Antimicrobial Stewardship Pharmacist Research Articles

Evaluation after implementation of chemical bowel preparation for surgical site infections in elective colorectal cancer surgery and role of antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist: Retrospective cohort study

BackgroundWe evaluated the predictive factors for surgical site infections (SSIs) in elective colorectal cancer surgery and the role of antimicrobial stewardship (AS) pharmacists in modifying the clinical pathway.Main bodyBetween February 2017 and January 2022, 414 elective colorectal cancer surgeries were performed. The results of multivariate analysis by SSI incidence were adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.22–0.96 (P = 0.039) for sex (female), aOR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.13–0.58 (P < 0.001) for laparoscopy, aOR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.19–0.91 (P = 0.029) for chemical bowel preparation. The median (interquartile range) postoperative length of stay was 12 (10.0–18.5) vs. 10 (9.0–13.0) days before and after the clinical pathway was modified (P < 0.001).ConclusionThe role of AS pharmacists was primarily to conduct a literature search to explore whether SSIs could be ameliorated by pharmacotherapy, coordinate the addition of chemical bowel preparation, and epidemiologically confirm their effectiveness.

Improving the antibiotic duration of therapy with the implementation of antimicrobial lanyard cards and education in a regional hospital

AbstractBackgroundThere is increasing evidence to support reducing antibiotic duration of therapy (DoT). The Therapeutic Guidelines: Antibiotic (version 16 [TG]) have been updated accordingly. However, these recommendations are not consistently followed.AimThe project aimed to reduce antibiotic DoT for common infections using antimicrobial lanyard cards and education.MethodA retrospective pre‐ and post‐implementation audit was undertaken to examine whether antimicrobial stewardship education and lanyard cards defined DoT per infection and severity in accordance with the TG improved antibiotic DoT for common respiratory, urinary, abdominal, and skin infections. Cards were distributed to doctors and pharmacists, with education delivered by an antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) pharmacist. This project was exempt due to the local policy requirements that constitute research by the Darling Downs Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (Reference no: EX/2022/QTDD/86644). The justification for this ethics exemption was as follows: the study conformed with the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Ethical considerations in quality assurance and evaluation activities; education was incorporated as part of routine, scheduled sessions ran at Toowoomba hospital and staff were provided with information on the project as part of the education; consent was not required from staff to attend the education nor for using the lanyard cards; the research did not include any assessment of the education program, use of lanyard cards, or involvement of staff.ResultsFor all patients an improvement was found in the percentage of antibiotics prescribed per the TG (55–72%, p = 0.0095). This included statistically significant differences for respiratory (42–89%, p = 0.0002), but not for urinary (87–91%, p = 0.99), skin (58–77%, p = 0.3039), or abdominal infections (48–44%, p = 0.6990). The mean total excess treatment days decreased across all infections from 1.86 to 0.95 days (p = 0.0036, 95% confidence interval = −1.52 to −0.30).ConclusionThe introduction of antibiotic DoT cards, with AMS education, can improve antimicrobial prescribing in line with the TG in a regional hospital.

Antimicrobial Point Prevalence Survey in four Emergency Departments at Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust

Abstract Introduction Antimicrobial Point Prevalence Surveys (PPS) are a recognised tool to facilitate monitoring of compliance to an organisation’s antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programme.1 Most PPS tools used within secondary care focus on prescribing of antimicrobials for in-patients. At Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust (MFT) PPS are carried out by clinical pharmacists across all inpatient ward areas. Antimicrobials are one of the most prescribed medicines in the emergency department2 (ED) yet, the current MFT PPS tool does not facilitate undertaking PPS in EDs. A new validated outpatient PPS tool3 from the Global Point Prevalence Survey (GPPS) was released earlier this year. Aim To pilot the GPPS outpatient tool in the EDs at MFT to determine the level of compliance with the MFT antimicrobial guidelines within the EDs, estimate the total burden of antimicrobial use and describe types of infections and prescribed antimicrobials within the EDs. Methods Following the GPPS outpatient protocol3 the four emergency departments (3 general EDs, and 1 paediatric ED) at MFT were assessed in a ten-day period during May 2023. Each ED was assessed continuously for a 4-hour timeslot on a weekday morning by an AMS pharmacist who retrieved the data from the EPIC electronic patient record system remotely. All patients who were allocated a room/bedspace on ED within the timeslot were audited, including patients who were not prescribed antimicrobials. Guideline compliance was checked with the MFT antimicrobial guidelines. The online GPPS data collection tool was used, generating a data download into an Excel spreadsheet for analysis. This study was a service evaluation and so did not require ethical approval. Results 180 patients were audited from 4 EDs yielding a total of 41 prescriptions for antimicrobials. 28/180 patients were prescribed one or more antimicrobial, with an overall antimicrobial prescribing rate of 15.5%. Prescribing was higher in the paediatric ED with a rate of 25%. 92.7% (38/41) of antimicrobials were prescribed intravenously (IV). Choice of antimicrobial was compliant in 38/41 (92.7%). Dose was compliant in 40/41 (97.6%). Duration of treatment was compliant in 39/41 (95.1%). Sepsis accounted for 48.8% of indications. 2/41 prescriptions were based on the C Reactive Protein (CRP) biomarker. Discussion/Conclusion Whilst the study was only conducted over a short time period, the findings suggested that overall compliance with the MFT antimicrobial guidelines was very good. The prescribing rate of 15.5% was low in comparison to the recent MFT inpatient PPS which showed a prescribing rate of 30%. There is a high rate of diagnosis of sepsis and prescribing of IV antimicrobials in comparison to orals which may be anticipated in the emergency setting. The GPPS outpatient audit tool provided an opportunity to do a baseline assessment within the EDs across MFT, providing data on prevalence of antimicrobial prescribing and compliance to the MFT guidelines. The GPPS audit tool did not have the utility to review the accuracy of clinical diagnosis of severe infection/sepsis within the ED, or the appropriateness of IV antimicrobial prescribing. Further research should be undertaken to provide assurance on the clinical diagnosis of severe infection and the appropriateness of IV antimicrobial prescribing with the EDs.

Adding Antimicrobial Stewardship Pharmacists to the ID Compensation Discussion: A More Perfect Union?

Adding Antimicrobial Stewardship Pharmacists to the ID Compensation Discussion: A More Perfect Union?

The Essential Role of Senior Care Pharmacists in Antimicrobial Stewardship: An Updated Position Statement on Behalf of the American Society of Consultant Pharmacists and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists.

Senior care pharmacists are well-positioned to lead and drive antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) initiatives, not only through audit and data collection, but also through communication, collaboration, and cooperation with prescribers and nurses to influence prescribing behaviors. Senior care pharmacists are in a unique position to take a leadership role within the interprofessional team to achieve AMS goals. They should engage with the interprofessional team to promote the judicious and appropriate use of antimicrobials at their practice sites. This position statement is an update of the 2017 version by the American Society of Consultant Pharmacists (ASCP) Antimicrobial Stewardship and Infection and Prevention Control Committee and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists (SIDP).

Pharmacists Working to Avert an Avoidable Apocalypse.

A recently published novel paper explored the frightening prospect of living in an imaginary world where antibiotics can no longer fulfill their valuable function in modern medicine. The authors of this piece demonstrate an interesting approach that they feel might motivate health care professionals to contemplate more carefully what can be done to preserve the utility of antimicrobials. In what is perhaps a more pragmatic approach, in this edition of the journal, we publish a joint position statement addressing the role of senior care pharmacists in antimicrobial stewardship. The position statement addresses a range of concepts, but of importance overall it speaks to the need for pharmacists to play an important role in preserving the efficacy of antibiotics.

Barriers to penicillin allergy de-labeling in the inpatient and outpatient settings: a qualitative study

BackgroundPenicillin allergy is the most commonly reported drug allergy in the US. Despite evidence demonstrating that up to 90% of labels are incorrect, scalable interventions are not well established. As part of a larger mixed methods investigation, we conducted a qualitative study to describe the barriers to implementing a risk-based penicillin de-labeling protocol within a single site Veteran’s hospital.MethodsWe conducted individual and group interviews with multidisciplinary inpatient and outpatient healthcare teams. The interview guides were developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore workflows and contextual factors influencing identification and evaluation of patients with penicillin allergy. Three researchers iteratively developed the codebook based on TDF domains and coded the data using thematic analysis.ResultsWe interviewed 20 clinicians. Participants included three hospitalists, five inpatient pharmacists, one infectious disease physician, two anti-microbial stewardship pharmacists, four primary care providers, two outpatient pharmacists, two resident physicians, and a nurse case manager for the allergy service. The factors that contributed to barriers to penicillin allergy evaluation and de-labeling were classified under six TDF domains; knowledge, skills, beliefs about capabilities, beliefs about consequences, professional role and identity, and environmental context and resources. Participants from all groups acknowledged the importance of penicillin de-labeling. However, they lacked confidence in their skills to perform the necessary evaluations, such as test dose challenges. The fear of inducing an allergic reaction and adding further complexity to patient care exacerbated their reluctance to de-label patients. The lack of ownership of de-labeling initiative was another significant obstacle in establishing consistent clinical workflows. Additionally, heavy workloads, competing priorities, and ease of access to alternative antibiotics prevented the prioritization of tasks related to de-labeling. Space limitations and nursing staff shortages added to challenges in outpatient settings.ConclusionOur findings demonstrated that barriers to penicillin allergy de-labeling fall under multiple behavioral domains. Better role clarification, opportunities to develop necessary skills, and dedicated resources are needed to overcome these barriers. Future interventions will need to employ a systemic approach that addresses each of the behavioral domains influencing penicillin allergy de-labeling with stakeholder engagement of the inpatient and outpatient health care teams.

Impact of Infectious Diseases Consultation in Patients With Candidemia at a Multisite Health Care System With Established Antimicrobial Stewardship and Telemedicine Services.

Infectious diseases consultation improves outcomes in patients with candidemia, although some facilities lack access to consultation. This multisite health care system study compared in-hospital mortality in patients with candidemia across 3 groups-those who received on-site consultation, telemedicine consultation, or no consultation. All patients were reviewed by an antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist. A retrospective observational cohort study was performed of adult hospitalized patients with candidemia from January 2018 to October 2021. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included receipt and duration of antifungals, removal of central venous lines if present, ophthalmologic examination, echocardiography, and determination of infection source. A total of 265 patients were evaluated: 187 in the on-site consultation group, 49 in the telemedicine consultation group, and 29 in the nonconsultation group. Although in-hospital mortality did not differ significantly between the on-site and nonconsultation groups, it was significantly lower in the telemedicine group when compared with the nonconsultation group (10.2% vs 34.5%, P = .009). Patients who received on-site or telemedicine consultation had significantly more antifungal therapy initiated, appropriate therapy duration, central lines removed, and echocardiography performed, as well as fewer unknown candidemia sources, vs those in the nonconsultation group. This is the first study of a multisite health care system providing telemedicine services to evaluate the impact of infectious diseases consultation on candidemia mortality. These findings suggest that when on-site consultation is unavailable, infectious diseases telemedicine consultation and antimicrobial stewardship can improve outcomes and should be considered for all patients with candidemia at resource-limited sites.

Expanding the scope of the infectious diseases pharmacist in HCT: Beyond antimicrobial stewardship.

Infectious disease (ID) pharmacists and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs are integral to the infection management of hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients demonstrating effective implementation of clinical pathways, de-escalation of empirical antibiotics for febrile neutropenia (FN), allergy assessments, and use of rapid diagnostic testing. The HCT procedure is complex, dynamic, and a high risk for infectious complications. Therefore, there is an important role for an ID and AMS pharmacist to collaborate with the primary treating team, with ongoing care, involving the optimal individual patient prophylactic, pre-emptive and treatment management of infections in this high-risk population. This review highlights key factors for consideration of ID/AMS Pharmacists in relation to HCT, including important aspects in the evaluation of infection risk prior to transplant, risk from donor sources, length of, and changes in immunosuppression, and potential drug-drug interactions from other essential supportive care therapies.

Validation of the Antifungal National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (AF-NAPS) quality assessment tool.

The Antifungal National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (AF-NAPS) was developed to undertake streamlined quality audits of antifungal prescribing. The validity and reliability of such tools is not characterized. To assess the validity and reliability of the AF-NAPS quality assessment tool. Case vignettes describing antifungal prescribing were prepared. A steering group was assembled to determine gold-standard classifications for appropriateness and guideline compliance. Infectious diseases physicians, antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and specialist pharmacists undertook a survey to classify appropriateness and guideline compliance of prescriptions utilizing the AF-NAPS tool. Validity was measured as accuracy, sensitivity and specificity compared with gold standard. Inter-rater reliability was measured using Fleiss' kappa statistics. Assessors' responses and comments were thematically analysed to determine reasons for incorrect classification. Twenty-eight clinicians assessed 59 antifungal prescriptions. Overall accuracy of appropriateness assessment was 77.0% (sensitivity 85.3%, specificity 68.0%). Highest accuracy was seen amongst specialist (81%) and AMS pharmacists (79%). Prescriptions with lowest accuracy were in the haematology setting (69%), use of echinocandins (73%), mould-active azoles (75%) and for prophylaxis (71%). Inter-rater reliability was fair overall (0.3906), with moderate reliability amongst specialist pharmacists (0.5304). Barriers to accurate classification were incorrect use of the appropriateness matrix, knowledge gaps and lack of guidelines for some indications. The AF-NAPS is a valid tool, assisting assessors to correctly classify appropriate prescriptions more accurately than inappropriate prescriptions. Specialist and AMS pharmacists had similar performance, providing confidence that both can undertake AF-NAPS audits to a high standard. Identified reasons for incorrect classification will be targeted in the online tool and educational materials.

Echinocandin use in an Australian tertiary hospital: implications for antifungal stewardship

AbstractBackgroundInvasive candidiasis (IC) surveillance demonstrates an increasing incidence of resistance to azole‐based therapy. Consequently, echinocandins are often considered first‐line treatment for IC in critically ill patients. To better understand the complexities of decision‐making around echinocandin initiation, an evidence‐based audit tool was developed.AimTo describe echinocandin initiation and compliance with current guidelines.MethodA retrospective audit of echinocandin initiation was conducted between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2020 at a quaternary referral hospital. An audit tool was developed by infectious diseases physicians and antimicrobial stewardship pharmacists, capturing patient demographics, microbiological results, indication for therapy, and risk factors for invasive fungal disease (IFD). Local guideline compliance was determined. This project was determined to be a quality improvement project and was not required to undergo ethical review according to the Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee procedures.ResultsOne hundred sixty‐seven patients were initiated on 214 courses of echinocandin therapy. Caspofungin was most commonly prescribed (n = 172, 80%). Of the 167 patients, most (n = 119, 71%) were in the intensive care unit at the time of initiation. Empiric therapy for sepsis or infection of unclear source was the most commonly documented indication (n = 117, 55%); 71% (n = 153) of all courses were deemed empiric therapy, followed by directed therapy (n = 55, 26%). The most common risk factors for IFD were recent exposure to broad‐spectrum antimicrobial therapy (n = 165, 99%) and the presence of a urinary catheter (n = 141, 84%). Most first doses were compliant with local guidelines (n = 144, 67%).ConclusionsEchinocandin therapy was commonly prescribed in critically ill patients with risk factors for IFD. Although the majority of prescriptions were empiric and compliant with local guidelines, improved guidelines incorporating additional patient factors should be included in future antifungal stewardship initiatives.

Design and Implementation of an Antimicrobial Stewardship Certificate Program in the United Arab Emirates

Introduction: The purpose of our report is to describe the design and implementation of the first antimicrobial stewardship certificate program (ASCP) in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Methods: The ASCP was implemented in January 2019. A needs assessment was conducted before the implementation of the program. The program delivery utilized a blended learning format with both a live and an experiential component. Learner assessments consisted of pre- and post-course assessments, as well as structured feedback throughout the course. Course assessments and post-course evaluation results were utilized to assess the certificate program (CP) outcomes. Results: Between January 2019 to March 2020, 24 pharmacists were trained through the program. All participants passed the post-course assessment. Participants scored a median of 40 percent on the pre-course assessment at the start of the program and a median of 80 percent on the post-course assessment (p-value &lt; 0.0001), demonstrating a significant improvement in their baseline knowledge. Overall, participants were highly satisfied with the program and felt that it would enhance their ability to take care of patients and/or result in practice change in their institution. Conclusions: The ASCP enhanced the knowledge of pharmacists in antimicrobial stewardship. The implemented model provides a sustainable blueprint for future CPs in specialty areas of practice for the Middle East region.

Expansion of a Pharmacist-Led Culture Follow-Up Program to Real-Time Notification of Multidrug-Resistant Microbiology Results in the Emergency Department.

Introduction: There are currently limited published data for a pharmacist-led multidrug-resistant (MDR) culture follow-up program through a collaborative drug therapy management (CDTM) agreement in the emergency department (ED). Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of a pharmacist-led culture follow-up program for MDR microbiology results on ED revisit rate. Methods: A single-center quasi-experimental retrospective study was conducted comparing the outcomes before (December 2017 to March 2019) and after (April 2019 to July 2020) implementation of the ED MDR Culture program. Patients 18 years of age or older; with confirmed positive microbiology culture of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) at any site; and discharged from the ED were included. The primary outcome was to evaluate ED revisit within 30 days due to antimicrobial treatment failure, defined as lack of resolution or worsening of infection. A statistical analysis was performed for categorical data using Fisher's exact test, and for continuous data using unpaired t test or Mann-Whitney U Test, when applicable. Results: A total of 130 patients were included in the analysis. Patients in the post-implementation group (n = 70) had a significant reduction in ED revisits compared to the pre-implementation group (n = 60); 9 [12.9%] versus 17 [28.3%], respectively; P = .046. Conclusion: Implementation of an ED MDR culture program was associated with significantly less ED revisits within 30 days due to antimicrobial treatment failure, thus demonstrating the expanded role of ED pharmacists in antimicrobial stewardship in the outpatient setting.

The Impact of Pharmacist-Led Antimicrobial Stewardship Review of Cultures in the Ambulatory Setting at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Background: Several antimicrobial stewardship interventions have demonstrated improved clinical outcomes. Though the impact of a pharmacist-led antimicrobial stewardship review of cultures has been described, studies have not evaluated such an intervention in institutions that primarily serve cancer patients. Aim: To describe the impact of the antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist's review of microbiological cultures from adult cancer patients in the ambulatory setting. Method: A retrospective study at a comprehensive cancer center that included adult cancer patients with positive microbiological cultures treated in the ambulatory setting, between August 2020 and February 2021. The cultures were reviewed in real time by the antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist, and were assessed for appropriateness of treatment. The number of antimicrobial modifications made, type of modifications, and physicians' acceptance rate were recorded. Results: A total of 661 cultures from 504 patients were reviewed by the pharmacist. The mean age of patients was 58 years ± 16 (SD); most had solid tumors (95%), and 34% were recent recipients of chemotherapy. Among the reviewed cultures, 175 (26%) required antimicrobial therapy modification, with an acceptance rate of 86%. The modifications consisted of changing from non-susceptible to susceptible antimicrobials (n = 95, 54%), initiation (n = 61, 35%), discontinuation (n = 10, 6%), de-escalation (n = 7, 4%), and dose modification (n = 2, 1%) of antimicrobials. Conclusion: Around one fourth of the cultures reviewed by the antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist in the ambulatory setting required interventions to optimize therapy. Future studies should evaluate the impact of these interventions on clinical outcomes.

Suboptimal antimicrobial discharge prescriptions at a tertiary referral children's hospital.

To determine the rate of and factors associated with suboptimal discharge antimicrobial prescribing at a tertiary referral children's hospital. Retrospective cohort. Tertiary referral children's hospital. All enteral antimicrobial discharge prescriptions at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford from January 1st, 2021 through December 31st, 2021. All enteral discharge antimicrobials are routinely evaluated by our antimicrobial stewardship program within 48 hours of hospital discharge. Antimicrobials are determined to be optimal or suboptimal by an antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist after evaluating the prescribed choice of antimicrobial, dose, duration, dosing frequency, and formulation. The rate and factors associated with suboptimal antimicrobial discharge prescribing were evaluated. Of 2,593 antimicrobial prescriptions ordered at discharge, 19.7% were suboptimal. Suboptimal prescriptions were due to incorrect duration (72.2%), dose (31.0%), dose frequency (23.3%), drug choice (6.5%), or formulation (5.7%). In total, 87.2% of antimicrobials for perioperative prophylaxis and 13.5% of treatment antimicrobials were suboptimal. Antimicrobials with the highest rate of suboptimal prescriptions were amoxicillin-clavulanate (40.7%), clindamycin (36.6%), and cephalexin (36.6%). Suboptimal antimicrobial discharge prescriptions are common and present an opportunity for antimicrobial stewardship programs during hospital transition of care. Factors associated with suboptimal prescriptions differ by antimicrobial and prescribed indication, indicating that multiple stewardship interventions may be needed to improve prescribing.

Pharmacist adjustment of preoperative antibiotic orders to the preferred preoperative antibiotic cefazolin for patients with penicillin allergy labeling.

Emerging literature has detailed the safe use of cefazolin in patients with immunoglobulin E-mediated penicillin allergy labeling (PAL) such as hives and anaphylaxis. The purpose of this article is to detail efforts led by an antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist working with an interdisciplinary team to optimize preoperative antimicrobials in patients with PAL. A pharmacist-led, interdisciplinary collaborative practice agreement (CPA) was activated in January 2020 to permit pharmacists to independently optimize preoperative antibiotics to the preferred cefazolin in patients with PAL if nonsevere or severe reactions had been reported. A patient registry was established covering the timeframe between January 8, 2020, and January 6, 2022. Reaction during surgery was assessed via 2-provider documentation, which included surgeon and anesthesiology staff documentation of any complications during the procedure related to a suspected allergic safety event. Utilization of cefazolin, clindamycin, and vancomycin for preoperative prophylaxis was monitored before and after implementation of the CPA. During the stated timeframe, 10,182 procedures and/or surgeries were completed on 1,572 (15.4%) patients with PAL and 659 (41.9%) patients previously reporting at least one reaction categorized as a severe reaction, which was hives for 71.2% of these patients. Of the 659 patients with PAL reporting a severe reaction, 356 received a preoperative cephalosporin (cefazolin, 98.8%; ceftriaxone, 1.2%) and tolerated it without a reported safety event, including 52 patients with PAL previously reporting anaphylaxis. An increase in preferred preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis utilization was noted (cefazolin: 86% to 96.3%, P < 0.001; 2019 to 2021) with reductions noted in the use of nonpreferred preoperative antibiotics (clindamycin: 2.1% to 0.2%, P < 0.001; vancomycin: 3.2% to 0.4%, P < 0.001; 2019 to 2021). A pharmacist-led, interdisciplinary CPA increased preferred preoperative antimicrobial use in patients with PAL reporting severe allergic reactions, including hives and anaphylaxis, without reported safety events.

1930. Answering the Call: Inpatient Vaccination for SARS-CoV2 Infection in an Academic Hospital

Abstract Background While the available SARS-CoV2 vaccines are up to 94% effective at preventing COVID-19-related death or invasive mechanical ventilation, only 76% of the United States population aged ≥18 years have received a primary series and 49% have received a booster. Vaccine administration has been complicated by changing schedule recommendations, packaging in multi-dose vials, and federal reporting requirements that may have limited the locations offering vaccines. We therefore implemented a pharmacy-based initiative to provide SARS-CoV2 vaccination to patients admitted to an academic health center, in order to encourage vaccination when patients had presented for other care. Methods A pharmacy committee developed a protocol for administering the three authorized SARS-CoV2 vaccines to interested inpatients while minimizing vaccine waste, monitoring for safety events, and providing next dose education. Associated training included multidisciplinary education on requirements related to vaccine Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) status. While developing the protocol, the vaccine committee utilized a temporary procedure to administer vaccines once weekly through review by antimicrobial stewardship pharmacists during August 2021. The protocol went live in September 2021 for inpatient and emergency department sites, with subsequent tracking of the number of doses ordered (stratified by vaccine type and dose number) and number administered. Results From August 3 2021 to March 25 2022, a total of 389 vaccine orders were placed with 302 doses (78%) administered, including 126 Moderna (48 first, 20 second, 15 third, 42 booster, and 1 undesignated), 165 Pfizer/BioNTech (80 first, 24 second, 41 third, 14 booster, and 6 undesignated), and 11 Janssen COVID-19 vaccine doses. Only 18 vaccine orders were placed on patients in the ED, with 14 (78%) of those doses administered. Of the 87 vaccine orders not administered, 6 were placed but not given, and 81 were placed and then discontinued. Conclusion With multidisciplinary collaboration, SARS-CoV2 vaccination can be performed in inpatient and ED settings. However, orders should be monitored for protocol compliance and order discontinuation, as these may increase potential for waste. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

936. Antimicrobial Stewardship Assessments in De-labeling Beta-lactam Allergies

Abstract Background Unnecessary use of broad-spectrum antibiotics due to false antibiotic allergy labels leads to an increase in drug resistant and health care associated infections. Therefore, allergy assessments to de-label patients not truly allergic is an important antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) tool. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a pharmacy-led questionnaire and AMS rounds in improving the accuracy of beta-lactam allergy labels (BLA). Methods AMS piloted BLA de-labeling rounds three times a week from November 1, 2021 to April 1, 2022. Rounds consisted of an infectious disease physician and an AMS pharmacist that reviewed allergy questionnaires conducted by trained pharmacy personnel. The questionnaire was provided to patients 18 years or older with a documented BLA and an admission stay of two or more nights. Patients were excluded if unable to participate or did not have a representative available for interview. The primary outcomes evaluated were: (i) direct de-labelling (ii) future de-labeling upon patient consent (iii) allergy profile changes. The secondary outcomes were potential days of therapy (DOTs) saved for anti-MRSA agents (vancomycin, linezolid, clindamycin) and fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin) and PEN-FAST scores for those with a penicillin-specific allergy. Results 93 of 96 patients interviewed (96.9%) had their allergy profile updated to include type, severity, or timing of reaction. 82 of 96 patients (85.4%) were classified as low-risk allergies in which 11 patients (13.4%) were successfully de-labeled and 18 patients (22.0%) were eligible for de-labeling upon patient consent. The remaining patients were eligible for further interrogation with an oral challenge (Figure 1). Potential DOTs saved were 131 and 67 days for anti-MRSA agents and fluoroquinolones, respectively. Average PEN-FAST scores for those de-labeled and eligible for oral challenge was 0.5 (SD 0.85) and 1.08 (SD 1.20), respectively. Conclusion AMS BLA assessments can decrease the prevalence of false BLA labels and prescribing of unnecessary broad-spectrum agents. PEN-FAST scores less than 2 suggests that allergy assessments help identify patients with low-risk penicillin allergies. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

1753. Impact of a Pharmacist-Driven Home Hospital Antimicrobial Stewardship Program Pilot within a Large Community Health System

Abstract Background Home Hospital (HH) is a unique and rapidly expanding care model that allows patients to receive medical therapy and monitoring through telehealth communication and nursing visits, and there are currently no published studies evaluating antimicrobial stewardship interventions in the HH setting. The goal of this study is to evaluate the impact of a pharmacist-driven antimicrobial stewardship pilot for the HH program. Methods This was a pre-post quasi-experimental study of adult patients enrolled in HH program between January through March in 2021 (control cohort) and in 2022 (intervention cohort), who received antibiotics (oral/intravenous) during their HH admission. Patients on long-term prophylactic antimicrobials, antifungals, external antimicrobials, or mycobacterial treatment were excluded. The antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist performed prospective audit and feedback and provided recommendations to clinicians through the electronic medical record. The primary endpoint was antibiotic use (days of therapy per 1000 patient-days). Secondary endpoints included broad-spectrum antibiotic usage; appropriateness of antibiotic indication, dosing, and duration; compliance with the institution’s outpatient antibiotic reference guide or outpatient intravenous antibiotic therapy (OPAT) monitoring; treatment failure; antibiotic-associated adverse effects; and cost of antibiotic therapy. Results The study included 73 and 127 patients in the control and intervention group, respectively (Figure 1). On average, the pharmacist reviewed 8 eligible patients/day. Interventions were generally well received by HH providers (Figure 2). There was no significant difference in the primary outcome. More inappropriate antibiotic indication was identified in the intervention group (46 [36%] vs. 15 [19%], p=0.01), associated with post-surgical infection prophylaxis after orthopedic procedures (Figure 3). Other secondary outcomes did not vary significantly between the groups. Figure 1:Study inclusion flowchartFigure 2:Intervention breakdownFigure 3:Infection types Conclusion The pilot allows for better understanding of outpatient and HH antibiotic prescribing practices to provide targeted interventions, and suggests the need for additional antimicrobial stewardship involvement to optimize antibiotic therapy in this novel care setting. Disclosures Elizabeth B. Hirsch, PharmD, FCCP, FIDSA, Melinta: Advisor/Consultant|MeMed: Advisor/Consultant|Merck: Advisor/Consultant|Merck: Grant/Research Support.

464: EVALUATION OF ANTIMICROBIAL STEWARDSHIP WHEN USING BIOFIRE FILMARRAY PNEUMONIA PANEL

Introduction: The goal of this study is to determine if the use of the BioFire Pneumonia Panel has led to positive impacts on antimicrobial stewardship in the intensive care units at Charleston Area Medical Center (CAMC). Methods: A total of 111 adult patients who were diagnosed with pneumonia in the intensive care unit (ICU), 59 patients diagnosed with standard of care and 52 patients diagnosed with the BioFire Pneumonia Panel, between September 1, 2018 – February 28, 2019 and September 1, 2019 – February 28, 2020, were included. For data collection, the following information was documented: length of stay, ICU length of stay, antibiotic indication, urine antigen collection and results, sputum culture collection and result, PCR collection and result, antibiotics, days of therapy, infectious disease consult, and if there was a C. diff diagnosis during admission. For each patient, their antimicrobial therapies were placed into one of eight categories regarding appropriate/inappropriateness of the therapy after a specific pathogen was or was not identified. Results: Standard of care showed more appropriate continuations in therapy with no change compared to BioFire PCR (30% vs 11%, p=0.015). Standard of care was less likely to have an appropriate escalation of therapy compared to BioFire PCR (0% vs 7.7%, p=0.03). There was no statistical difference between the two groups in appropriate discontinuation (1.7% vs 3.8%, p=0.48), appropriate de-escalation (27.1% vs 42.3%, p=0.09), inappropriate continuation (13.6% vs 13.5%, p=0.99), inappropriate escalation (8.5% vs 7.7%, p=0.88), or inappropriate de-escalation (13.6% vs 13.5%, p=0.99). The most common antibiotics used in each group were vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam, with the most common pathogen isolated being MRSA. Conclusions: Based on these results, the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel is a great tool that can help guide therapy, but the panel alone does not make an impact. The use of the PCR did not show a significant positive impact on antimicrobial stewardship other than escalating therapy guided toward a specific pathogen. Future directions for the use of the PCR for antimicrobial stewardship is to determine if the help of an antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist in combination with this tool can make a positive impact.