The Effect of Contact Precautions for MRSA on Patient Satisfaction Scores

Contact precautions may have an adverse effect on a patient's hospital experience and the delivery of care. This case–control study compared patient satisfaction scores between 70 patients isolated for MRSA and 139 non-isolated patients. Based on an adjusted analysis, there was no difference in patient satisfaction between the two groups. Age and educational status were found to affect patient satisfaction

Antibiotic Stewardship Implementation and Antibiotic Use at Hospitals With and Without On-site Infectious Disease Specialists.

BackgroundMany US hospitals lack infectious disease (ID) specialists, which may hinder antibiotic stewardship efforts. We sought to compare patient-level antibiotic exposure at Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals with and without an on-site ID specialist, defined as an ID physician and/or ID pharmacist.MethodsThis retrospective VHA cohort included all acute-care patient admissions during 2016. A mandatory survey was used to identify hospitals' antibiotic stewardship processes and their access to an on-site ID specialist. Antibiotic use was quantified as days of therapy per days present and categorized based on National Healthcare Safety Network definitions. A negative binomial regression model with risk adjustment was used to determine the association between presence of an on-site ID specialist and antibiotic use at the level of patient admissions.ResultsEighteen of 122 (14.8%) hospitals lacked an on-site ID specialist; there were 525 451 (95.8%) admissions at ID hospitals and 23 007 (4.2%) at non-ID sites. In the adjusted analysis, presence of an ID specialist was associated with lower total inpatient antibacterial use (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, .85-.99). Presence of an ID specialist was also associated with lower use of broad-spectrum antibacterials (0.61; .54-.70) and higher narrow-spectrum β-lactam use (1.43; 1.22-1.67). Total antibacterial exposure (inpatient plus postdischarge) was lower among patients at ID versus non-ID sites (0.92; .86-.99).ConclusionsPatients at hospitals with an ID specialist received antibiotics in a way more consistent with stewardship principles. The presence of an ID specialist may be important to effective antibiotic stewardship

Antibiotic stewardship implementation and patient-level antibiotic use at hospitals with and without on-site Infectious Disease specialists.

Many US hospitals lack Infectious Disease (ID) specialists, which may hinder antibiotic stewardship efforts. We sought to compare patient-level antibiotic exposure at Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals with and without an on-site ID specialist, defined as an ID physician and/or ID pharmacist. This retrospective VHA cohort included all acute-care patient-admissions during 2016. A mandatory survey was used to identify hospitals' antibiotic stewardship processes and their access to an on-site ID specialist. Antibiotic use was quantified as days of therapy (DOT) per days-present and categorized based on National Healthcare Safety Network definitions. A negative binomial regression model with risk adjustment was used to determine the association between presence of an on-site ID specialist and antibiotic use at the level of patient-admissions. Eighteen of 122 (14.8%) hospitals lacked an on-site ID specialist; there were 525,451 (95.8%) admissions at ID hospitals and 23,007 (4.2%) at non-ID sites. In the adjusted analysis, presence of an ID specialist was associated with lower total inpatient antibacterial use [OR 0.92, (95% CI, 0.85-0.99)]. Presence of an ID specialist was also associated with lower use of broad-spectrum antibacterials [OR 0.61 (95% CI, 0.54-0.70)] and higher narrow-spectrum beta-lactam use [OR 1.43 (95% CI, 1.22-1.67)]. Total antibacterial exposure (inpatient plus post-discharge) was lower among patients at ID versus non-ID sites [OR 0.92 (95% CI, 0.86-0.99)]. Patients at hospitals with an ID specialist received antibiotics in a way more consistent with stewardship principles. The presence of an ID specialist may be important to effective antibiotic stewardship

Using Audit and Feedback to Improve Antimicrobial Prescribing in Emergency Departments: A Multicenter Quasi-Experimental Study in the Veterans Health Administration

Background: In this pilot trial, we evaluated whether audit-and-feedback was a feasible strategy to improve antimicrobial prescribing in emergency departments (EDs). Methods: We evaluated an audit-and-feedback intervention using a quasi-experimental interrupted time-series design at 2 intervention and 2 matched-control EDs; there was a 12-month baseline, 1-month implementation, and 11-month intervention period. At intervention sites, clinicians received (1) a single, one-on-one education about antimicrobial prescribing for common infections and (2) individualized feedback on total and condition-specific (uncomplicated acute respiratory infection [ARI]) antimicrobial use with peer-to-peer comparisons at baseline and every quarter. The primary outcome was the total antimicrobial-prescribing rate for all visits and was assessed using generalized linear models. In an exploratory analysis, we measured antimicrobial use for uncomplicated ARI visits and manually reviewed charts to assess guideline-concordant management for 6 common infections. Results: In the baseline and intervention periods, intervention sites had 28 016 and 23 164 visits compared to 33 077 and 28 835 at control sites. We enrolled 27 of 31 (87.1%) eligible clinicians; they acknowledged receipt of 33.3% of feedback e-mails. Intervention sites compared with control sites had no absolute reduction in their total antimicrobial rate (incidence rate ratio = 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.01). At intervention sites, antimicrobial use for uncomplicated ARIs decreased (68.6% to 42.4%; P < .01) and guideline-concordant management improved (52.1% to 72.5%; P < .01); these improvements were not seen at control sites. Conclusions: At intervention sites, total antimicrobial use did not decrease, but an exploratory analysis showed reduced antimicrobial prescribing for viral ARIs. Future studies should identify additional targets for condition-specific feedback while exploring ways to make electronic feedback more acceptable

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Nasal Real-Time PCR: A Predictive Tool for Contamination of the Hospital Environment

OBJECTIVE We sought to determine whether the bacterial burden in the nares, as determined by the cycle threshold (CT) value from real-time MRSA PCR, is predictive of environmental contamination with MRSA. METHODS Patients identified as MRSA nasal carriers per hospital protocol were enrolled within 72 hours of room admission. Patients were excluded if (1) nasal mupirocin or chlorhexidine body wash was used within the past month or (2) an active MRSA infection was suspected. Four environmental sites, 6 body sites and a wound, if present, were cultured with premoistened swabs. All nasal swabs were submitted for both a quantitative culture and real-time PCR (Roche Lightcycler, Indianapolis, IN). RESULTS At study enrollment, 82 patients had a positive MRSA-PCR. A negative correlation of moderate strength was observed between the CT value and the number of MRSA colonies in the nares (r=−0.61; P<0.01). Current antibiotic use was associated with lower levels of MRSA nasal colonization (CT value, 30.2 vs 27.7; P<0.01). Patients with concomitant environmental contamination had a higher median log MRSA nares count (3.9 vs 2.5, P=0.01) and lower CT values (28.0 vs 30.2; P<0.01). However, a ROC curve was unable to identify a threshold MRSA nares count that reliably excluded environmental contamination. CONCLUSIONS Patients with a higher burden of MRSA in their nares, based on the CT value, were more likely to contaminate their environment with MRSA. However, contamination of the environment cannot be predicted solely by the degree of MRSA nasal colonization

Antibiotic stewardship implementation at hospitals without on-site infectious disease specialists: A qualitative study.

BackgroundHospitals are required to have antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs), but there are few models for implementing ASPs without the support of an infectious disease (ID) specialist, defined as an ID physician and/or ID pharmacist.ObjectiveIn this study, we sought to understand ASP implementation at hospitals that lack on-site ID support within the Veterans' Health Administration (VHA).MethodsUsing a mandatory VHA survey, we identified acute-care hospitals that lacked an on-site ID specialist. We conducted semistructured interviews with personnel involved in ASP activities.SettingThe study was conducted across 7 VHA hospitals.ParticipantsIn total, 42 hospital personnel were enrolled in the study.ResultsThe primary responsibility for ASPs fell on the pharmacist champions, who were typically assigned multiple other non-ASP responsibilities. The pharmacist champions were more successful at gaining buy-in when they had established rapport with clinicians, but at some sites, the use of contract physicians and frequent staff turnover were potential barriers. Some sites felt that having access to an off-site ID specialist was important for overcoming institutional barriers and improving the acceptance of their stewardship recommendations. In general, stewardship champions struggled to mobilize institutional resources, which made it difficult to advance their programmatic goals.ConclusionIn this study of 7 hospitals without on-site ID support, we found that ASPs are largely a pharmacy-driven process. Remote ID support, if available, was seen as helpful for implementing stewardship interventions. These findings may inform the future implementation of ASPs in settings lacking local ID expertise