patients with a primary diagnosis of HIV missed 17% of visits and WRAP-eligible, non-enrolled patients missed 25% of visits (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.35, p-value 0.002). B. WRAP-enrolled patients with a primary diagnosis of hepatitis C missed 25% of visits while WRAP-eligible, non-enrolled patients missed 39% (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.72, p-value 0.0003). Conclusion Providing patients with social support services to address barriers to attending clinic visits was associated with fewer missed ID clinic visits. Higher engagement in care is a step towards implementing evidence-based treatment to lessen overdose deaths and injection-related infections. Future projects will include investigating whether WRAP enrollment is associated with fewer hospital admission and ER visits. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

28. The Paradox of an Integrated MAT OPAT Program

BackgroundPatients with substance use disorders (SUD), specifically opioid use disorder (OUD) and injection drug use (IDU) utilize healthcare resources for prolonged inpatient treatment of serious infections stemming from their addictions. For a variety of reasons, physicians treating these patients refuse to send these patients home to receive outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT), and instead keep the patient in the hospital for several weeks or longer to complete treatment for the injection-related infections. Patients who do not have history of IDU are sent home with a PICC line to receive OPAT once they are no longer acutely ill and therefore no longer meet criteria to remain inpatient, which is the established standard of care. Patients with OUD and IDU are not allowed the same standard of care, and furthermore do not receive adequate, if any, therapy for their primary problem and reason for their serious infection – the addiction.Flow chart of the MAT-OPAT process MethodsMedication-assisted treatment (MAT) with buprenorphine-naloxone has been approved for treating adults with opioid use disorder as part of a comprehensive treatment program that also includes counseling and behavioral therapy. Until now in our healthcare system there has been no comprehensive and integrated program to safely discharge patients with OUD and IDU to receive OPAT via a PICC line, while simultaneously treating their addiction. We describe the implementation of a MAT-OPAT program. Please refer to the chart included.ResultsWe present a successful case of a 36-year-old male with a history of endocarditis associated with IV drug use and the intervention of the Healthcare System to link the patient to appropriate Infectious disease, behavioral health and medication adherence treatment for opioid abuse. The patient completed the IV antibiotic therapy and remained enrolled in the behavioral health program with a successful outcome.ConclusionMAT-OPAT implementation in large healthcare system with continuous outpatient support that includes Infectious Disease services, behavioral health and drug abuse rehabilitation therapy can be a successful strategy to minimize readmisión, cost and complications in patients with history of IV drug use and infections that require prolonged intravenous antibiotic therapy.Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Clinical impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based strategies for addressing the US opioid epidemic: a modelling study

SummaryBackgroundThe syndemic of injection drug use and serious injection-related infections is leading to increasing mortality in the USA. Although outpatient treatment with medications for opioid use disorder reduces overdose risk and recurrent infections, hospitalisation remains common. We evaluated the clinical impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based strategies to address the US opioid epidemic.MethodsWe developed a microsimulation model to compare the cost-effectiveness of: standard hospital care—detoxification for opioids, no addiction consult service (status quo); expanded inpatient prescribing of medications for opioid use disorder, including bridge prescriptions (ie, medication until they can see an outpatient provider) when possible (medications for opioid use disorder with bridge); implementation of addiction consult services within the hospital (addiction consult services alone); and a combined medication for opioid use disorder with addiction consult services strategy (combined). We used clinical trials and observational cohorts to inform model inputs. Outcomes were life-years, discounted costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, hospitalisations, and deaths. We did deterministic sensitivity analyses on key model inputs related to costs and sequelae of drug use and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to further address uncertainty.FindingsAmong people who inject opioids in the USA, we estimated that expanding medications for opioid use disorder with bridge prescriptions would reduce hospitalisations and overdose deaths by 3·2% and 3·6%, respectively, and the combination of expanded medications with opioid use disorder along with addiction consult sevices would reduce hospitalisations and overdoses by 5·2% and 6·6%, respectively, compared with the status quo. Mean lifetime costs ranged from US$731 400 (95% credible interval 447 911–859 189 for the medications for opioid use disorder strategy) to $741 200 (470 930–868 551 for the combined strategy) per person. Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per life-year gained, medications for opioid use disorder with bridge and combined strategies were cost-effective ($7600 and $14 300, respectively). A scenario that assumed ideal access to harm reduction services came to the same conclusions as the base case and our results were robust in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.InterpretationThe combined interventions of expanding hospital-based prescribing of medications for opioid use disorder and implementing addiction consult services could improve life expectancy, be cost-effective, and could be the basis for a comprehensive hospital-based strategy for addressing the opioid epidemic in the USA and countries with similar opioid epidemics.FundingNational Institute on Drug Abuse and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Value of Packaged Testing for Sexually Transmitted Infections for Persons who Inject Drugs Hospitalized With Serious Injection-Related Infections.

BackgroundPersons who inject drugs (PWID) are frequently admitted for serious injection-related infections (SIRIs). PWID are also at risk for sexually transmitted infections (STIs).MethodsWe conducted a multicenter quality improvement project at 3 hospitals in Missouri. PWID with SIRI who received an infectious diseases consultation were prospectively identified and placed into an electronic database as part of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention–funded quality improvement project. Baseline data were collected from 8/1/2019 to 1/30/2020. During the intervention period (2/1/2020–2/28/2021), infectious diseases physicians caring for patients received 2 interventions: (1) email reminders of best practice screening for HIV, viral hepatitis, and STIs; (2) access to a customized EPIC SmartPhrase that included checkboxes of orders to include in assessment and plan of consultation notes. STI screening rates were compared before and after the intervention. We then calculated odds ratios to evaluate for risk factors for STIs in the cohort.ResultsThree hundred ninety-four unique patients were included in the cohort. Initial screening rates were highest for hepatitis C (88%), followed by HIV (86%). The bundled intervention improved screening rates for all conditions and substantially improved screening rates for gonorrhea, chlamydia, and syphilis (30% vs 51%, 30% vs 51%, and 39 vs 60%, respectively; P < .001). Of patients who underwent screening, 16.9% were positive for at least 1 STI. In general, demographics were not strongly associated with STIs.ConclusionsPWID admitted for SIRI frequently have unrecognized STIs. Our bundled intervention improved STI screening rates, but additional interventions are needed to optimize screening.

A missed opportunity: underutilization of inpatient behavioral health services to reduce injection drug use sequelae in Florida

BackgroundPeople who inject drugs (PWID) suffer high morbidity and mortality from injection related infections (IRI). The inpatient setting is an ideal opportunity to treat underlying substance use disorder (SUD), but it is unclear how often this occurs.ObjectivesTo quantify the utilization of behavioral health services for PWID during inpatient admissions for IRI.MethodsData for all hospital admissions in Florida in FY2017 were obtained from the Agency for Healthcare Administration. Hospitalization for IRI were obtained using a validated ICD-10 algorithm and treatment for substance use disorder was quantified using ICD-10-Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-PCS) codes.ResultAmong the 20,001 IRI admissions, there were 230 patients who received behavioral health services as defined by ICD-10-PCS SAT codes for treatment for SUD.ConclusionsIn a state with a large number of IRI, only a very small portion of admissions received behavioral health services. Increased efforts should be directed to studying referral patterns among physicians and other providers caring for this population and increasing utilization of behavioral health services.

Recurring Severe Injection-Related Infections in People Who Inject Drugs and the Need for Safe Injection Sites in Madrid, Spain.

BackgroundAn estimated 58 749 people with opioid use disorder engaged in opioid agonist therapy (OAT) in 1132 centers in Spain during 2017. We aimed to calculate the incidence of severe injection-related infections in people who inject drugs (PWID) engaged in OAT in harm reduction settings without a safe consumption space.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed in PWID engaged in OAT and in a mobile harm reduction unit to quantify admissions to a referral hospital for any severe injection-related infections between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2019. A Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to assess factors associated with any severe injection-related infection.ResultsTwo hundred thirty-seven PWID who engaged in OAT were included in the study. After a median follow-up of 5.5 months (interquartile range [IQR], 1.3–22.7 months), a total of 104 episodes of severe injection-related infections occurred among 56 individuals, and admission due to a second event occurred in 35.7% of this same group. The incidence density of any type of severe injection-related infection was 26.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.2–34.8) episodes per 100 person-years, and the incidence density of complicated skin and soft tissue infections that required hospital admission was 20.4 (95% CI, 15.0–27.3) episodes per 100 person-years. Fifty-six (53.8%) of all the episodes were patient-directed discharge (PDD), and people who had 2 or more hospital admissions had a higher PDD frequency.ConclusionsSevere injection-related infections remain highly prevalent among PWID cared for in a harm reduction setting without a safe consumption space. PDD was more frequent among higher-risk individuals who presented 2 or more hospital readmissions.

The wound that closes doors: Lived experiences and complexities of injection-related injuries and infections among people who inject drugs through an ethnographic lens.

Besides HIV, people who inject drugs (PWID) experience other biomedical adversities, including injection-related injuries and infections. Yet, they are often inadequately addressed due to the prioritisation of HIV-related issues. This article explored the risk environment and socio-structural adversities of PWID living with injection-related injuries and infections, as well as existing management and treatment challenges of these conditions in harm reduction interventions. We undertook an ethnographic study from April 2018 to December 2019 in selected areas of Dhaka, Bangladesh. This component of the study involved 2500 hours of observations and informal conversations, 35 in-depth interviews and five focus group discussions with PWID experiencing injection-related injuries and infections. We also performed seven key-informant interviews with service providers and clinical experts. We applied thematic analysis and used various theoretical social scientific conceptualisations to analyse the relationship between the biomedical realities and socio-structural vulnerabilities of PWID. Our findings indicated that PWID's physical, legal and socio-economic environments predisposed PWID to risky practices which ultimately precipitated injection-related injuries and infections. These injection-related injuries and infections consequently displaced them in spheres of social exclusion, stigmatisation, physical pain and disability and, hence, fueled their feelings of distress and despondence. Our findings also presented limitations in the management strategy of these injection-related injuries and infections. Specifically, service providers misconstrued all these complexities as "abscesses", thus applying a simplistic "one-size-fits-all" approach without accounting for the diversity of these complexities. This led to a paucity of tailored care and management approaches which could precipitate unfavourable treatment outcomes, such as chronic and complicated cases with antibiotic resistance. Injection-related injuries and infections nestled PWID within various prongs of biomedical and socio-structural adversity, without viable and targeted treatment modalities. Thus, it is integral to nurture a multifaceted harm reduction intervention tailored to their biomedical and socio-structural needs.

Partnering With State Health Departments to Address Injection-Related Infections During the Opioid Epidemic: Experience at a Safety Net Hospital.

Massachusetts is one of the epicenters of the opioid epidemic and has been severely impacted by injection-related viral and bacterial infections. A recent increase in newly diagnosed human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections among persons who inject drugs in the state highlights the urgent need to address and bridge the overlapping epidemics of opioid use disorder (OUD) and injection-related infections. Building on an established relationship between the Massachusetts Department of Public Health and Boston Medical Center, the Infectious Diseases section has contributed to the development and implementation of a cohesive response involving ambulatory, inpatient, emergency department, and community-based services. We describe this comprehensive approach including the rapid delivery of antimicrobials for the prevention and treatment of HIV, sexually transmitted diseases, systemic infections such as endocarditis, bone and joint infections, as well as curative therapy for chronic hepatitis C virus in a manner that is accessible to patients on the addiction-recovery continuum. We also provide an overview of programs that provide access to medications for OUD, harm reduction services including overdose education, and distribution of naloxone. Finally, we outline lessons learned to inform initiatives in other settings.

Barriers to Care Experienced by Patients Who Inject Drugs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Analysis.

Objectives:To identify the barriers to accessing health care and social services faced by people who inject drugs (PWID) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.Methods:This report is a sub-analysis of a larger qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with PWID admitted to an academic medical center from 2017 to 2020 for an invasive injection-related infection. Standard qualitative analysis techniques, consisting of both inductive and deductive approaches, were used to identify and characterize the effects of COVID-19 on participants.Results:Among the 30 PWID interview participants, 14 reported barriers to accessing health and addiction services due to COVID-19. As facilities decreased appointment availability or transitioned to telemedicine, PWID reported being unable to access services. Social distancing led to isolation or loneliness during hospital stays and in the community. Recovery meetings and support groups, critical to addiction recovery, were particularly affected. Other participants reported that uncertainty and fear of contracting the virus generated changes in behavior that led them to avoid seeking services.Conclusions:COVID-19 has disrupted health systems and social services, leading PWID to experience unprecedented barriers to accessing and maintaining health and addiction services in both inpatient and outpatient settings. Opioid use disorder management must be understood as a holistic process, and a multidisciplinary approach to ensuring comprehensive care, even in the midst of this pandemic, is needed.

A qualitative assessment of discharge against medical advice among patients hospitalized for injection-related bacterial infections in West Virginia.

The incidence of infective endocarditis (IE) and other systemic bacterial infections is increasing, and people who inject drugs (PWID) have higher rates of discharge against medical advice (AMA) for these infections than patients whose infections are not injection-related. In this study, we characterize factors that contribute to AMA hospital discharge among PWID. We conducted qualitative interviews with twenty PWID hospitalized with serious injection-related bacterial infections in West Virginia. Participants completed a brief survey and in-depth qualitative interview. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a codebook developed based on deductive and inductive thematic analysis. We also conducted medical records abstraction and used descriptive statistics to summarize medical and survey data. Average age was 34 years, 55% were female, 95% identified as white, and 75% had a primary diagnosis of IE. Drugs injected prior to hospitalization were methamphetamine (60%), prescription opioids (38%), and/or heroin/fentanyl (25%). Participants cited multiple contributors to AMA discharge including negative interactions with hospital staff that they perceived as stigmatizing, including being searched or monitored for illicit drug use; inadequate management of pain and withdrawal; boredom and confinement during lengthy hospitalizations; and isolation from family and other social supports. We identified multiple factors contributing to AMA discharge that are amenable to intervention. Given the significant morbidity, mortality, and financial costs associated with hospitalizing PWID for serious injection-related bacterial infections, hospitals should be highly motivated to develop and test interventions designed to improve outcomes among these patients.

Risk factors for fatal and nonfatal reactions to immunotherapy (2008-2018): postinjection monitoring and severe asthma

BackgroundSubcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) is highly effective but risks exist. ObjectiveTo identify practices that influence systemic allergic reactions (SRs) to SCIT and SCIT-associated infections. MethodsMembers of the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology completed an annual survey of SCIT-related SRs of varying severity (2008-2018). Injection-related infections were queried (2014-2018). Strategies to enforce postinjection waiting times and to reduce risks from asthma/severe asthma were queried (2016-2018). ResultsData were gathered on 64.5 million injection visits. Ten confirmed fatalities occurred since 2008, including 3 new fatalities since 2017. One fatal reaction occurred per 7.2 million injection visits (2008-2018). No infections occurred. Practices that tracked the time after injections, and required checking out with office personnel, had significantly lower total (P < .001), grade 3 (severe) (P < .001), and grade 4 (very severe) SRs (P < .001). Having more individuals with asthma on SCIT was associated with more grade 3 SRs (P < .02). Not prescribing SCIT in individuals with uncontrolled asthma was associated with fewer grade 3 SRs (P = .02). Having individuals with more severe asthma on SCIT was associated with more total, grade 1, and grade 2 SRs (P < .001); 50% of grade 3 and 4 SRs occurred in individuals with severe asthma. ConclusionSCIT-related fatalities have declined since 2008, with a slight increase in recent years. SCIT is not associated with an increased risk of infections. Tracking the time after injections and checking out with office staff confer significantly lower risks of severe SRs. Asthma, especially severe asthma, is a major risk factor for severe and fatal SRs. Strategies that reduce risks for individuals with asthma, such as not prescribing SCIT to patients with uncontrolled asthma, may lower the risks.

Care cascade for patients with opioid use disorder and serious injection related infections

Objectives To define the care cascade for patients with serious injection drug use related infections (SIRI) in a tertiary hospital system and compare outcomes of those who did and did not participate in an opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment referral program. Methods The medical records of patients admitted with both OUD and SIRI including endocarditis, osteomyelitis, septic arthritis, epidural abscess, thrombophlebitis, myositis, bacteremia, and fungemia from 2016-2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, clinical covariates, 90-day readmission rates, and outcomes data were collected. We compared data from those who were successfully referred to outpatient care through Engaging Patients in Care Coordination (EPICC), a peer recovery specialist-run OUD treatment referral program, to those who did not receive outpatient referral. Results During the study period 334 persons who inject opioids were admitted with SIRI. Fourteen admitted patients died and were excluded from the analysis. The all-cause readmission rate was lower among patients referred to the EPICC program (18/76 [23.7%]) compared to those not referred to EPICC (100/244 [41.0%]) (OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.25–0.80). Conclusion An OUD care cascade evaluation for patients with SIRI demonstrated that referral to peer recovery services with outpatient OUD treatment was associated with reduced 90-day readmission rate.

Harm reduction for the treatment of patients with severe injection-related infections: description of the Jackson SIRI Team

Introduction Hospitalizations for severe injection-related infections (SIRI), such as endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) are increasingly common. People who inject drugs (PWID) experiencing SIRIs often receive inadequate substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and lack of access to harm reduction services. This translates into lengthy hospitalizations with high rates of patient-directed discharge, readmissions, and post-hospitalization mortality. The purpose of this study was to describe the development of an integrated “SIRI Team” and its initial barriers and facilitators to success. Materials and methods The Jackson SIRI Team was developed to improve both hospital and patient-level outcomes for individuals hospitalized with SIRIs at Jackson Memorial Hospital, a 1550-bed public hospital in Miami, Florida, United States. The SIRI Team provides integrated infectious disease and SUD treatment across the healthcare system starting from the inpatient setting and continuing for 90-days post-hospital discharge. The team uses a harm reduction approach, provides care coordination, focuses on access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and utilizes a variety of infection and addiction treatment modalities to suit each individual patient. Results Over the initial 8-months of the SIRI Team, 21 patients were treated with 20 surviving until discharge. Infections included osteomyelitis, endocarditis, bacteraemia/fungemia, SSTIs, and septic arthritis. All patients had OUD and 95% used stimulants. All patients were discharged on MOUD and 95% completed their prescribed antibiotic course. At 90-days post-discharge, 25% had been readmitted and 70% reported taking MOUD. Conclusions A model of integrated infectious disease and SUD care for the treatment of SIRIs has the potential to improve infection and addiction outcomes. Providing attentive, patient-centered care, using a harm reduction approach can facilitate engagement of this marginalized population with the healthcare system. KEY MESSAGES Integrated infectious disease and addiction treatment is a novel approach to treating severe injection-related infections. Harm reduction should be applied to treating patients with severe injection-related infections with a goal of facilitating antibiotic completion, remission from substance use disorder, and reducing hospital readmissions.

594. Characteristics of an At-Risk Patient Population Presenting to a Philadelphia Student-Run Free Clinic within 30 Days of Hospital Visit

Background30-day readmission rates are the parameter that hospitals and insurance companies use to measure clinical quality of care and set reimbursement levels for care (McCormack, et al., 2013). The 2019 readmission rate for United States hospitals was 14.9%; however, reported readmission rates vary in accuracy due to exclusion of at-risk populations or patients who seek care outside the hospital network (America’s Health Rankings, 2020; Gupta, et al., 2018). As coordinators of a student-run urgent care clinic operating within a Philadelphia syringe exchange and harm-reduction social services organization, we serve an at-risk patient population that includes a large portion of individuals who are transiently housed, people who engage in sex work, and people who use drugs (PWUD). We sought to determine our at-risk population’s impact on current readmission rates and the ability of hospitalization to meet their unique medical needs.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective review of 607 electronic charts for patients who sought care at our student run clinic associated with a syringe exchange in Kensington, Philadelphia from January 2017 to January 2020, and identified patients who visited our clinic within 30 days of self-reported hospitalization. We identified time since hospitalization, purpose for hospitalization, and reason for clinic visit.ResultsOf 607 visits, 100 (16.5%) self-reported hospitalization within 30 days clinic presentation. Of these 100 clinic visits, 64% presented with the same chief complaint as their reason for hospitalization, and 21% presented with a complication related to their hospital visit. 33% of visits associated with previous hospitalization were from infections associated with IV drug use, including abscess, cellulitis, and osteomyelitis. On average, patients presented 7.5 days following hospital departure.ConclusionWe identified a high incidence of clinic visits for medical needs associated with recent hospitalization, particularly injection-related infection, which suggests insufficient hospital care for this at-risk population. The number of readmissions for this population is underestimated due to their ability to seek medical care outside of the hospital network.Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Emergency department patients with untreated opioid use disorder: A comparison of those seeking versus not seeking referral to substance use treatment

BACKGROUND Little is known regarding the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of emergency department (ED) patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD) and the relationship of those characteristics with whether they were seeking a referral to substance use treatment at the time of their ED visit. METHODS Using data collected from 2/2017−1/2019 from participants enrolled in Project ED Health (CTN-0069), we conducted a cross-sectional analysis of patients with untreated moderate to severe OUD presenting to one of four EDs in Baltimore, New York City, Cincinnati, or Seattle. Sociodemographic and clinical correlates, and International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis codes related to opioid withdrawal, injection-related infection, other substance use, overdose, and OUD of those seeking and not seeking a referral to substance use treatment on presentation were compared using univariate analyses. RESULTS Among 394 study participants, 15.2 % (60/394) came to the ED seeking a referral to substance use treatment. No differences in age, gender, education, health insurance status or housing stability were detected between those seeking and not seeking referral to substance use treatment. Those seeking a referral to substance use treatment were less likely to have urine toxicology testing positive for amphetamine [17 % (10/60) vs 31 % (104/334), p = 0.023] and methamphetamine [23 % (14/60) vs 40 % (132/334), p = 0.017] compared to those not seeking a referral. CONCLUSION Most patients with untreated OUD seen in the EDs were not seeking a referral to substance use treatment. Active identification, treatment initiation, and coding may improve ED efforts to address untreated OUD.

Hospital Costs of Injection Drug Use in Florida.

People who inject drugs (PWID) experience significant injection-related infections (IRIs) at significant healthcare system cost. This study used and validated an algorithm based on the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, to estimate hospitalized PWID populations, assess the total statewide morbidity for IRIs among PWID, and calculate associated costs of care.