Mentored Research Training Research Articles

139 Adapting Center for Improvement of Mentored Experiences in Research (CIMER) Mentor Training for Clinical Research Professionals: A Process Description

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Learn how the National Organization of Research Development Professionals (NORDP) adapted the Center for Improvement of Mentored Experiences in Research (CIMER) NIH-funded evidenced-based mentor training curriculum for research development professionals and how the curriculum will be further adapted for clinical research professionals. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: NORDP pioneered the adaptation of the CIMER curriculum for professional research staff. In addition to revamping the case studies and ensuring the curriculum was appropriately staff-centric, the NORDP team developed best practices for adapting the curriculum. This approach included four phases: (1) developing expertise in mentor training, (2) adapting curriculum for staff, (3) creating role-specific case studies, and (4) integrating mentor training with institutional or professional association-based mentoring programs. In collaboration with CIMER and units at the University of Minnesota (UMN), the mentor training model for research development will be further adapted for clinical research staff, i.e. coordinators, regulators, facilitators. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: This poster will discuss the preliminary work of adapting the curriculum for clinical research professionals by the UMN’s Departments of Family Medicine and Community Health and Clinical and Translational Science Institute’s Translational Workforce Development team. The anticipated short to mid-term outcomes of this work include: (1) improved research professionals mentoring knowledge and skills, (2) diversity addressed across research roles, (3) reduced staff turnover and associated costs, (4) increased staff job satisfaction and moral, and (5) research culture changed to value mentoring excellence across the academic enterprise. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Research mentoring has traditionally been focused on faculty and trainees. Given the unique skill sets and increasing complexity of research staff roles, mentoring can increase job satisfaction and reduce the overall costs related to turnover, i.e. research productivity, loss of institutional knowledge, hiring costs, etc.

Emergency medicine residency pathways for MD/PhD trainees: A national cross-sectional study of physician-scientist training programs.

Combined clinical and research training is common in residency programs outside emergency medicine (EM), and these pathways are particularly valuable for combined MD/PhD graduates planning to pursue a career as a physician-scientist. However, EM departments may not know what resources to provide these trainees during residency to create research-focused, productive, future faculty, and trainees may not know which programs support their goal of becoming a physician-scientist in EM. The objective of this study was to describe research training and resources available to MD/PhD graduates in EM residency training with a focus on dedicated research pathways. This study was a cross-sectional inventory conducted through an electronic survey of EM residency program directors. We sought to identify dedicated MD/PhD research training pathways, with a focus on both resources and training priorities. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize survey responses. We collected 192 survey responses (69.6% response rate). Among respondents, 41 programs (21.4%) offered a research pathway/track, 52 (27.4%) offered a research fellowship, 22 (11.5%) offered both a residency research pathway/track and a research fellowship, and two (1.0%) offered a dedicated EM physician-scientist training pathway. Most programs considered research a priority and were enthusiastic about interviewing applicants planning a research career, but recruitment of physician-scientist applicants was not generally prioritized. Some EM residency programs offer combined clinical and mentored research training for prospective physician-scientists, and nearly all residency programs considered research important. Future work will focus on improving the EM physician-scientist pipeline by optimizing pathways available to trainees during residency and fellowship.

73. Increasing High School Students’ Researcher Identity and Research Interest Through Myhealth: A Year-Long Mentored Research Training Program

73. Increasing High School Students’ Researcher Identity and Research Interest Through Myhealth: A Year-Long Mentored Research Training Program

Mentoring up for early career investigators: Empowering mentees to proactively engage in their mentoring relationships.

Effective mentorship is recognized as critical for the professional development of clinical and translational investigators. Evidence-based mentorship training prompted the development of training for mentees at early career stages who are navigating both mentor and mentee roles. The curriculum titled, Mentoring Up for Early Career Investigators, recognizes the importance of building mentee self-efficacy across proactive mentorship skills and competencies. Mentoring Up for Early Career Investigators curriculum is based on the research mentor training approach in Entering Mentoring. Pilot implementations of Mentoring Up at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and University of Pennsylvania had positive training outcomes for KL2 Scholars. Subsequently, Mentoring Up was implemented and evaluated at several other institutions. For 26 implementations longer than 4 hours, data were collected on trainee demographics, satisfaction with training, skill gains across mentorship competencies, and the intent to change mentoring behaviors following training. 88% of participants rated the mentee training as valuable. Significant skill gains were reported across all mentorship competencies following training. 77% reported specific plans to change or augment their mentoring behaviors because of the training. The majority aligned with mentorship skill competencies (aligning expectations, effective communications) or mentoring up strategies (voicing needs, setting boundaries, communicating proactively). Mentoring Up training is effective in advancing mentee skills and promoting strategies to be more proactive in getting their mentoring needs met. Mentoring Up offers an expansion to the suite of mentorship education and resources to support the career advancement of all in the translational science workforce.

Training in the art and science of facilitation to scale research mentor training in low and middle income countries

Advancing biomedical research in low and middle income countries (LMICs) to expand the capacity for LMICs to integrate biomedical research into their health care systems and education has been the focus of many programs in global health over the past two decades. Central to the success of these programs is effective research mentoring, characterized by academic, career and psychosocial support through culturally appropriate practices. Research mentoring is a learned skill, developed through training, mutual discussions, practice and feedback. The majority of extant training programs are designed and delivered by US partners, so the next stage in building capacity is to train facilitators within the LMIC partner institutions to contextualize and advance mentoring specifically within their cultural and institutional norms by co-developing, delivering and evaluating semi-annual research mentoring training. To this end, we describe the development, delivery and outcome evaluation of a 5-week course in the art and skill of facilitation. Care was taken to explicitly distinguish between concepts of “teaching” and “facilitation,” since “teaching” is closely connected to a transmission or banking model of education, which is characterized by “top-down,” hierarchical relationship. The course discussed power and positionality, themes that resonate with partners in Nigeria and Tanzania. These themes provided unique entry into deeper conversations core to advancing mentoring practice away from the traditional dyadic power structure that remains from colonization. Evaluation findings indicate significant advances in awareness of differences between teaching and facilitating, increased confidence in facilitation skills, especially in the area of structured planning and organization, as well as improved communication and interpersonal skills. All respondents felt that students in Nigeria and Tanzania would respond well to the facilitation approach conveyed during the course and they found value in participating in the course as a cohort.

Recommendations for Writing a National Institutes of Health Individual Predoctoral Fellowship (F31) Training Grant in Dissemination and Implementation Science.

Early career training is an essential component of building the future of dissemination and implementation (D&I) science. The United States National Institutes of Health Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) Individual Predoctoral Fellowship (F31) award offers a mechanism for doctoral students to acquire specialized D&I training and mentorship, to pursue independent research in D&I science, and to receive financial support for their graduate studies. Due to scarce resources on preparing early career grant proposals focused on D&I science, this commentary offers guidance to doctoral students on developing a successful application for a specific type of early career proposal - the NIH F31 mechanism. We offer strategies for the research and training components based on themes identified across six funded F31 grant applications and on our experiences in the application process (grants funded from 2019-2020). We are from diverse fields (clinical psychology, school psychology, public health, and epidemiology) with varied research foci (global health, mental health, and infectious diseases). Applications were funded on both the F31 and F31-Diversity mechanisms. Funded F31 research projects included dissemination strategies, treatment adaptions, piloting new methods, and pre-implementation inquiry. Common training goals included developing content expertise in D&I science, understanding specific D&I science methodologies, learning strategies for working with community partners, and enhancing knowledge of analytic methods. D&I training activities included journal clubs, meeting with consultants, attending D&I science trainings, and attending conferences. Mentored research training is essential for learning D&I science methods and developing research-practice partnerships as students.

Welcoming a New Anesthesiology Editor: Peter Nagele, M.D., M.Sc.

Special Announcement| June 2023 Welcoming a New Anesthesiology Editor: Peter Nagele, M.D., M.Sc. Anesthesiology June 2023, Vol. 138, 584. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000004576 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Cite Icon Cite Get Permissions Search Site Citation Welcoming a New Anesthesiology Editor: Peter Nagele, M.D., M.Sc.. Anesthesiology 2023; 138:584 doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000004576 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll PublicationsAnesthesiology Search Advanced Search Topics: abdominal aortic aneurysm, american academy of arts and sciences, anesthesia for trauma procedures, arts, austria, awards and prizes, cardiac event, clinical method training, genetic epidemiology, major depressive disorder Peter Nagele, M.D., M.Sc., is the newest editor for Anesthesiology. Dr. Nagele is Professor of Anesthesiology at the University of Chicago with a secondary appointment in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences. He completed his M.D. at University of Innsbruck, Austria, and his clinical training at the Vienna General Hospital (AKH), Medical University of Vienna, Austria, and obtained M.Sc. degrees in both Clinical Investigation and Genetic Epidemiology at Washington University in St. Louis. His clinical interests are in civilian and military trauma anesthesia and perioperative medicine. He is a National Institutes of Health–funded investigator with an active research program in exploring the use of nitrous oxide in the treatment of major depression and studying cardiac events after noncardiac surgery. Nagele is a former recipient of a Foundation for Anesthesia Education and Research (FAER)–mentored research training grant (2008) and the Presidential Scholar Award from the American Society of Anesthesiologists... You do not currently have access to this content.

A mentored hands-on training model for scaling up implementation and intervention research in India: “connecting the dots”

Despite the high burden of mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), less than 25% of those in need have access to appropriate services, in part due to a scarcity of locally relevant, evidence-based interventions and models of care. To address this gap, researchers from India and the United States and the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) collaboratively developed a “Grantathon” model to provide mentored research training to 24 new principal investigators (PIs). This included a week-long didactic training, a customized web-based data entry/analysis system and a National Coordination Unit (NCU) to support PIs and track process objectives. Outcome objectives were assessed via scholarly output including publications, awards received and subsequent grants that were leveraged. Multiple mentorship strategies including collaborative problem-solving approaches were used to foster single-centre and multicentre research. Flexible, approachable and engaged support from mentors helped PIs overcome research barriers, and the NCU addressed local policy and day-to-day challenges through informal monthly review meetings. Bi-annual formal review presentations by all PIs continued through the COVID-19 pandemic, enabling interim results reporting and scientific review, also serving to reinforce accountability. To date, more than 33 publications, 47 scientific presentations, 12 awards, two measurement tools, five intervention manuals and eight research grants have been generated in an open-access environment. The Grantathon is a successful model for building research capacity and improving mental health research in India that could be adopted for use in other LMICs.

Quality of Life After Critical Illness.

1 Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA. 2 Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 3 Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA. *See also p. 632. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of others. Support was provided solely from institutional sources. Dr. Arriaga is the recipient of: 1) a mentored research training grant from the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation (APSF) and the Foundation for Anesthesia Education and Research (FAER) and 2) a Career Development Award from the Center for Diversity and Inclusion of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital. He is also a member of the Patient Safety Editorial Board for the American Society of Anesthesiologists and Question Editor/Examiner for the American Board of Anesthesiology, where he receives a stipend for work that is otherwise done in a volunteer capacity. He received funding from the American Society of Anesthesiologists Patient Safety Editorial Board, the American Board of Anesthesiology, the Minority Faculty Career Development Award from the Center for Diversity and Inclusion of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital, the APSF, and the FAER. Dr. Allen has disclosed that he does not have any potential conflicts of interest.

Editorial introduction

Editorial introduction

Evaluation of a student clinical research education program in addiction medicine

Objective To evaluate an experiential student clinical addiction research program by analyzing its components, evaluation survey data, and scientific outputs. Methods In 1995, we established a summer research program supporting trainees to gain exposure to clinical addiction research careers. This curriculum employed a three-pronged approach that combined mentored research training, didactic education, and clinical observerships for medical students and other trainees to acquire experience with addiction medicine and research. Utilizing the Kirkpatrick model as program evaluation framework, we analyzed evaluation data from programmatic surveys (didactic seminar evaluations, overall program surveys) and conducted qualitative feedback exploration. Results Between 2007 and 2019, 56 trainees and 26 faculty mentors participated in the curriculum. To date, 25 students published 38 papers with their faculty mentor. Analysis of the past 12 years of program evaluation data demonstrated that students highly valued individually-mentored research experiences. They indicated that seminars familiarized them with the foundations of different clinical care models and career trajectories in addiction medicine. Clinical observerships provided students with patient contacts in various multidisciplinary addiction treatment settings. These experiences, perhaps most importantly hearing about patients’ lived experiences, meaningfully informed various research and didactic activities. Conclusions This summer student research program successfully introduced students to addiction medicine and research, manifested by high peer-reviewed publication productivity. While our program engaged and involved committed mentors and inspired mentees to pursue professional paths in addiction research, it did not specifically incorporate attention to equity and diversity into program planning and implementation. Going forward, the program will improve equity by increasing the recruitment of trainees from disadvantaged groups and engaging underrepresented faculty. KEY MESSAGES Summer programs can be effective in engaging medical students and trainees in research early in their trajectory and inspire them to incorporate research into their careers. Programs that integrate experiential addiction research learning, i.e. mentored research activities, didactic sessions, and clinical observerships, can provide trainees with a profound understanding of substance use disorder treatment and research.

Comparing the Outcomes of Face-to-Face and Synchronous Online Research Mentor Training Using Propensity Score Matching.

In this study, propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to examine differences in the effectiveness of research mentor training (RMT) implemented using two modes-face-to-face or synchronous online training. This study investigated each training mode and assessed participants' perceived gains in mentoring skills, ability to meet mentees' expectations, and overall quality of mentoring, as well as intention to make changes to their mentoring practices. Additional factors that may contribute to participant outcomes were also examined. In total, 152 mentors trained using a synchronous online platform and 655 mentors trained in in-person workshops were analyzed using the PSM method. Mentors were matched based on similar characteristics, including mentee's career stage, mentor's title, mentor's prior mentoring experience, mentor's race/ethnicity and sex, and mentor's years of experience; results show that both face-to-face and synchronous online modes of RMT are effective. Findings indicated that the training mode did not significantly impact the mentors' perceived training outcomes. Factors associated with the reported training outcomes included dosage (hours of training), facilitator effectiveness, race/ethnicity, and previous mentoring experience. The results of this study demonstrate that mentors' perceived training outcomes are comparable regardless of the training modality used-online versus face-to-face.

Graduate training opportunities in the hearing sciences at the University of Louisville

The University of Louisville currently offers two branches of training opportunities for students interested in pursuing graduate training in the hearing sciences: A Ph.D. degree in experimental psychology with concentration in hearing science, and a clinical doctorate in audiology (Au.D.). The Ph.D. degree program offers mentored research training in areas such as psychoacoustics, speech perception, spatial hearing, and multisensory perception, and guarantees students four years of funding (tuition plus stipend). The Au.D. program is a 4-year program designed to provide students with the academic and clinical background necessary to enter audiologic practice. Both programs are affiliated with the Heuser Hearing Institute, which, along with the University of Louisville, provides laboratory facilities and clinical populations for both research and training. An accelerated Au.D./Ph.D. training program that integrates key components of both programs for training of students interested in clinically based research is under development. Additional information is available at: http://louisville.edu/medicine/degrees/audiology and https://louisville.edu/psychology/graduate/experimental.

Research training incorporating education and mentoring for rural and regional allied health professionals: An evaluation study.

Building rural health workforce research capacity is critical to addressing rural health inequalities. Research training is a mainstay research capacity building strategy. This paper describes the delivery and evaluation of a research training program for rural and regional allied health professions (AHPs). A mentored research training program was delivered to AHPs employed public health services in rural and regional Victoria, Australia. The program was evaluated using the Evidence-Based Practice Knowledge Attitudes and Practice (EBP-KAP) tool at baseline and 3 months post-training. Semi-structured interviews undertaken at 3 and 16 months post-training explored participants' perspectives of the training, their development and application of EBP and research skills. Survey data were analysed descriptively, and interview data were analysed using a framework approach. Thirty-four individuals from 14 organisations attended the first workshop and 31 attended the second. Thirty-one participants completed the survey at baseline and nine at 3 months post-training. Sixteen interviews were undertaken with 11 participants, five participating at both time points. Participants had positive EBP attitudes at both time points. Overall, participants' knowledge and incorporation of EBP into their practice, and retrieval of evidence was unchanged 3 months post-training. Themes identified in the interview data were as follows: (1) individual research capacity enhanced through supported practice, (2) organisational factors influence individuals' progression of research and (3) individual contributions towards research capacity within the organisation. A mentored rural research training program promoted the application of EBP skills at the individual level and contributed to organisational research capacity.

Alex Proekt, M.D., Ph.D., Recipient of the 2021 James E. Cottrell, M.D., Presidential Scholar Award

Alex Proekt, M.D., Ph.D., Recipient of the 2021 James E. Cottrell, M.D., Presidential Scholar Award

Tisch Cancer Institute Scholars Program: Mentored Cancer Research Training Pipeline for Medical Students.

Cancer research has led to unprecedented advances in treatment in recent decades. Physician-scientists have played a crucial role in these advances given their unique perspective at the intersection between basic research and clinical care, though their representation in cancer research has been in progressive decline. Cancer research programs that feature strong mentorship at the medical student level are associated with increased likelihood of alumni choosing a cancer research career path. In an effort to increase the cancer research medical student training pipeline, senior research faculty from the Tisch Cancer Institute (TCI) at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (ISMMS) developed the TCI Scholars Program, a rigorous mentored research training program funding medical students’ summer research. This program is currently in its third year and has garnered significant interest among mentors and students alike from all four TCI Cancer Center Support Grant (CCSG)–funded research programs. Herein, we describe the development, implementation, evaluation, and major outcomes of this program.

506. Variation in Occupational Activities and Infection Prevention Practices in Healthcare Personnel Based on Exposure to COVID-19 Units

BackgroundHealthcare personnel (HCP) may be at increased risk for COVID-19, but differences in risk by work activities are poorly defined. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends cohorting hospitalized patients with COVID-19 to reduce in-hospital transmission of SARS-CoV-2, but it is unknown if occupational and non-occupational behaviors differ based on exposure to COVID-19 units.MethodsWe analyzed a subset of HCP from an ongoing CDC-funded SARS-CoV-2 serosurveillance study. HCP were recruited from four Atlanta hospitals of different sizes and patient populations. All HCP completed a baseline REDCap survey. We used logistic regression to compare occupational activities and infection prevention practices among HCP stratified by exposure to COVID-19 units: low (0% of shifts), medium (1–49% of shifts) or high (≥50% of shifts).ResultsOf 211 HCP enrolled (36% emergency department [ED] providers, 35% inpatient RNs, 17% inpatient MDs/APPs, 7% radiology technicians and 6% respiratory therapists [RTs]), the majority (79%) were female and the median age was 35 years. Nearly half of the inpatient MD/APPs (46%) and RNs (47%) and over two-thirds of the RTs (67%) worked primarily in the ICU. Aerosol generating procedures were common among RNs, MD/APPs, and RTs (26–58% performed ≥1), but rare among ED providers (0–13% performed ≥1). Compared to HCP with low exposure to COVID-19 units, those with medium or high exposure spent a similar proportion of shifts directly at the bedside and were about as likely to practice universal masking. Being able to consistently social distance from co-workers was rare (33%); HCP with high exposure to COVID-19 units were less likely to report social distancing in the workplace compared to those with low exposure; however, this was not significantly different (OR 0.6; 95% CI: 0.3, 1.1). Concerns about personal protective equipment in COVID-19 units were similar across levels of exposure (Table 1).Table 1: Occupational activities and infection prevention behaviors of healthcare personnel stratified by level of exposure to COVID-19 units ConclusionThe proportion of time spent in dedicated COVID-19 units did not appear to influence time HCP spend directly at the bedside or infection prevention practices (social distancing and universal masking) in the workplace. Risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCP may depend more on factors acting at the individual level rather than those related to location of work.Disclosures Jessica Howard-Anderson, MD, Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) (Other Financial or Material Support, The ARLG fellowship provides salary support for ID fellowship and mentored research training) Ben Lopman, PhD, MSc, Takeda Pharmaceuticals (Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)World Health Organization (Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees for technical advice and analysis)

189. Validating a Hospitalist-Specific Antibiotic Prescribing Metric across Four Acute Care Hospitals

BackgroundPeer comparison reduces unnecessary outpatient antibiotic prescribing, but no prescribing metric has been validated for inpatient comparison. We aimed to evaluate if an electronically derived antibiotic prescribing metric correlated with indicated antibiotic days in hospitalized patients.MethodsWe previously created a hospitalist-specific adjusted antibiotic use metric (observed:expected [O:E]) for National Healthcare Safety Network-defined broad-spectrum antibiotics. From May-Oct 2019 at four Emory Healthcare hospitals, we identified outlier hospitalists prescribing in the top (high O:E) and bottom (low O:E) 15th percentile. We randomly selected 10 days of antibiotic administration from each outlier and reviewed days with > 2 days of consecutive days of antibiotics. For pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or urinary tract infection (UTI) we determined if each day of antibiotics was indicated, assuming the diagnosis was accurate. We compared high vs. low O:E providers and used regression modeling to determine if the metric predicted indicated days of antibiotics.ResultsAmong 997 days, 510 (51%) were from high and 487 (49%) from low O:E providers. High O:E providers had a greater proportion of days with > 2 prior days of antibiotics (60%) compared to low O:E providers (54%, p = 0.03). In the subset of days with > 2 prior days of antibiotics (n = 569), high O:E providers had more patient-days with longer hospital stays, diabetes and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) >3, and fewer days supervising (resident/advanced practice provider, Table 1). The primary diagnosis was pneumonia, COPD exacerbation or UTI in 260 (25%) days; 91% were indicated based on duration with no difference between high and low O:E providers (88% vs. 94%, p = 0.1). After controlling for days of hospitalization, CCI, immunocompromised status, and supervisory role, a high O:E was not associated with indicated antibiotic use (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2 – 1.3).Description of days with a patient on greater than two days of antibiotics, comparing high- versus low-metric providers ConclusionA high hospitalist antibiotic prescribing metric correlated with patients receiving > 2 consecutive days of antibiotics on any given day but did not predict unindicated antibiotic use for a subset of diagnoses. Evaluating indicated use by validating diagnoses may improve metric performance.Disclosures Jessica Howard-Anderson, MD, Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) (Other Financial or Material Support, The ARLG fellowship provides salary support for ID fellowship and mentored research training)

834. Clinical Outcomes with Carbapenem-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa that Retain Susceptibility to Traditional Antipseudomonal β-lactams: Atlanta, 2016-2018

BackgroundCarbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA) often results from multiple mechanisms, creating unique phenotypic patterns of resistance including retaining susceptibility to traditional antipseudomonal β-lactams: cefepime (FEP), ceftazidime (CAZ) and piperacillin-tazobactam (TZP). Outcomes of patients with CRPA susceptible to FEP, CAZ and TZP are unclear.MethodsThe Georgia Emerging Infections Programed performs active, population-based surveillance for CRPA (minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC] ≥ 8 µg/mL for doripenem, imipenem or meropenem) isolated from sterile sites, urine, lower respiratory tracts and wounds in metropolitan Atlanta. We created a retrospective cohort of adults without cystic fibrosis with their first episode of CRPA while hospitalized or hospitalized within 1 week, from 8/2016 – 7/2018. We compared patients with CRPA that remained susceptible to FEP, CAZ and TZP (“susceptible CRPA”) to those that were not (“resistant CRPA”) including multivariable logistic regression for 30-day mortality.ResultsAmong 643 patients, 638 had susceptibility results available for FEP, CAZ or TZP. 60% were male, median age was 65 years, and median Charlson comorbidity index was 2 (Table 1). Most (66%) resided in a hospital or long-term care facility 4 days prior to culture. The most common source was urine (38%). Non-susceptibility to multiple antibiotic classes was common: 523 (81%) for 3 classes and 214 (33%) for 5 classes (Table 2). 220 (34%) patients had susceptible CRPA and compared to patients with resistant CRPA, were more likely to have lived in a private residence, have a community-associated infection, and less likely to be in the ICU previously (Table 1). Patients with susceptible CRPA had a similar crude 30-day mortality (16% vs 12%, p = 0.15) to those with resistant CRPA, but in a multivariable analysis had an increased 30-day mortality (OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.1–3.2).Table 1 (Part 1/2): Characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients with carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA) in metropolitan Atlanta, stratified by antipseudomonal β-lactam susceptibility Table 1 (Part 2/2): Characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients with carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA) in metropolitan Atlanta, stratified by antipseudomonal β-lactam susceptibility Table 2: Antibacterial susceptibility results for hospitalized patients with carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in metropolitan Atlanta ConclusionOver 1/3 of hospitalized patients with CRPA retained susceptibility to other antipseudomonal β-lactams, but had an increased mortality compared to CRPA resistant to other β-lactams. Further research into mechanisms of resistance or antibiotics received might help explain this unexpected finding.Disclosures Jessica Howard-Anderson, MD, Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) (Other Financial or Material Support, The ARLG fellowship provides salary support for ID fellowship and mentored research training)

411. Application of a SARS-CoV-2-specific serologic assay for translational research and surveillance

BackgroundSensitive and specific SARS-CoV-2 antibody diagnostics are urgently needed to estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in both the general population and special risk groups. Moreover, validated serologic assays are critical to understanding immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection over time and identifying correlates of protection.MethodsAn enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) protocol to detect antibodies (IgG) that bind the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein was validated and ROC curve analysis performed by testing a large panel of pre-pandemic sera (n=162) and convalescent sera from RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases (n=60). We then applied this test in two cohorts: 1) Healthcare personnel (HCP) that were enrolled in a longitudinal surveillance cohort just after peak local transmission and 2) Mildly ill patients being tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR from NP swabs in an ambulatory testing clinic.Demographics of mildly symptomatic patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 with RT-PCR ResultsROC curve analysis yielded an AUC of 0.9953, with a sensitivity and specificity at 91.67% and 99.38% at the optimal OD normalization threshold of 0.20. In 240 HCP surveilled at enrollment, 5.83% had positive IgG results. Of 19 symptomatic patients who presented to the ambulatory clinic, 5/19 had a positive PCR. In convalescence (13–74 days post symptom onset), 3 of those 5 were positive for IgG.Validation of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD ELISA ROC Curve Analysis ConclusionWe demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD ELISA. This simple assay is an efficient way to track seroconversion and duration of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 for different populations, particularly since RBD-binding antibodies have been shown to correlate with neutralization activity and may be useful to determine protective immunity following natural infection or vaccination. Ongoing work will assess variation in magnitude, character and duration of antibody responses in key populations and seek to maximize deployability of large-scale SARS-CoV-2 serology.Disclosures Jessica Howard-Anderson, MD, MSc, Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) (Other Financial or Material Support, The ARLG fellowship provides salary support for ID fellowship and mentored research training) Nadine Rouphael, MD, Lilly (Grant/Research Support)Merck (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support)Quidel (Grant/Research Support)Sanofi Pasteur (Grant/Research Support)