The impact of antibiotic allergy labels on antibiotic exposure, clinical outcomes, and healthcare costs: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Nathan M. Krah ◽  
Trahern W. Jones ◽  
Joanita Lake ◽  
Adam L. Hersh
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
Inpatient Setting ◽  
Antibiotic Exposure ◽  
Antibiotic Allergy ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Objective: A growing body of evidence suggests that antibiotic allergy labels as documented in medical records are a risk factor for poor clinical outcomes. In this systematic review, we aimed to determine how antibiotic allergy labels influence 3 domains: antibiotic use and exposure, clinical outcomes, and healthcare-related costs. Design: We performed a systematic review to identify studies reporting outcomes in patients with antibiotic allergy labels compared to nonallergic counterparts. The search included PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, EBSCO, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion and abstracted data. Studies were graded using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. Study outcomes included antibiotic use, clinical outcomes, and economic outcomes. Results: In total, 41 studies met our criteria for inclusion. These studies varied in medical specialty, patient population, healthcare delivery system, and design, but most were conducted among adults age >18 years (85%) in the inpatient setting (82.5%). Among 34 studies examining antibiotic exposure, 32 (94%) found that patients with antibiotic allergy labels received more broad-spectrum antibiotics. Moreover, 31 studies examined clinical outcomes such as length of hospitalization, ICU admission, hospital readmission, multidrug-resistant or opportunistic infection, or mortality, and 27 (87%) found that allergy-labeled patients had at least 1 negative outcome. Of 9 studies examining healthcare costs, 7 (78%) found that allergy-labeled patients incurred significantly higher drug or hospital-related costs. Conclusions: Antibiotic allergy labels have negative effects on antibiotic use, clinical outcomes, and economic outcomes in a variety of clinical settings and populations.

scholarly journals The impact of asynchronous e-visits on clinical outcomes and healthcare delivery: A systematic review (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver T. Nguyen ◽  
Amir Alishahi Tabriz ◽  
Jinhai Huo ◽  
Karim Hanna ◽  
Christopher M. Shea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Healthcare Quality ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Infection Management ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND E-visits involve asynchronous communication between providers and patients through a secure web-based platform, such as a patient portal, to elicit symptoms and determine a diagnosis and treatment plan. E-visits are now reimbursable through Medicare due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The state of the evidence regarding e-visits, such as the impact on clinical outcomes and healthcare delivery, is unclear. OBJECTIVE To address this gap, this systematic review examines how e-visits have impacted clinical outcomes and healthcare quality, access, utilization, and costs. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 through October 2020 for peer-reviewed studies that assessed e-visits’ impact on clinical and healthcare delivery outcomes. RESULTS Out of 1,858 papers, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. E-visit usage was associated with improved or comparable clinical outcomes, especially for chronic disease management (e.g., diabetes care, blood pressure management). The impact on quality of care varied across conditions. Quality of care was equivalent or better for chronic conditions but variable quality was observed in infection management (e.g., appropriate antibiotic prescribing). Similarly, the impact on healthcare utilization varied across conditions (e.g., lower utilization for dermatology) but mixed impact in primary care. Healthcare costs were lower for e-visits for a wide-range of conditions (e.g., dermatology and acute visits). No studies examined the impact of e-visits on healthcare access. Available studies are observational in nature and it is difficult to draw firm conclusions about effectiveness or impact on care delivery. CONCLUSIONS Overall, the evidence suggests e-visits may provide comparable clinical outcomes to in-person care and reduce healthcare costs for certain healthcare conditions. At the same time, there is mixed evidence on healthcare quality, especially regarding infection management (e.g., sinusitis, urinary tract infections, conjunctivitis). Further studies are needed to test implementation strategies that might improve delivery (e.g., clinical decision support for antibiotic prescribing) and to assess which conditions are amenable to e-visits and which conditions require in-person or face-to-face care (e.g., virtual visit). CLINICALTRIAL not applicable

671 Update of a systematic review and meta-analysis studying the association between antibiotic use and clinical outcomes of non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A708-A708
Author(s):  
Pierre-Alain Bandinelli ◽  
Julie Cervesi ◽  
Clément Le Bescop ◽  
Renaud Buffet ◽  
Jean De Gunzburg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Time Window ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Forest Plot ◽  
Antibiotic Exposure ◽  
Hazard Ratios

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been shown to improve patients‘ clinical outcomes in a variety of cancers, but with variable efficacy. Prior research has also suggested that systemic antibiotic (ABX) exposure may impact the intestinal microbiota and result in suboptimal ICI treatment outcomes. Our team published a systematic review and meta-analysis showing that ABX use could indeed decrease the survival of patients diagnosed with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and treated with ICIs.1 The present abstract aims at updating this meta-analysis by incorporating new studies that have been published in the period ranging from September 2019 to August 2020.MethodsMedline (through PubMed), the Cochrane Library and major oncology conferences proceedings were systematically searched to identify studies assessing the impact of ABX use on the clinical outcomes of NSCLC patients treated with ICIs. Studies were found eligible for inclusion when they mentioned a hazard ratio (HR) or Kaplan–Meier curves for overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) based on antibiotic exposure. Pooled HRs for OS and PFS and HRs for OS and PFS according to different time windows for ABX exposure were calculated.Results6 eligible new studies were identified between September 2019 and August 2020 while 3 other studies were updated with new information. Altogether, 27 studies reported data for OS (6,436 patients, 826 of whom coming from new studies) and 24 for PFS (3,751 patients, 786 of whom coming from new studies). The pooled HR was 1.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38–2.23) for OS and 1.57 (95% CI: 1.28–1.92) for PFS, confirming a significantly reduced survival in patients with NSCLC exposed to ABX. The detailed analysis in subgroups based on the time window of exposure (figure 1, figure 2) suggests that the deleterious effect of ABX is stronger when the exposition happens shortly before and after the initiation of the ICI treatment.Abstract 671 Figure 1Forest plot of hazard ratios for overall survival of patients diagnosed with NSCLC and exposed to antibiotics versus not exposed to antibiotics, according to the time window of antibiotic exposureAbstract 671 Figure 2Forest plot of hazard ratios for progression-free survival of patients diagnosed with NSCLC and exposed to antibiotics versus not exposed to antibiotics, according to the time window of antibiotic exposureConclusionsThe update of the meta-analysis confirms the previously reported deleterious effect of ABX on ICI treatment outcomes, taking into account the latest publications in the field. The topic deserves further research to uncover if the effect will stand with 1st line use of ICI together with chemotherapies and/or other approved combinations, elucidate the mechanisms at stake and improve care of patients.ReferencesLurienne L, Cervesi J, Duhalde L, de Gunzburg J, Andremont A, Zalcman G, et al. NSCLC immunotherapy efficacy and antibiotic use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Oncol 2020;15:1147–1159.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of antibiotic exposure association with clinical outcomes of chemotherapy versus immunotherapy across three tumour types

ESMO Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. e000803
Author(s):  
Amit A Kulkarni ◽  
Maryam Ebadi ◽  
Shijia Zhang ◽  
Mohamad A Meybodi ◽  
Alaa M Ali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Induction Chemotherapy ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Solid Tumours ◽  
Antibiotic Exposure ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Risk Of Relapse

BackgroundIn solid tumours, antibiotic use during immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment is associated with shorter survival. Following allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), antibiotic-induced gut microbiome alterations are associated with risk of relapse and mortality. These findings suggest that the gut microbiota can modulate antitumour immune response across tumour types, though it is not clear if the impact on outcomes is specific to immune therapy. An important limitation of previous studies is that the analysis combined all antibiotic exposures irrespective of the antibiotic spectrum of activity. Whether antibiotic exposure during induction chemotherapy in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) affects risk of relapse is also unknown.Patients and methodsWe performed a single-centred retrospective analysis of antibiotic exposures in metastatic/advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and renal cell cancer (RCC) receiving ICI and newly diagnosed AML patients receiving induction chemotherapy achieving a complete remission 1. Antibiotic use within 4 weeks before and 6 weeks after the ICI initiation were included. In AML patients, antibiotic exposures between days 1 and 28 of induction were collected. Antibiotics were a priori stratified based on spectrum of activity. Primary outcomes of interest were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) in NSCLC and RCC and relapse-free survival (RFS) in AML.Results140 patients with NSCLC, 55 with RCC and 143 with AML were included. In multivariable analysis, PFS and OS were shorter in NSCLC patients who received broad-spectrum anti-anaerobes (PFS, HR=3.2, 95% CI 1.6 to 6.2, p<0.01; OS, HR=1.7, 95% CI 0.8 to 3.6, p=0.19) or ‘other’ antibiotics (vancomycin-predominant) (PFS, HR=2.4, 95% CI 1.3 to 4.6, p<0.01; OS, HR=2.4, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.7, p=0.01). In RCC, patients who received penicillins/penicillin-class/early-generation cephalosporins had shorter PFS (HR=3.6, 95% CI 1.7 to 7.6, p<0.01) but similar OS (p=0.37). In the AML cohort, none of the exposures were associated with RFS.ConclusionIn contrast to AML, antibiotic exposures in solid tumours affected clinical outcomes. The presence of an allogeneic effect (allo-HCT) or an augmented immune system (checkpoint blockade) may be necessary for microbiota mediation of relapse risk.

scholarly journals The impact of asynchronous e-visits on clinical outcomes and healthcare delivery: A systematic review (Preprint)

10.2196/27531 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver T. Nguyen ◽  
Amir Alishahi Tabriz ◽  
Jinhai Huo ◽  
Karim Hanna ◽  
Christopher M. Shea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
The Impact

Impact of Different Methods for Describing the Extent of Prior Antibiotic Exposure on the Association Between Antibiotic Use and Antibiotic-Resistant Infection

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 647-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily P. Hyle ◽  
Warren B. Bilker ◽  
Leanne B. Gasink ◽  
Ebbing Lautenbach
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Continuous Variable ◽  
Antibiotic Exposure ◽  
Categorical Variable ◽  
Antibiotic Resistant ◽  
E Coli ◽  
Multivariable Models ◽  
The Impact

Objective.Many studies have investigated the association between prior antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance. However, methods used in past studies to describe the extent of prior antibiotic use (eg, use of the 2 categories exposure versus no exposure and measurement of duration of exposure) have not been reviewed. The impact of the use of different methods for quantifying the use of antibiotics is unknown. The objectives of this study were to characterize past approaches to describing the extent of antibiotic use and to identify the impact of the use of different methods on associations between use of specific antibiotics and infection with an antibiotic-resistant-organism.Methods.We conducted a systematic review of studies that investigated risk factors for extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species to identify variability in past approaches to describing the extent of antibiotic use. We then reanalyzed a data set from a prior study of risk factors for infection with ESBL-producing E. coli and Klebsiella species. We developed 2 separate multivariable models: 1 in which prior antibiotic use was described as a categorical variable (eg, exposure or no exposure) and 1 in which antibiotic use was described as a continuous variable (eg, measured in antibiotic-days). These models were compared qualitatively.Setting.Large academic medical center.Results.The 25 articles included in the systematic review revealed a variety of methods used to describe the extent of prior antibiotic exposure. Only 1 study justified its approach. Results from the 2 multivariable models that used different methodologic approaches differed substantially. Specifically, use of third-generation cephalosporins was a risk factor for infection with ESBL-producing E. coli and Klebsiella species when antibiotic use was described as a continuous variable but not when antibiotic use was described as a categorical variable.Conclusions.There has been no consistent method for assessing the extent of prior antibiotic exposure. The use of different methods may substantially alter the identified antimicrobial risk factors, which has important implications for the resultant interventions regarding antimicrobial use.

Prior antibiotic use and acquisition of multidrug-resistant organisms in hospitalized children: A systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (10) ◽  
pp. 1107-1115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meghan T. Murray ◽  
Melissa P. Beauchemin ◽  
Natalie Neu ◽  
Elaine L. Larson
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Multidrug Resistant ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Hospitalized Children ◽  
Antibiotic Exposure ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Multidrug Resistant Organisms ◽  
The Impact

AbstractObjective:Multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) cause ~5%–10% of infections in hospitalized children, leading to an increased risk of death, prolonged hospitalization, and additional costs. Antibiotic exposure is considered a driving factor of MDRO acquisition; however, consensus regarding the impact of antibiotic factors, especially in children, is lacking. We conducted a systematic review to examine the relationship between antibiotic use and subsequent healthcare-associated infection or colonization with an MDRO in children.Design:Systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline.Methods:We searched PubMed and Embase for all English, peer-reviewed original research studies published before September 2018. Included studies evaluated hospitalized children, antibiotic use as an exposure, and bacterial MDRO as an outcome.Results:Of the 535 studies initially identified, 29 met the inclusion criteria. Overall, a positive association was identified in most studies evaluating a specific antibiotic exposure (17 of 21, 81%), duration of antibiotics (9 of 12, 75%), and number of antibiotics received (2 of 3, 67%). Those studies that evaluated any antibiotic exposure had mixed results (5 of 10, 50%). Study sites, populations, and definitions of antibiotic use and MDROs varied widely.Conclusions:Published studies evaluating this relationship are limited and are of mixed quality. Limitations include observation bias in recall of antibiotic exposure, variations in case definitions, and lack of evaluation of antibiotic dosing and appropriateness. Additional studies exploring the impact of antibiotic use and MDRO acquisition may be needed to develop effective antibiotic stewardship programs for hospitalized children.

scholarly journals Quality indicators for responsible antibiotic use in the inpatient setting: a systematic review followed by an international multidisciplinary consensus procedure

2018 ◽  
Vol 73 (suppl_6) ◽  
pp. vi30-vi39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annelie A Monnier ◽  
Jeroen Schouten ◽  
Marion Le Maréchal ◽  
Gianpiero Tebano ◽  
Céline Pulcini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Inpatient Setting ◽  
Consensus Procedure

scholarly journals What Is the Impact of Ambulatory Vital Sign Monitoring on Deterioration Detection and Related Clinical Outcomes in Hospitalised Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Morgado Areia ◽  
Christopher Biggs ◽  
Mauro Santos ◽  
Neal Thurley ◽  
Stephen Gerry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Ambulatory Monitoring ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Monitoring Systems ◽  
Hospitalised Patients ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Timely recognition of the deteriorating inpatient remains challenging. Ambulatory monitoring systems (AMS) may augment current monitoring practices. However, there are many challenges to implementation in the hospital environment, and evidence describing the clinical impact of AMS on deterioration detection and patient outcome remains unclear. Objective: To assess the impact of vital signs monitoring on detection of deterioration and related clinical outcomes in hospitalised patients using ambulatory monitoring systems, in comparison with standard care.Methods: A systematic search was conducted in August 2020 using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL and Health Technology Assessment databases, as well as grey literature. Studies comparing the use of AMS against standard care for deterioration detection and related clinical outcomes in hospitalised patients were included. Deterioration related outcomes (primary) included unplanned intensive care admissions, rapid response team or cardiac arrest activation, total and major complications rate. Other clinical outcomes (secondary) included in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay. Exploratory outcomes included alerting system parameters and clinical trial registry information. Results: Of 8706 citations, 10 studies with different designs met the inclusion criteria, of which 7 were included in the meta-analyses. Overall study quality was moderate. The meta-analysis indicated that the AMS, when compared with standard care, was associated with a reduction in intensive care transfers (risk ratio, RR, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.66 to 1.15), rapid response or cardiac arrest team activation (RR, 0.84; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.01), total (RR, 0.77; 95% CI 0.44 to 1.32) and major (RR, 0.55; 95% CI 0.24 to 1.30) complications prevalence. There was also association with reduced mortality (RR, 0.48; 95% CI 0.18 to 1.29) and hospital length of stay (mean difference, MD, -0.09; 95% CI -0.43 to 0.44). However, none were statistically significant.Conclusion: This systematic review indicates that implementation of AMS may have a positive impact on early deterioration detection and associated clinical outcomes, but differing design/quality of available studies and diversity of outcomes measures limits a definite conclusion. Our narrative findings suggested that alarms should be adjusted to minimise false alerts and promote rapid clinical action in response to deterioration.PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42020188633

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document