Prospective Audit And Feedback Research Articles

Evaluation of long-term pharmacist-led prospective audit and feedback in antimicrobial stewardship: An 8-year study

Limited research has evaluated the long-term outcomes of prospective audit and feedback (PAF) led by pharmacists. We assessed pharmacist-led PAF processes and outcome measures over 8 years. This study was conducted at a single public hospital in Japan. Between 2014 and 2021, pharmacists conducted weekday PAFs for hospitalized patients and annually evaluated the process and outcome measures. The endpoints included detection of drug-resistant bacteria, drug susceptibility rates, duration of antimicrobial therapy, and proportion of long-term administration. Among inpatients, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus significantly decreased from 50.9% in 2014 to 32.8% in 2021 (P<.001). The susceptibility rate of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to meropenem significantly increased from 91.2% in 2014 to 94.4% in 2021 (P<.001) and levofloxacin increased from 84.9% in 2014 to 89.3% in 2021 (P<.001). Antimicrobial therapy duration did not differ significantly between 2014 and 2016, but decreased significantly from 2017 onwards (P<.001), except in 2018. The number of patients receiving intravenous antimicrobials for >10 days decreased significantly between 2014 and 2021 (P<.001). Long-term continuous PAF interventions by pharmacists contribute to improving and maintaining process and outcome indicators and prevent the spread of drug-resistant bacteria.

Implementation and Perceived Effectiveness of Prospective Audit and Feedback and Preauthorization by US Pediatric Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) promote optimal antimicrobial use to prevent resistance, improve outcomes, and reduce costs. We explored how pediatric ASPs enact prospective audit and feedback (PAF) and preauthorization and characterized programs' perceptions of how these choices affected attainment of stewardship goals. We conducted focus groups with US pediatric ASP practitioners, organized by predominant strategy: PAF, preauthorization, or a hybrid. We asked open-ended questions about organization, staffing, and operation of these strategies, as well as rationales for and perceived advantages and disadvantages of these choices. We used applied thematic analysis to analyze transcripts, organizing coded text into themes and categories. We formulated a conceptual model for how the design and performance of PAF and preauthorization affect stewardship goals and stewards' work experiences. Eighteen physicians and 14 pharmacists from 24 hospitals participated in five focus groups. Stewards described myriad advantages and limitations of PAF and preauthorization that support or detract from stewardship goals. For example, PAF uncovered institutional trends in antibiotic use and fostered relationship building but was time-consuming. Preauthorization efficiently reduced broad-spectrum antimicrobial use, yet offered limited educational opportunities. How these strategies facilitated or impeded appropriate antimicrobial use in turn affected stewards' professional satisfaction, creating a feedback loop that could reinforced positive or negative outcomes. ASPs reported differing emphasis on and implementation of PAF and preauthorization. Each strategy entailed contrasting benefits and trade-offs for steward satisfaction and perceived efficacy, suggesting that a hybrid approach could enable ASPs to maximize strengths of each to mitigate drawbacks of the other.

1217. Game of Trophs: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Management 2.0: Before and After an Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention

Abstract Background IDSA guidance on the treatment of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infections version 2.0 recommends caution in the use of levofloxacin, reserving its use as a second line option for mild infections and using it only as a component of combination therapy for moderate to severe infections. The use of ceftazidime is not recommended. In July 2022 we implemented a multifaceted intervention including suppression of levofloxacin and removal of ceftazidime susceptibility reporting in the electronic medical record, education to ID providers, and prospective audit and feedback (PAF). We herein describe S. maltophilia treatment and outcomes before and after this intervention. Methods This was a retrospective single center cohort study including all patients from whom S. maltophilia was isolated in culture between 7/1/2021 – 6/31/2022 (before) and 7/1/2022 – 3/31/2023 (after). The primary objective was to describe the rates of adherence to the recommended use of levofloxacin and ceftazidime for each period. The secondary objective was to describe clinical outcomes. Results One hundred eleven patients were included in the study. The respiratory tract was the most common culture source. Levofloxacin susceptibility data were visible to providers in 100% and 2% of cultures in the before and after periods, respectively. Ceftazidime susceptibility data were visible to providers in 20% and 7% in the before and after periods, respectively (table 1). ID was consulted more often in the after period (30% before vs 47% after). Adherence to recommended treatment overall was greater in the after period. Fewer patients received levofloxacin monotherapy and no patients received IV ceftazidime in the after period (table 2). S. maltophilia was isolated in subsequent cultures in 12% and 13% of patients and levofloxacin resistance developed in 3% and 2% of isolates during the before and after periods respectively (table 3). Conclusion A stewardship intervention including changes in susceptibility reporting, education, and PAF was associated with an increase in the percentage of patients receiving appropriate therapy. Clinical outcomes did not change. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Difference between days of therapy and days of antibiotic spectrum coverage in an inpatient antimicrobial stewardship program: Vector autoregressive models for time-series analysis.

The days of therapy (DOT) metric, used to estimate antimicrobial consumption, has some limitations. Days of antibiotic spectrum coverage (DASC), a novel metric, overcomes these limitations. We examined the difference between these 2 metrics of inpatient intravenous antimicrobial consumption in assessing antimicrobial stewardship efficacy and antimicrobial resistance using vector autoregressive (VAR) models with time-series analysis. Differences between DOT and DASC were investigated at a tertiary-care center over 8 years using VAR models with 3 variables in the following order: (1) the monthly proportion of prospective audit and feedback (PAF) acceptance as an index of antimicrobial stewardship efficacy; (2) monthly DOT and DASC adjusted by 1,000 days present as indices of antimicrobial consumption; and (3) the monthly incidence of 5 organisms as an index of antimicrobial resistance. The Granger causality test, which evaluates whether incorporating lagged variables can help predict other variables, showed that PAF activity contributed to DOT and DASC, which, in turn, contributed to the incidence of drug-resistant P. aeruginosa. Notably, only DASC helped predict the incidence of drug-resistant Enterobacterales. Another VAR analysis demonstrated that a high proportion of PAF acceptance was accompanied by decreased DASC in a given month, whereas increased DASC was accompanied by an increased incidence of drug-resistant Enterobacterales, unlike with DOT. The VAR models of PAF activity, antimicrobial consumption, and antimicrobial resistance suggested that DASC may more accurately reflect the impact of PAF on antimicrobial consumption and be superior to DOT for predicting the incidence of drug-resistant Enterobacterales.

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

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

Impact of carbapenem-targeted antimicrobial stewardship interventions: an interrupted time-series analysis

The development of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacilli (CR-GNB) is largely favoured by indiscriminate and prolonged carbapenem use, which is a significant contributing factor. To evaluate the impact of two carbapenem antibiotic stewardship programme interventions on both carbapenem prescriptions and the clinical isolation rates of CR-GNBs, using interrupted time-series analysis. A time-series analysis was performed using data for carbapenem usage from a tertiary hospital in South Korea from January 2017 to July 2022. Two carbapenem antibiotic stewardship programme interventions were implemented sequentially: (i) a prospective audit and feedback (PAF) from November 2018 to April 2020 (intervention 1), and (ii) preauthorization from May 2020 to August 2020 (intervention 2). Monthly carbapenem usage and incidence of CR-GNB before and after each intervention were compared using an autoregressive integrated moving average model. Implementation of PAF resulted in a significant reduction in carbapenem consumption, followed by an additional decrease after the preauthorization was implemented. The incidence of carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae increased after intervention 1, but there was a significant change from an increasing trend to a stationary trend after intervention 2. The incidence of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, which had increased during the baseline period, became stationary after intervention 1. A significant decrease was observed in the incidence of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii during the implementation of intervention 1 and 2. This study emphasizes the importance of adopting comprehensive antibiotic management and rigorous infection control to prevent infections caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Indication-driven order entry decreases stewardship and pharmacist interventions.

Indication-driven order entry (IDOE) was implemented at our pediatric institution for cefazolin, piperacillin-tazobactam, and meropenem; the 3 most intervened upon antibiotics during prospective audit and feedback (PAF) by the antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP). IDOE was associated with a significant reduction in both ASP PAF recommendations and clinical pharmacist interventions.

Improving the Efficiency of Antimicrobial Stewardship Action in Acute Care Facilities.

Inpatient antimicrobial stewardship (AS) programs are quality improvement programs tasked with improving antibiotic practices by augmenting frontline providers' antibiotic prescription. Prospective audit and feedback (PAF) and preauthorization (PRA) are essential activities in the hospital that can be resource intensive for AS teams. Improving efficiency in AS activities is needed when there are limited resources or when programs are looking to expand tasks beyond PAF and PRA, such as broad education or guideline development. Guidance on the creation and maintenance of alerts for the purpose of PAF reviews, modifications of antibiotic restrictions for PRA polices, and overall initiative prioritization strategies are reviewed. In addition, daily prioritization tools, such as the tiered approach, scoring systems, and regression modeling, are available for stewards to prioritize their daily workflow. Using these tools and guidance, AS programs can be productive and impactful in the face of resource limitation or competing priorities in the hospital.

Antifungal stewardship in practice: Insights from a prospective audit and feedback program.

To identify characteristics of antifungal prospective audit and feedback (PAF) and to compare rates of PAF recommendation and acceptance between antifungal and antibiotic agents. Retrospective cohort study of antifungal and antibiotic audits by a children's hospital antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) from November 1, 2020, to October 31, 2022. Antimicrobial audit data were retrieved from the ASP data warehouse. We characterized antifungal PAF using descriptive statistics. We then compared the overall rates of PAF recommendation and recommendation acceptance between antifungals and antibiotics. We also compared the differences in antifungal and antibiotic PAF recommendation and acceptance rates across various factors, including infectious problem, medical service, and recommendation type. Of 10,402 antimicrobial audits identified during the study period, 8,599 (83%) were for antibiotics and 1,803 (17%) were for antifungals. The highest antifungal recommendation rates were for liposomal amphotericin B, antifungals used for sepsis or respiratory tract infection, and antifungals prescribed in the cardiovascular intensive care unit. The rate of PAF recommendation was higher for antibiotics than for antifungals (29% vs 21%; P < .001); however, the rates of recommendation acceptance were similar. Recommendations to discontinue or for medication monitoring were more common for antifungals. Our analysis of antifungal PAF identified key opportunities to improve antifungal use, including the optimized use of specific agents and targeted use by certain medical services. Moreover, antifungal PAF, despite identifying fewer recommendations compared to antibiotic PAF, were associated with similarly high rates of acceptance, highlighting a promising opportunity for antifungal stewardship.

Initial blood culture collection practices and the associated factors upon continued empiric piperacillin-tazobactam usage

Background: Approaches to the prescription behavior of broad-spectrum antibiotics, including preauthorization and prospective audit and feedback (PAF), are a focus of antimicrobial stewardship (ASP). However, preprescription behavior, such as blood-culture collection before empiric prescription, is understudied and merits more attention given its influence on the usage of broad-spectrum antibiotics. At the University of Tokyo Hospital, carbapenems are subject to PAF, which has resulted in a compensatory increase in piperacillin-tazobactam use. To evaluate the inherent preprescription behavior associated with a broad-spectrum antibiotic, we investigated the initial blood-culture collection practices upon hospitalization in patients who were continued on empiric piperacillin-tazobactam. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted at the University of Tokyo Hospital, a tertiary-care hospital in Tokyo, Japan. Patients who were administered piperacillin-tazobactam on the day of hospitalization between April 2016 and December 2017 were included. Patients aged &lt;=18 years and/or patients who discontinued piperacillin-tazobactam within two days were excluded. Only 1 admission per patient was kept for analysis. The medical records of 250 randomly selected patients were reviewed to obtain data on demographics, blood-culture collection, severity, specialties, and risk factors for multidrug-resistant organisms. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with blood-culture collection. Results: In total, 960 discrete patients fulfilled the study criteria. Of the randomly selected 250 patients, blood cultures were collected from 162 patients (64.8%), and microbial growth was observed in 30 cases (18.5%). Enterobacterales and anaerobes accounted for 73.3% of the microbial population. Gastroenterologists (94, 37.6%) and general surgeons (52, 20.8%) were the most common prescribers. Hepatobiliary (83, 33.2%), respiratory (58, 23.2%), and intra-abdominal infections (IAI; 34, 13.6%) were the major suspected diagnoses. Blood-culture collection was associated with the use of immunosuppressive agents (OR, 3.48; 95% CI, 1.49–8.99), intrabdominal infection (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12–0.67), systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria ≥ 2 (OR, 4.50; 95% CI, 2.25–9.42), and surgical specialty (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.18–0.60). Conclusions: More than one-third of patients requiring hospitalization and empiric piperacillin-tazobactam did not undergo blood-culture collection. The finding that blood cultures were less likely to be obtained in patients with suspected IAI requiring hospitalization and by surgical specialties raises a concern regarding suboptimal evaluation. Further assessment of the appropriateness of blood-culture collection in the setting of broad-spectrum antibiotic prescription and tailored promotion of blood-culture collection to surgical specialties may be warranted.Disclosures: S.K.: The author (during graduate school (PhD) was involved in antiviral research relevant to a neglected tropical disease and favipiravir. During this graduate school research, favipiravir was provided by FUJIFILM Toyama Chemical Co. Ltd

Impact of a prospective audit and feedback antimicrobial stewardship programme on carbapenem consumption: a quasi-experimental study (IPANEMA study).

To test the hypothesis that a prospective audit and feedback (PAF) intervention combined with electronic tools will reduce carbapenem use without negatively affecting patient outcomes. A quasi-experimental, pre-intervention and intervention study was performed conducted in the urology department of a university hospital. The intervention involved implementing a PAF within an antimicrobial stewardship programme with the aid of an electronic tool. The primary outcome was carbapenem use, assessed by DDD/100 patient-days (PD). Secondary outcomes included evaluating the effect of the intervention on overall antibiotic use measured by DDD/100 PD and days of therapy (DOT)/100 PD, as well as patient safety. The chi-squared test or t-test was used, and the Poisson model was employed to assess the association between the intervention and outcomes. A 9% decrease in carbapenem DDD/100 PD was observed during the intervention period (IR = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.85-0.97, P = 0.007). The proportion of patients who received carbapenem treatment dropped from 17.8% to 16.5% [incidence ratio (IR) = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.86-2.05, P = 0.31]. Carbapenem DOT/100 PD decreased from 12.4 to 11.0 (IR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.83-0.94, P < 0.001). Overall antibiotic DDD/100 PD decreased by 3% (IR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.94-0.99, P = 0.001) and DOT/100 PD by 7% (IR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.91-0.95, P < 0.001). The incidence of infections caused by carbapenemase-producing microorganisms, Enterococcus faecium bacteraemia and Clostridioides difficile-associated diarrhoea episodes was similar in the pre-intervention and intervention periods. ESBL incidence rate decreased, but the differences were not statistically significant (3.94/1000 PD versus 2.88/1000 PD, P = 0.111). Length of hospital stay, in-hospital all-cause mortality, and 30 day readmission incidence remained unchanged. The implementation of PAF combined with an electronic tool was an effective and safe intervention for reducing carbapenem use.

Evaluating a pilot, structured, face-to-face, antimicrobial stewardship, prospective audit-and-feedback program in emergency general surgery service in a community hospital.

Prospective audit and feedback (PAF) is an established practice in critical care settings but not in surgical populations. We pilot-tested a structured face-to-face PAF program for our acute-care surgery (ACS) service. This was a mixed-methods study. For the quantitative analysis, the structured PAF period was from August 1, 2017, to April 30, 2019. The ad hoc PAF period was from May 1, 2019, to January 31, 2021. Interrupted time-series segmented negative binomial regression analysis was used to evaluate change in antimicrobial usage measured in days of therapy per 1,000 patient days for all systemic and targeted antimicrobials. Secondary outcomes included C. difficile infections, length of stay and readmission within 30 days. Each secondary outcome was analyzed using a logistic regression or negative binomial regression model. For the qualitative analyses, all ACS surgeons and trainees from November 23, 2015, to April 30, 2019, were invited to participate in an email-based anonymous survey developed using implementation science principles. Responses were measured using counts. In total, 776 ACS patients were included in the structured PAF period and 783 patients were included in the in ad hoc PAF period. No significant changes in level or trend for antimicrobial usage were detected for all and targeted antimicrobials. Similarly, no significant differences were detected for secondary outcomes. The survey response rate was 25% (n = 10). Moreover, 50% agreed that PAF provided them with skills to use antimicrobials more judiciously, and 80% agreed that PAF improved the quality of antimicrobial treatment for their patients. Structured PAF showed clinical outcomes similar to ad hoc PAF. Structured PAF was well received and was perceived as beneficial by surgical staff.

1772. Evaluating the Impact of a Pilot Structured Antimicrobial Stewardship Prospective Audit and Feedback Program in Emergency General Surgery in a Community Hospital

Abstract Background The benefits of prospective audit and feedback (PAF) are established in critical care settings but not in the surgical population. We piloted once-weekly structured face-to-face PAF with the Acute Care Surgery (ACS) Service surgeon(s) and compared outcomes to usual care which comprised of ad-hoc PAF on targeted antimicrobials once or twice weekly with recommendations made to ACS surgeon(s) using written or verbal methods. Methods Interrupted time series segmented negative binomial regression analysis was used to evaluate the change in the primary outcome of antimicrobial usage measured in Days of Therapy/1000 patient days (DOT/1000-PD) for all systemic and targeted antimicrobials ordered by the ACS team. The structured PAF period was from August 1, 2017- April 30, 2019 while the ad-hoc PAF period was from May 1, 2019-January 31, 2021. Targeted antimicrobials included 3rd generation cephalosporins, piperacillin/tazobactam, carbapenems and clindamycin. Secondary outcomes included C. difficile infections, length of stay and readmission within 30 days. The first two secondary outcomes were analyzed using a logistic regression model while a negative binomial regression model was used to evaluate readmission within 30 days. Results There were 776 ACS patients in the structured PAF period with 783 patients in the ad-hoc PAF period. = No significant changes in level or trend of the primary outcome of DOT/1000-PD in both periods was found for all and targeted antimicrobials. However, there was a trend to small reduction in DOT/1000-PD of 0.9% per month (rate ratio 1.0, CI 0.99-1.02) for all antimicrobials and 0.3% per month (rate ratio 1.0, CI 0.98-1.03) for targeted antimicrobials in the ad-hoc PAF period. Similarly, there were no significant differences with respect to any of the secondary outcomes. There was a trend of 10% increase in length of stay (rate ratio 1.07, CI 0.98-1.17) and 13% reduction in 30-day readmission (OR 0.87, CI 0.56-1.35) in the ad-hoc PAF period. Rates by Time Using Negative Binomial Models for All and Targeted Antimicrobials Conclusion Structured PAF showed similar clinical outcomes to ad-hoc PAF for the Acute Care Surgery Service at our institution. Other antimicrobial stewardship interventions can be explored to better support judicious antimicrobial use in General Surgery. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

930. Weakening the waves: Impact of a syndrome-based antimicrobial stewardship intervention during COVID-19

Abstract Background Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) from SARS-CoV-2 are difficult to distinguish from other viral or bacterial etiologies. This has led to increased antimicrobial use (AU) during the pandemic and concerns for concomitant rise in antimicrobial resistance (AMR). It is crucial for antimicrobial stewardship (ASP) to develop strategies to mitigate excess AU and curve AMR. We leveraged a syndrome-based ASP intervention targeting LRTIs and the use of anti-Pseudomonal beta lactams (APBL) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We incorporated COVID-19 elements into a syndrome-based prospective audit and feedback (PAF) at an urban community hospital. Elements included EMR order sets (Figure 1) that discouraged routine AU for COVID-19 and PAF targeting LRTIs and COVID-19 therapies. Empiric selection discouraging APBL was incorporated during the first COVID-19 wave. Order sets and PAF were then modified to reflect novel COVID-19 therapeutics and AU was strongly discouraged in subsequent waves. Data on AU and AMR from 2018-2022 was reviewed. Figure 1.Electronic medical records COVID-19 antimicrobial order set Results Average quarterly AU increased during the first pandemic year by 8.7%, from 359.5 to 391 days of therapy per 1000 patient days (DOT/1000), with peaks 22.5% above the pre-pandemic average during COVID-19 surges. AU increased each COVID-19 surge, with smaller peaks each subsequent wave. DOT/1000 declined 29% from the first wave to the Omicron wave. AU decreased the second year to 318, an 18.6% decrease from the first pandemic year. Ceftriaxone use increased during surges, reflecting our LRTI guidelines (Figure 2). Peaks declined each subsequent wave, from a peak of 239 in the first wave to 75 during Omicron, a 68% decrease. The average monthly DOT/1000 for APBL decreased from 73.51 to 63.21 (Figure 3). Incidence rate of ESBL and CRE initially rose and then declined (Figure 4). Figure 2.Antimicrobial use (DOT/1000) before and during the COVID-19 pandemicFigure 4.Antipseudomonal beta lactam use before and during the COVID-19 pandemic Figure 5. Incidence of multidrug resistance organisms before and during the COVID-19 pandemic Conclusion ASP successfully incorporated COVID-19 elements and steered AU during the pandemic. Though total AU increased, APBL use declined and AU peaks decreased with each COVID-19 wave, reflecting adherence with ASP recommendations. AMR increased during the first year and subsequently declined. ASP can play a vital role guiding AU during respiratory pandemics. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

931. All Hands on Deck: Incorporation of Infectious Diseases Pharmacy Trainees in a Community Hospital Antimicrobial Stewardship Program

Abstract Background Community hospitals may have challenges implementing core elements of antimicrobial stewardship (ASP) due to lack of ID trained pharmacists (PharmD). The COVID-19 pandemic compounded these challenges with constrained resources and staffing. The pandemic also saw a rise in antimicrobial use (AU) and brought forth novel therapeutics, thus increasing the need for robust ASP. We established a community ASP rotation for ID PharmD fellows during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A community ASP rotation was established at a 151-bed community hospital. ID PharmD trainees rotated with the ID clinician and were responsible for daily prospective audit and feedback (PAF) under close supervision of the ID clinician. Fellows were involved in pandemic response, including protocol development and restrictions for COVID-19 therapeutics. Results A community ASP rotation was successfully implemented (Figure 1). For PAF activities, the most common indications were CAP (19%), HAP (3%), IAI (24%), SSTI (22%) and UTI (19%). Average DOT/1000 was 340.4 per quarter with increases each COVID-19 surge (Figure 2). Empiric AU was protocol adherent 77% of the time and 23% required ASP changes. ASP Interventions included change to protocol (23%), bug drug mismatch (2%), de-escalation (15%), duration change (25%), IV to PO (16%), discontinuation (19%). Fellows successfully developed protocols and managed restrictions for remdesivir, baricitinib, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies in coordination with the ID clinician and assisted in mass vaccination campaign protocols. Conclusion A community ASP rotation was successfully established and sustained during COVID-19. Fellows received hands on experience and performed PAF under close supervision. The program enhanced ID clinician capabilities while leveraging PharmD expertise at a time when staffing and resources were stretched thin. The rotation provided firsthand experience in pandemic preparedness and response. This educational opportunity assisted in maintaining a strong ASP in a community hospital setting while preparing trainees with experiences to assist them throughout their future careers. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

Use of leading practices in US hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs.

To determine the proportion of hospitals that implemented 6 leading practices in their antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs). Design: Cross-sectional observational survey. Acute-care hospitals. ASP leaders. Advance letters and electronic questionnaires were initiated February 2020. Primary outcomes were percentage of hospitals that (1) implemented facility-specific treatment guidelines (FSTG); (2) performed interactive prospective audit and feedback (PAF) either face-to-face or by telephone; (3) optimized diagnostic testing; (4) measured antibiotic utilization; (5) measured C. difficile infection (CDI); and (6) measured adherence to FSTGs. Of 948 hospitals invited, 288 (30.4%) completed the questionnaire. Among them, 82 (28.5%) had <99 beds, 162 (56.3%) had 100-399 beds, and 44 (15.2%) had ≥400+ beds. Also, 230 (79.9%) were healthcare system members. Moreover, 161 hospitals (54.8%) reported implementing FSTGs; 214 (72.4%) performed interactive PAF; 105 (34.9%) implemented procedures to optimize diagnostic testing; 235 (79.8%) measured antibiotic utilization; 258 (88.2%) measured CDI; and 110 (37.1%) measured FSTG adherence. Small hospitals performed less interactive PAF (61.0%; P = .0018). Small and nonsystem hospitals were less likely to optimize diagnostic testing: 25.2% (P = .030) and 21.0% (P = .0077), respectively. Small hospitals were less likely to measure antibiotic utilization (67.8%; P = .0010) and CDI (80.3%; P = .0038). Nonsystem hospitals were less likely to implement FSTGs (34.3%; P < .001). Significant variation exists in the adoption of ASP leading practices. A minority of hospitals have taken action to optimize diagnostic testing and measure adherence to FSTGs. Additional efforts are needed to expand adoption of leading practices across all acute-care hospitals with the greatest need in smaller hospitals.

Prospective audit and feedback implementation by a multidisciplinary antimicrobial stewardship team shortens the time to de-escalation of anti-MRSA agents.

Prospective audit and feedback (PAF) is considered an effective procedure for appropriate antibiotic use. However, its effect on the time to de-escalation is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the effect of daily PAF implementation, focusing on the time to de-escalation of anti-methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) agents as an outcome measure. To this end, a single-center, retrospective, quasi-experimental study including patients treated with intravenous anti-MRSA agents during pre-PAF (April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015) and post-PAF (April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2016) periods was conducted. The time to de-escalation was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and Cox proportional hazard analysis was performed to assess the effect of daily PAF implementation on the time to de-escalation. Interrupted time series analysis was used to evaluate the relationship between daily PAF implementation and anti-MRSA agent utilization data converted to defined daily dose (DDD) and days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 patient days. The median time to de-escalation was significantly shorter in the post-PAF period than in the pre-PAF period (6 days vs. 7 days, P < 0.001). According to multivariate analysis, PAF implementation was independently associated with a shorter time to de-escalation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.35). There were no significant differences in hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and length of stay between the two periods. Interrupted time series analysis showed significant reductions in the trends of DDD (trend change, –0.65; 95% CI, –1.20 to –0.11) and DOT (trend change, –0.74; 95% CI, –1.33 to –0.15) between the pre-PAF and post-PAF periods. Daily PAF implementation for patients treated with intravenous anti-MRSA agents led to a shorter time to de-escalation and lower consumption of anti-MRSA agents without worsening the clinically important outcomes.

Improving patient outcomes by promoting antimicrobial stewardship for patients with positive blood cultures: Investigation of patients with gram negative bacterium.

In this study, changes in patient outcomes were analysed to evaluate the effects of prospective audit and feedback (PAF), which was promoted under a new system of antimicrobial stewardship (AS), in patients with gram-negative rod (GNR)-positive blood cultures. This study included patients with positive blood cultures treated at Kagawa University Hospital between 2019 and 2020. The effects of PAF, as promoted in 2020 and performed within a few days of treatment initiation, were examined in terms of patient prognosis and estimated cost of extra hospital stay associated with GNR infection. As AS activities under the new system, proposals were made for targeted therapy based on susceptibility results and for the duration of antimicrobial therapy, escalation and dose increases, and imaging evaluation. Between 2019 and 2020, there was no difference in the rate of de-escalation in the form of switching to a narrower-spectrum intravenous antimicrobial, the rate of image inspection, but the rate of switching to oral therapy after receiving culture results increased from 19.7% to 31.3%, the rate of sensitivity-based treatment increased from 76.4% to 92.2%. Regarding patient outcomes, the 90-day mortality rate and the duration of hospital stay were similar between the groups. The rate of recurrent bloodstream infections decreased from 8.7% to 0.9%. Most of the changes in the indicators related to patient outcomes analysed in this study suggest that the increased use of PAF in AS activities improved patient outcomes.

Prospective audit and feedback of Clostridioides difficile PCR at the time of ordering increases appropriateness of testing

Background: Over-testing for Clostridioides difficile infection outside acute diarrheal illness without a clear alternative cause can lead to inappropriate diagnosis and treatment with antibiotic therapy. Preanalytical interventions such as education, order restriction, and electronic order assistance are common but are limited in effectiveness. As an alternative approach, our antibiotic stewardship program (ASP) implemented prospective audit and feedback (PAF) on C. difficile PCR orders to reduce inappropriate testing.Methods: The study was conducted at a 399-bed, tertiary-care, Veterans’ Affairs Medical Center and included adult inpatients and outpatients for whom C. difficile PCR testing was ordered. In the preintervention period from June through September 2019, the ASP was alerted to C. difficile PCR tests and collected data but did not intervene. From October 2019 to January 2020, the ASP performed real-time PAF at the time of ordering. Appropriateness of testing was determined based on whether there was a negative result in the prior 7 days and a 3-step review of clinical factors (Fig. 1). When possible, a direct conversation took place with the ordering provider. If not possible, a general note delineating appropriate clinical criteria for testing was generated. No PAF was done outside standard hours. The ASP recommended cancelling tests deemed inappropriate. Monthly test rates during the pre- and postintervention periods were compared using the Student t test with α = .05, and test appropriateness was compared using the χ2 test. All analyses were conducted using Microsoft Excel software. Results: During the preintervention period, a total of 418 tests were ordered (104.5 per month). This number decreased to 276 (69 per month) during the intervention period. (p Conclusions: Direct PAF at the time of C. difficile PCR ordering may increase test appropriateness and is associated with a reduction in overall testing, primarily by reducing the number of tests that are considered not appropriate on clinical grounds. PAF is effective but requires significant time investment by ASP staff and may not be a sustainable intervention over time.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Efficacy and safety of antimicrobial stewardship prospective audit and feedback in patients hospitalized with COVID-19: A protocol for a pragmatic clinical trial

The use of broad-spectrum antibiotics is widespread in patients with COVID-19 despite a low prevalence of bacterial co-infection, raising concerns for the accelerated development of antimicrobial resistance. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is vital but there are limited randomized clinical trial data supporting AMS interventions such as prospective audit and feedback (PAF). High quality data to demonstrate safety and efficacy of AMS PAF in hospitalized COVID-19 patients are needed. This is a prospective, multi-center, non-inferiority, pragmatic randomized clinical trial evaluating AMS PAF intervention plus standard of care (SOC) versus SOC alone. We include patients with microbiologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospital admission for severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Eligible ward beds and critical care unit beds will be randomized prior to study commencement at each participating site by computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by intensive care unit versus conventional ward in a 1:1 fashion. PAF intervention consists of real time review of antibacterial prescriptions and immediate written and verbal feedback to attending teams, performed by site-based AMS teams comprised of an AMS pharmacist and physician. The primary outcome is clinical status at post-admission day 15 measured using a 7-point ordinal scale. Patients will be followed for secondary outcomes out to 30 days. A total of 530 patients are needed to show a statistically significant non-inferiority, with 80% power and 2.5% one-sided alpha assuming standard deviation of 2 and the non-inferiority margin of 0.5. This study protocol presents a pragmatic clinical trial design with small unit cluster randomization for AMS intervention in hospitalized COVID-19 that will provide high-level evidence and may be adopted in other clinical situations. This study is being performed at the University of Alberta and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04896866) on May 17, 2021.