Stewardship Metrics Research Articles

Impact of COVID-19 on antimicrobial stewardship program: Study protocol

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic affects the healthcare system worldwide and challenges many governments and institutions. Antimicrobial stewardship program advocating the wise use of antimicrobial agents. Its metrics include antimicrobial use measures, process, and outcome performance indications. We will conduct a retrospective observational study with the main hypothesis that the COVID-19 pandemic does not affect the antimicrobial stewardship program and its metrics. We will compare antimicrobial stewardship metrics (process, outcome, utilization) and antibiotic resistance two years before (2018–2019) (Group A) & two years with the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2021) (Group B). The study will be conducted in Saqr Hospital, a secondary care hospital in the emirate of Ras Al Khaimah in the United Arab Emirates. Data will be analyzed using SPSS version 22. Numerical data will be presented as mean (SD) or median (IQR). Chi-square or Fisher's exact test will be used to analyze categorical data. The t-test or Mann–Whitney U test will be used to compare the difference of numerical variables. p < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant. Multivariate logistic regression will be used to investigate the relation between different variables with (1) cost and (2) antibiotic resistance.

A five-year quasi-experimental study to evaluate the impact of empiric antibiotic order sets on antibiotic use metrics among hospitalized adult patients.

Evaluation of adult antibiotic order sets (AOSs) on antibiotic stewardship metrics has been limited. The primary outcome was to evaluate the standardized antimicrobial administration ratio (SAAR). Secondary outcomes included antibiotic days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 patient days (PD); selected antibiotic use; AOS utilization; Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) cases; and clinicians' perceptions of the AOS via a survey following the final study phase. This 5-year, single-center, quasi-experimental study comprised 5 phases from 2017 to 2022 over 10-month periods between August 1 and May 31. The study was conducted in a 752-bed tertiary care, academic medical center. Our institution implemented AOSs in the electronic medical record (EMR) for common infections among hospitalized adults. For the primary outcome, a statistically significant decreases in SAAR were detected from phase 1 to phase 5 (1.0 vs 0.90; P < .001). A statistically significant decreases were detected in DOT per 1,000 PD (4,884 vs 3,939; P = .001), fluoroquinolone orders (407 vs 175; P < .001), carbapenem orders (147 vs 106; P = .024), and clindamycin orders (113 vs 73; P = .01). No statistically significant change in mean vancomycin orders was detected (991 vs 902; P = .221). A statistically significant decrease in CDI cases was also detected (7.8, vs 2.4; P = .002) but may have been attributable to changes in CDI case diagnosis. Clinicians indicated that the AOSs were easy to use overall and that they helped them select the appropriate antibiotics. Implementing AOS into the EMR was associated with a statistically significant reduction in SAAR, antibiotic DOT per 1,000 PD, selected antibiotic orders, and CDI cases.

Adaptation and validation of an antibiotic prescribing, peer comparison metric for respiratory tract diagnoses in walk-in clinics: a mixed-methods analysis.

Antibiotic overuse is common across walk-in clinics, but it is unclear which stewardship metrics are most effective for audit and feedback. In this study, we assessed the validity of a metric that captures antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract diagnoses (RTDs). We performed a mixed-methods study to evaluate an RTD metric, which quantified the frequency at which a provider prescribed antibiotics for RTD visits after excluding visits with complicating factors. Seven walk-in clinics across an integrated healthcare system. We included clinic visits during 2018-2022. We also conducted 17 semi-structured interviews with 10 unique providers to assess metric acceptability. There were 331,496 visits; 120,937 (36.5%) met RTD criteria and 44,382 (36.7%) of these received an antibiotic. Factors associated with an increased odds of antibiotic use for RTDs included patient age ≥ 65 (OR = 1.40; 95% CI 1.30-1.51), age 0-17 (1.55, 95% CI 1.50-1.60), and ≥1 comorbidity (OR = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.15-1.29). After stratifying providers by their antibiotic-prescribing frequency for RTDs, patient case-mix was similar across tertiles. However, the highest tertile of prescribers more frequently coded suppurative otitis media and more frequently prescribed antibiotics for antibiotic-nonresponsive conditions (eg, viral infections). There was no correlation between antibiotic prescribing for RTDs and the frequency of return visits (r = 0.01, P = 0.96). Interviews with providers demonstrated the acceptability of the metric as an assessment tool. A provider-level metric that quantifies the frequency of antibiotic prescribing for all RTDs has both construct and face validity. Future studies should assess whether this type of metric is an effective feedback tool.

Establishing obstetrics-specific metrics and interventions for antimicrobial stewardship.

To describe baseline antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) metrics and apply AMS interventions in an inpatient obstetrical population. From October 2018 to October 2019, our tertiary-care obstetrical center reviewed components of our AMS program, which included: (1) antimicrobial consumption data, (2) point prevalence surveys (PPS), and (3) prospective audit and feedback. We reviewed institutional data for antimicrobial consumption from the pharmacy database. Detailed point prevalence surveys were conducted for all antimicrobial prescriptions on two predefined dates each month. Daily audits and feedback assessed the appropriateness of all non-protocolized antimicrobials. Our average antimicrobial length of therapy (LOT) was 12 days per 100 patient-days, where erythromycin (2.33), amoxicillin (2.28), and ampicillin (1.81) were the greatest contributors. Point prevalence surveys revealed that 28.8% of obstetrical inpatients were on antimicrobials, of which 11.2% were inappropriate. Protocolized antimicrobials were 62% less likely (p = 0.027) to be inappropriate. From 565 audited prescriptions, 110 (19.5%) resulted in feedback, where 90% of recommendations were accepted and implemented. The most common reasons for interventions include incorrect dosage, recommending a diagnostic test before continuing antimicrobials, and changing antimicrobials based on specific culture and sensitivity. Antimicrobial use in obstetrics is unique compared to general inpatients. We provide a baseline set of metrics for AMS at our obstetrical center intending to lay the groundwork for AMS programming in our discipline. Antimicrobial protocolization, as well as audit and feedback, are feasible interventions to improve antimicrobial prescribing patterns.

Validation of antibiotic stewardship metrics for genitourinary infection management in Veterans Affairs outpatient settings

Background: Diagnosis and management of suspected urinary tract infection (UTI) in outpatient settings has been shown to be suboptimal. We previously developed a set of stewardship metrics for UTIs based on electronic health record (EHR) data (Antimicrobial Stewardship &amp; Healthcare Epidemiology 2022;2 suppl 1:S5–S6. doi:10.1017/ash.2022). A tier-based approach was used to more fully capture antibiotic use associated with genitourinary (GU) symptoms and diagnoses. Herein we report a preliminary analysis of validity and reliability of these metrics based on chart abstraction. Methods: The study cohort consisted of patients who visited Veterans Affairs emergency departments or primary care clinics between 2015 and 2022 and who had a GU diagnosis based on International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes, divided into 3 categories: tier 1 (antibiotics always indicated), tier 2 (antibiotics sometimes indicated), and tier 3 (antibiotics not indicated). Visits related to urological procedures, nontarget settings, or concomitant non-GU infections were excluded. Cases were randomly sampled for manual review from within 8 strata based on tier, use of antibiotics, and visit type. An infectious disease physician and pharmacist abstracted charts using a standardized data-collection instrument. Clinical judgments regarding diagnosis and treatment were recorded on a Likert scale without knowledge of how the patient was managed. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to estimate interrater reliability. Results: To date, 148 cases have been reviewed (50 by both reviewers). Mean (SD) age was 67.5 (15.3) years and 12.2% were female. In a majority of tier 1 and 2 visits in which antibiotics were given, the reviewers found evidence for GU infection (69.7%) and favored prescribing of antibiotics (60.6%) (Table). In contrast, most patients in the tier 3 category who received antibiotics were judged to have noninfectious conditions (eg, benign prostatic hypertrophy) and to not require antibiotics. In the subset of records examined by both reviewers, the interrater reliability of judgments of whether antibiotics were warranted was good (ICC = .704). Conclusions: This preliminary validation provides support for a tier-based approach for stewardship metrics for GU conditions that relies upon electronic data to identify patients for whom antibiotics are generally not indicated.Disclosures: None

1799. Impact of COVID 19 on urgent care diagnoses and stewardship metrics

Abstract Background The percentage of all respiratory diagnoses prescribed an antibiotic is an outpatient stewardship metric and was introduced as a HEDIS measure in 2022. Given a stable case mix, this metric is not affected by differences in coding practices between clinicians or health systems since all respiratory diagnoses are considered together. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic introduced a high number of viral illness episodes where antibiotics are not recommended. The impact of this shift in case mix on respiratory diagnosis coding and prescribing metrics has not been explored. Methods We examined antibiotic prescribing rates for respiratory diagnoses in a network of urgent care clinics affiliated with the University of Utah during two periods. Pre-Pandemic was Mar 2019-Feb 2020 and Pandemic was Mar 2020-Mar 2022. Respiratory diagnoses were identified using ICD10 codes and further stratified into 3 Tiers (Tier 1: antibiotics indicated; Tier 2: antibiotics sometimes indicated; Tier 3: antibiotics not indicated). We examined trends in antibiotic prescribing across these periods including the percentage of all respiratory visits prescribed antibiotics and by Tier and the distribution of diagnoses by Tier. No formalized stewardship interventions were introduced during these periods. Results There were 146,897 urgent care visits during the study period (47,423 Pre Pandemic and 99,474 Pandemic). The respiratory prescribing rate declined from 42.3% Pre Pandemic to 26.2% during the Pandemic (Figure). The distribution of respiratory diagnoses by Tier and prescribing within Tier are shown in the Table. Tier 3 diagnoses increased from 48% to 67%, while Tier 2 diagnoses declined from 47% to 31%. Antibiotic prescribing declined for both Tier 2 and Tier 3 diagnoses. 15,429 (23%) of Tier 3 diagnoses during the Pandemic were coded as COVID-19. 50% of the reduction in prescribing is attributable to changes in Tiers alone. FigureTable Conclusion The COVID 19 pandemic was associated with a reduction in the percentage of respiratory diagnoses prescribed antibiotics. Half was due to an increase in Tier 3 encounters although declines in prescribing occurred with Tiers in addition. Using this metric for benchmarking requires accounting for the impact of case mix differences over time or between systems and clinicians. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

Bridging the gap: An approach to reporting antimicrobial stewardship metrics specific to solid organ transplant recipients.

This study seeks to describe inpatient antimicrobial use (AU) utilizing the National Healthcare Safety Network-AU (NHSN-AU) framework among solid organ transplant recipients (SOTr) within 12 months after transplant. This cross-sectional study included SOTr ≥ 18 years of age who underwent transplantation from January 2015 to December 2016 at a Midwestern US transplant center. Inpatient AU was followed for 12 months post-transplant. Hospital days present up to 12 months post-transplant, AU variables, and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) occurrences were analyzed. The cohort of 530 SOTr included 225 kidney (42.5%), 171 liver (32.3%), 45 lung (8.5%), 40 heart (7.5%), 39 multivisceral (7.4%), seven small bowel (1.3%), and three pancreas (0.6%) transplants. Total days of therapy (DOT) were 22 782 among the cohort, with a median of 5 days [interquartile range [IQR], 1-12]. Lung and liver transplants had the most total DOT (6571vs. 5569 days), while lungs and small bowels had the highest median DOT (13 [IQR, 2-56] vs. 12 [IQR, 2-31]). The facility-wide DOT/1000 days were lowest in pancreas and highest in lung transplants (5.3vs. 428.1). Small bowel transplants received the most resistant-Gram-positive infection and hospital-onset infection agents for facility-wide DOT/1000 days present. Pancreas and kidney transplants accounted for the most high-risk CDI agents. CDI occurred in 34 patients, with kidney and liver transplants experiencing 13 each. This study represents one of the first reports of AU in SOTr utilizing the NHSN-AU framework. More studies are needed for further peer-to-peer comparison of AU in this complex patient population.

Antimicrobial stewardship in solid organ transplant recipients: Current challenges and proposed metrics.

Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are challenging populations for antimicrobial stewardship interventions due to a variety of reasons, including immunosuppression, consequent risk of opportunistic and donor-derived infections, high rates of infection with multi-drug resistant organisms (MDROs), Clostridioides difficile, and need for prolonged antimicrobial prophylaxis. Despite this, data on stewardship interventions and metrics that address the distinct needs of these patients are limited. We performed a narrative review of the current state of antimicrobial stewardship in SOT recipients, existing interventions and metrics in this population, and considerations for implementation of transplant-specific stewardship programs. Antimicrobial stewardship metrics are evolving even in the general patient population. Data on metrics applicable to the SOT population are even more limited. Standard process, outcomes, and balancing metrics may not always apply to the SOT population. A successful stewardship program for SOT recipients requires reviewing existing data, applying general stewardship principles, and understanding the nuances of SOT patients. As antimicrobial stewardship interventions are being implemented in SOT recipients; new metrics are needed to assess their impact. In conclusion, SOT patients present a challenging but important opportunity for antimicrobial stewards. SOT, antimicrobial stewardship program, MDRO, Clostridioides difficile infection, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Infectious Diseases Society of America, prospective audit and feedback, hematopoietic cell transplant, cytomegalovirus, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, surgical site infections, nucleic acid amplification testing, days of therapy, defined daily dose, and length of stay.

Tier-based antimicrobial stewardship metrics for genitourinary-related antibiotic use in Veterans’ Affairs outpatient settings

Background: Tracking antibiotic use is a core element of antimicrobial stewardship. We developed a set of metrics based on electronic health record data to support an outpatient stewardship initiative to improve management of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in Veterans’ Affairs (VA) emergency departments (EDs) and primary care clinics. Because UTI diagnostic codes only capture a portion of genitourinary (GU)-related antibiotic use, a tier-based approach was used to evaluate practices. Methods: Metrics were developed to target practices related to antibiotic prescribing and diagnostic testing (Table 1). GU conditions were divided into 3 categories: tier 1, conditions for which antibiotics are usually or always indicated; tier 2, conditions for which antibiotics are sometimes indicated; and tier 3, conditions for which antibiotics are rarely or never indicated (eg, benign prostatic hypertrophy with symptoms). Patients with visits related to urological procedures, nontarget providers, and concomitant non-GU infections were excluded. Descriptive analyses included calculation of the correlation matrix for the 7 metrics and the construction of box plots to display interfacility variability. Results: Metrics were calculated quarterly for 18 VA medical centers, including affiliated clinics, in a western VA network, from July 2018 to June 2020 (Table 1). Tier 3 GU conditions accounted for 1,276 of 11,840 (11%) of GU-related antibiotic use. Metrics 1 and 6b were strongly correlated with each other and were also positively correlated with metrics 2 and 5 (coefficients &gt; 0.5) (Fig. 1). Substantial interfacility variation was observed (Fig. 2). Conclusions: Stewardship metrics for suspected or documented UTIs can identify opportunities for practice improvement. Broadly capturing GU conditions in addition to UTIs may enhance utility for performance feedback. Antibiotic prescribing for tier 3 GU conditions is analogous to unnecessary antibiotic use for acute, uncomplicated bronchitis and upper respiratory tract infections.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

A comparison of active versus passive methods of responding to rapid diagnostic blood culture results.

To compare 2 methods of communicating polymerase chain reaction (PCR) blood-culture results: active approach utilizing on-call personnel versus passive approach utilizing notifications in the electronic health record (EHR). Retrospective observational study. A tertiary-care academic medical center. Adult patients hospitalized with ≥1 positive blood culture containing a gram-positive organism identified by PCR between October 2014 and January 2018. The standard protocol for reporting PCR results at baseline included a laboratory technician calling the patient's nurse, who would report the critical result to the medical provider. The active intervention group consisted of an on-call pager system utilizing trained pharmacy residents, whereas the passive intervention group combined standard protocol with real-time in-basket notifications to pharmacists in the EHR. Of 209 patients, 105, 61, and 43 patients were in the control, active, and passive groups, respectively. Median time to optimal therapy was shorter in the active group compared to the passive group and control (23.4 hours vs 42.2 hours vs 45.9 hours, respectively; P = .028). De-escalation occurred 12 hours sooner in the active group. In the contaminant group, empiric antibiotics were discontinued faster in the active group (0 hours) than in the control group and the passive group (17.7 vs 7.2 hours; P = .007). Time to active therapy and days of therapy were similar. A passive, electronic method of reporting PCR results to pharmacists was not as effective in optimizing stewardship metrics as an active, real-time method utilizing pharmacy residents. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal method of communicating time-sensitive information.

115. Variable Use of Diagnostic Codes for Acute Respiratory Infections Across Emergency Departments and Urgent Care Clinics in an Integrated Healthcare System: Implications for Accuracy of Antibiotic Stewardship Metrics

BackgroundAntibiotic stewardship initiatives can leverage metrics that make peer-peer comparisons. A commonly used metric measures how frequently a clinician prescribes antibiotics for acute respiratory infections (ARIs), as defined by diagnostic codes. However, it is unclear if clinicians differ in their use of ARI diagnostic codes. In this study, we evaluated differences in how frequently clinicians code for ARIs and factors that are associated with the use of ARI diagnostic codes in Emergency Department (ED) and Urgent Care (UC) visits across an integrated healthcare system.MethodsWe analyzed a retrospective cohort of all ED and UC patient-visits across 129 Veterans Affairs medical centers during 2016-2018. ARI visits were identified using ICD-10 codes for acute bronchitis, influenza, pharyngitis, sinusitis, and upper respiratory tract infections for clinicians with 100 or more visits. A generalized linear mixed model with a link logit function that accounted for clustering at the clinician and facility-level was used to calculate median odds ratios (OR) and to identify factors associated with increased likelihood of entering an ARI code.ResultsThere were 6,016,499 patient-visits, and 519,389 (8.6%) were coded as an ARI (Table 1). The mean rate of ARI diagnoses across all visits was 8.9% (SD 2.5%) at the facility-level and 7.4% (SD 4.5%) at the clinician-level (Table 2). The median OR was 2.19 (95% CI 2.18, 2.22), suggesting there was between-clinician variation in coding for ARI diagnoses. Visits were significantly more likely to be coded as ARIs if seen by an advanced practice provider (OR=2.36, 95% CI 2.19, 2.54), if a fever was recorded (OR=4.20, 95% CI 4.18, 4.29), and if the visit occurred between December-March (OR=1.97, 95% CI 1.96, 1.98). Approximately 2/5th of the variability (41.4%) in assigning an ARI diagnostic code was explained by differences across individual clinicians. ConclusionThere was substantial variability in how frequently ED and UC clinicians coded a visit as an ARI, and a large proportion of the variability was explained by differences across clinicians. Unmeasured factors could include different approaches to using diagnostic codes. ARI metrics based on diagnostic codes may need to account for differences in clinicians’ coding behavior.Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Real-World Impact of the Accelerate PhenoTest BC Kit on Patients With Bloodstream Infections in the Improving Outcomes and Antimicrobial Stewardship Study: A Quasiexperimental Multicenter Study.

BackgroundBloodstream infections (BSIs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. The Improving Outcomes and Antimicrobial Stewardship study seeks to evaluate the impact of the Accelerate PhenoTest BC Kit (AXDX) on antimicrobial use and clinical outcomes in BSIs.MethodsThis multicenter, quasiexperimental study compared clinical and antimicrobial stewardship metrics, prior to and after implementation of AXDX, to evaluate the impact this technology has on patients with BSIs. Laboratory and clinical data from hospitalized patients with BSIs (excluding contaminants) were compared between 2 arms, 1 that underwent testing on AXDX (post-AXDX) and 1 that underwent alternative organism identification and susceptibility testing (pre-AXDX). The primary outcomes were time to optimal therapy (TTOT) and 30-day mortality.ResultsA total of 854 patients with BSIs (435 pre-AXDX, 419 post-AXDX) were included. Median TTOT was 17.2 hours shorter in the post-AXDX arm (23.7 hours) compared with the pre-AXDX arm (40.9 hours; P<.0001). Compared with pre-AXDX, median time to first antimicrobial modification (24.2 vs 13.9 hours; P<.0001) and first antimicrobial deescalation (36.0 vs 27.2 hours; P=.0004) were shorter in the post-AXDX arm. Mortality (8.7% pre-AXDX vs 6.0% post-AXDX), length of stay (7.0 pre-AXDX vs 6.5 days post-AXDX), and adverse drug events were not significantly different between arms. Length of stay was shorter in the post-AXDX arm (5.4 vs 6.4 days; P=.03) among patients with gram-negative bacteremia.ConclusionsFor BSIs, use of AXDX was associated with significant decreases in TTOT, first antimicrobial modification, and time to antimicrobial deescalation.

Impact of an interactive, clinical decision-making workshop on student learning of antimicrobial stewardship principles

Background and purposeEducational escape room activities are being implemented in various classroom environments to augment learning. These games are structured in a linear pathway, and all participants must complete riddles to arrive at the same answer and “escape the room.” Educational activity and settingInvestigators created a multi-directional interactive learning activity where students were presented with a patient case. The activity required students to identify the presented infectious disease, interpret microbiology results, and select antibiotic treatment options. Students were required to provide dosing and antimicrobial stewardship metrics based on their treatment selection along with rationale. Upon completion of the activity, students participated in group discussions explaining the reasoning behind their selected treatment option. They also completed a satisfaction survey. Knowledge of antimicrobial stewardship principles was assessed via a multiple-choice exam. Exam performance was compared to the prior year when a traditional lecture format was utilized to teach the topic. FindingsOf 194 students enrolled in the course, 138 completed the satisfaction survey. The majority (86.9%) indicated that they would recommend the activity and 88.2% considered it an effective tool for learning antimicrobial stewardship. There was a mean decline of 6.38% (P = .3) in correctly answered exam questions with the implementation of the activity compared to results from the previous academic year (N = 185). SummaryStudents perceived the game as a valuable learning experience, but it did not result in an improvement in knowledge of antimicrobial stewardship as assessed by multiple-choice exams.

Development and validation of antibiotic stewardship metrics for outpatient respiratory tract diagnoses and association of provider characteristics with inappropriate prescribing.

To determine metrics and provider characteristics associated with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract diagnoses (RTDs). Retrospective cohort study. Primary care practices in a university health system. Patients seen by an attending physician or advanced practice provider (APP) at their primary care office visit with International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM)-coded RTDs. Medical records were reviewed for 1,200 randomly selected office visits in which an antibiotic was prescribed to determine appropriateness. Based on this gold standard, metrics and provider characteristics associated with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing were determined. Overall, 69% of antibiotics were inappropriate. Metrics utilizing prespecified RTDs most strongly associated with inappropriate prescribing were (1) proportion prescribing for RTDs for which antibiotics are almost never required (eg, bronchitis) and (2) proportion prescribing for any RTD. Provider characteristics associated with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing were APP versus physician (72% vs 58%; P = .02), family medicine versus internal medicine (76% vs 63%; P = .01), board certification 1997 or later versus board certification before 1997 (75% vs 63%; P = .02), nonteaching versus teaching practice (73% vs 51%; P < .01), and nonurban vs urban practice (77% vs 57%; P < .01). Metrics utilizing proportion prescribing for RTDs for which antibiotics are almost never required and proportion prescribing for any RTD were most strongly associated with inappropriate prescribing. APPs and clinicians with family medicine training, with board certification 1997 or later, and who worked in nonteaching or nonurban practices had higher proportions of inappropriate prescribing. These findings could inform design of interventions to improve prescribing and could represent an efficient way to track inappropriate prescribing.

Improving outcomes and antibiotic stewardship (IOAS) for patients with Gram-positive bloodstream infections through use of rapid testing: a quasi-experimental multicentre study of the Accelerate PhenoTest™ BC Kit.

BackgroundData from the Improving Outcomes and Antibiotic Stewardship for Patients with Bloodstream Infections: Accelerate PhenoTest™ BC Kit (AXDX) Registry Study were analysed to determine the impact of rapid organism identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) for Gram-positive bacteraemia.Patients and methodsThis multicentre, quasi-experimental study evaluated clinical and antimicrobial stewardship metrics following the implementation of AXDX. Data from hospitalized patients with bacteraemia were compared between groups, one that underwent testing on AXDX (post-AXDX) and one that underwent traditional identification and AST (pre-AXDX). An analysis of patients with Gram-positive bacteraemia was performed. The primary outcome was time to optimal therapy (TTOT). Secondary outcomes included time to first antibiotic modification (overall and Gram-positive), duration of unnecessary MRSA coverage, incidence of adverse events, length of stay and mortality.ResultsA total of 219 (109 pre-AXDX, 110 post-AXDX) patients with Gram-positive bacteraemia were included. Median TTOT was 36.3 h (IQR, 16.9–56.7) in the pre-AXDX group and 20.4 h (IQR, 7.5–36.7) in the post-AXDX group (P = 0.01). Compared with pre-AXDX, median time to first antibiotic modification (29.1 versus 15.9 h; P = 0.002), time to first Gram-positive antibiotic modification (33.2 versus 17.2 h; P = 0.003) and median duration of unnecessary MRSA coverage (58.4 versus 29.7 h; P = 0.04) were reduced post-AXDX. A trend towards decreased acute kidney injury (24% versus 13%; P = 0.06) was observed in the post-AXDX group. Groups did not differ in other secondary outcomes.ConclusionsImplementation of AXDX testing for patients with Gram-positive bacteraemia shortened the TTOT and reduced unnecessary antibiotic exposure due to faster antibiotic modifications.

Opportunities for Stewardship in the Transition From Intravenous to Enteral Antibiotics in Hospitalized Pediatric Patients.

Pediatric patients hospitalized with bacterial infections often receive intravenous (IV) antibiotics. Early transition to enteral antibiotics can reduce hospital duration, cost, and complications. We aimed to identify opportunities to transition from IV to enteral antibiotics, describe variation of transition among hospitals, and evaluate feasibility of novel stewardship metrics. This multisite retrospective cohort study used the Pediatric Health Information System to identify pediatric patients hospitalized with pneumonia, neck infection, orbital infection, urinary tract infection (UTI), osteomyelitis, septic arthritis, or skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) between 2017 and 2018. Opportunity days were defined as days on which patients received both IV antibiotics and enteral medications, suggesting enteral tolerance. Percent opportunity was defined as opportunity days divided by days on any antibiotics. Both outcomes excluded IV antibiotics that have no alternative oral formulation. We evaluated outcomes per infection and antibiotic and assessed across-hospital variation. We identified 88,522 aggregate opportunity days in 100,103 hospitalizations. On 57% of the antibiotic days, there was an opportunity to switch patients to enteral therapy, with greatest opportunity days in SSTI, neck infection, and pneumonia encounters, and with clindamycin, ceftriaxone, and ampicillin-sulbactam. Percent opportunity varied by infection (73% in septic arthritis to 40% in pneumonia). There was significant across-hospital variation in percent opportunity for all infections. This multicenter study demonstrated the potential opportunity to transition from IV to enteral therapy in over half of antibiotic days. Opportunity varied by infection, antibiotic, and hospital. Across-hospital variation demonstrated likely missed opportunities for earlier transition and the need to define optimal transition times. Stewardship efforts promoting earlier transition for highly bioavailable antibiotics could reduce healthcare utilization and promote high-value care. We identified feasible stewardship metrics.

142. Frequency of Short-course Empiric Antibiotic Use as an Antimicrobial Stewardship Metric

BackgroundAntimicrobial stewardship metrics that provide actionable guidance are needed to support efforts to improve hospital use of antibiotics. Antibiotics such as vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam are common empiric agents used frequently when the infectious process remains unknown. Thus short, incomplete courses of therapy are used more frequently for such agents. We aimed to evaluate the variability in short courses of vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam use across U.S. hospitals. MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional study among U.S. hospitals that contributed inpatient pharmacy data to the Vizient clinical database in 2016. We identified vancomycin and piperacillin-tazobactam courses initiated within the 48 hours of admission, measured as days of therapy received. We calculated the percent of patients that received 1, 2, 3, 4 or >4 days of therapy at each facility to describe short course empiric therapy use. To describe the variability across facilities, we then assessed the median, interquartile range (IQR), and total range of that percentage.ResultsWe identified 145 hospitals representing approximately 3.7 million patient encounters for inclusion in this study. Within 48 hours of admission, 13.9% of encounters received vancomycin, 7.7% piperacillin/tazobactam, and 4.6% received both. The figure demonstrates the variability in the frequency of short course antibiotic use across hospitals; boxes indicate the IQR with the transecting line representing the median and whiskers representing the full range. The proportion of patients that received one day of therapy varied most across hospitals, with vancomycin ranging from 0–100%. In contrast, the frequency of patients that received greater than four days of therapy varied considerably less across hospitals; 0–33% for vancomycin.ConclusionThe variability in use of short course empiric therapies suggests that use for non-infectious processes or infections not appropriately treated by these agents varies greatly across facilities. Measuring short course use for common empiric agents may serve as an important antimicrobial stewardship metric. Such a metric could inform antimicrobial stewardship efforts to reduce unnecessary initiation of empiric antimicrobial therapy.Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

118. Optimizing the management of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) contaminants by reporting the species name

BackgroundCoNS are common isolates in blood cultures (BCx), but many are contaminants contributing to unnecessary antibiotic use. When CoNS are isolated from multiple BCx, different species and/or different susceptibility patterns may suggest contamination. Species reporting of CoNS is not performed at all hospitals. The purpose of this study was to characterize antibiotic use attributable to CoNS positive (pos) BCx and determine if reporting CoNS species could help reduce unnecessary antibiotics.MethodsA retrospective chart review was conducted of inpatients at an academic medical center before (Jan-June 2017) and after (Sept 2019-Feb 2020) implementation of CoNS species reporting. CoNS species were hidden to providers in the before group. Patients (pts) ≥18 years old with ≥1 BCx pos for CoNS were included. Pts who were neutropenic, treated with anti-staphylococcal antibiotics (SAbx) for a non-CoNS infection, or treated for CoNS with non-SAbx were excluded. Pts were categorized by number of pos BCx (1 vs ≥2). In each period, a random sample of pts was screened until 50 pts with 1 CoNS pos BCx were included. Additional data were collected until at least 50 pts with ≥2 pos BCx were included in each period. The primary outcome was use of SAbx among pts in each group before and after species reporting. Additional analyses were performed to compare the use of SAbx among subsets with same/different species and/or susceptibilities.Results203 pts were included, 102 before and 101 after. 51% and 50% had ≥2 pos BCx in the before and after groups, respectively. S. epidermidis was isolated more frequently in pts with ≥2 pos BCx (75% vs 50%, p< 0.001). 77% of pts received at least 1 SAbx (97% vancomycin). Median SAbx days of therapy per pt (DOTs) was greater among pts with ≥2 pos BCx (1 vs 5, p< 0.001). There was no difference in overall DOTs between the two periods (3 vs 2, p=0.25). However, among pts with ≥2 pos BCx, median DOTs was less in the after period (6.5 vs 3, p=0.016). Among pts with 1 pos BCx, median DOTs was 1 in both periods.Median Anti-Staphylococcal Antibiotic Days of Therapy per Patient (≥ 2 positive cultures) ConclusionCoNS species reporting was associated with decreased SAbx use for pts with ≥2 pos BCx, suggesting that knowing the species helps in determining likelihood of true infection. Institutions may realize improved stewardship metrics of SAbx by implementing CoNS species reporting for pos BCx.Disclosures Tyler J. Stone, PharmD, Paratek (Research Grant or Support) Elizabeth Palavecino, MD, Paratek (Grant/Research Support)Paratek (Grant/Research Support) John Williamson, PharmD, Paratek (Research Grant or Support)

Establishing essential metrics for antifungal stewardship in hospitals: the results of an international Delphi survey.

Guidance on assessment of the quantity and appropriateness of antifungal prescribing is required to assist hospitals to interpret data effectively and structure quality improvement programmes. To achieve expert consensus on a core set of antifungal stewardship (AFS) metrics and to determine their feasibility for implementation. A literature review was undertaken to develop a list of candidate metrics. International experts were invited to participate in sequential web-based surveys to evaluate the importance and feasibility of metrics in the area of AFS using Delphi methodology. Three surveys were completed. Consensus was predefined as ≥80% agreement on the importance of each metric. Eighty-two experts consented to participate from 17 different countries. Response rate for each survey was >80%. The panel included adult and paediatric physicians, microbiologists and pharmacists with diverse content expertise. Consensus was achieved for 38 metrics considered important to routinely include in AFS programmes, and related to antifungal consumption (n = 5), quality of antifungal prescribing and management of invasive fungal infection (IFI) (n = 24), and clinical outcomes (n = 9). Twenty-one consensus metrics were considered to have moderate to high feasibility for routine collection. The identified core AFS metrics will provide a framework to comprehensively assess the quantity and quality of antifungal prescribing within hospitals to develop quality improvement programmes aimed at improving IFI prevention, management and patient-centred outcomes. A standardized approach will support collaboration and benchmarking to monitor the efficacy of current prophylaxis and treatment guidelines, and will provide important feedback to guideline developers.

Antimicrobial Stewardship Metrics that Matter

Background Guidelines for antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) highlight the need for measuring quality metrics as surrogate markers for outcome. The objective of this study was to determine the relationship between ASP quality metrics and patient outcomes at an institution with an established ASP. Methods Retrospective cohort study including 442 patients receiving intravenous antibiotics for 72 hours or more in 1 of 3 designated inpatient units were assessed for compliance with ASP metrics and associated outcomes. Clinical success was defined as discharged alive, without adverse drug reaction and not readmitted within 30 days of discharge. Results The mean (SD) age was 62 (17) years with 205 males (46%) enrolled. A total of 422 patients (96%) had documented indication for therapy, 365 (83%) had appropriate cultures obtained at baseline, 354 (80%) had appropriate empiric therapy at baseline, and 166 (83%) of 199 had appropriate deescalation performed. All metrics were met in 58% of patients. Sixty-two percent of patients achieved clinical success; while, 14% died, 13% had an adverse drug reaction, and 21% were readmitted within 30 days. Completion of all ASP metrics was not associated with clinical success (odds ratio, 0.862; P = 0.46). Documentation of indication for therapy was a significant indicator for clinical success (97.8% vs 91.7%; P = 0.003); this remained associated after adjusting for infection type and severity. Conclusions Documented indication showed strong association with clinical success, providing support for use of the Centers for Disease Control's Core Elements as a metric for quality of care.