Low incidence of severe bacterial infections in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 : A population-based registry study

Background Bacterial infections complicating COVID-19 are rare but present a challenging clinical entity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence, aetiology and outcome of severe laboratory-verified bacterial infections in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. Methods All laboratory-confirmed patients with COVID-19 admitted to specialised healthcare hospitals in the Capital Province of Finland during the first wave of COVID-19 between 27 February and 21 June 2020 were retrospectively studied. We gathered the blood and respiratory tract culture reports of these patients and analysed their association with 90-day case-fatality using multivariable regression analysis. Results A severe bacterial infection was diagnosed in 40/585 (6.8%) patients with COVID-19. The range of bacteria was diverse, and the most common bacterial findings in respiratory samples were gram-negative, and in blood cultures gram-positive bacteria. Patients with severe bacterial infection had longer hospital stay (mean 31; SD 20 days) compared to patients without (mean 9; SD 9 days; p < 0.001). Case-fatality was higher with bacterial infection (15% vs 11%), but the difference was not statistically significant (OR 1.38 CI95% 0.56-3.41). Conclusions Severe bacterial infection complicating COVID-19 was a rare occurrence in our cohort. Our results are in line with the current understanding that antibiotic treatment for hospitalised COVID-19 patients should only be reserved for situations where a bacterial infection is strongly suspected. The ever-evolving landscape of the pandemic and recent advances in immunomodulatory treatment of COVID-19 patients underline the need for continuous vigilance concerning the possibility and frequency of nosocomial bacterial infections.Peer reviewe

Impact of selective reporting of wound cultures on microbiology reports and antimicrobial-drug use on a wound-care ward in Finland : a retrospective cohort study

Background Selective reporting is a promising tool for antimicrobial stewardship, but in wound cultures, its effects on the use of antimicrobials are unknown. Our HUS Diagnostic Center Bacteriology laboratory refined its selective reporting protocol for wound cultures during 2017-2018. In this study we aimed to show our protocol's impact on the frequency of antimicrobial escalation. . Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients in the wound-care ward of a primary-care hospital in Helsinki, Finland, from 2014 to 2016 (pre-intervention) and from 2019 to April 2021 (post-intervention). With the inclusion criterion being wound-culture collection, this provided us with 299 patients, of which 152 were in the pre-intervention group, and 147 were post-intervention. We collected the data from medical records and compared the pre-intervention- with the post-intervention group in terms of patient profiles, microbiology reports, antimicrobial treatment, and treatment outcomes. Findings In the pre-intervention group 40% of the patients were male and 60% female and in the post-intervention group 49% and 51% respectively. The frequency of AST reported had decreased from 63% in the pre-intervention group to 37% post-intervention (OR 0.35, p < 0.001). The post-intervention group demonstrated lower frequencies of antimicrobial treatment 7 d after wound culture collection, 82% pre-intervention vs 58% post-intervention (OR 0.31, p < 0.001), and antimicrobial escalation, 42% vs 20% (OR 0.35, p < 0.001) respectively. Length of hospital stay, and all-cause mortality were similar between the groups. Interpretation Selective reporting of wound cultures appears an effective and safe measure to reduce the use of antimicrobials. Funding HUS Diagnostic Center. Copyright (c) 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Peer reviewe