scholarly journals Clinical Team Distribution and Antibiotic Use Patterns at a Tertiary-Care Academic Medical Center

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s168-s169
Author(s):  
Rebecca Choudhury ◽  
Ronald Beaulieu ◽  
Thomas Talbot ◽  
George Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Hospital Units ◽  
Antibiotic Utilization ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Level Data ◽  
Utilization Data

Background: As more US hospitals report antibiotic utilization to the CDC, standardized antimicrobial administration ratios (SAARs) derived from patient care unit-based antibiotic utilization data will increasingly be used to guide local antibiotic stewardship interventions. Location-based antibiotic utilization surveillance data are often utilized given the relative ease of ascertainment. However, aggregating antibiotic use data on a unit basis may have variable effects depending on the number of clinical teams providing care. In this study, we examined antibiotic utilization from units at a tertiary-care hospital to illustrate the potential challenges of using unit-based antibiotic utilization to change individual prescribing. Methods: We used inpatient pharmacy antibiotic use administration records at an adult tertiary-care academic medical center over a 6-month period from January 2019 through June 2019 to describe the geographic footprints and AU of medical, surgical, and critical care teams. All teams accounting for at least 1 patient day present on each unit during the study period were included in the analysis, as were all teams prescribing at least 1 antibiotic day of therapy (DOT). Results: The study population consisted of 24 units: 6 ICUs (25%) and 18 non-ICUs (75%). Over the study period, the average numbers of teams caring for patients in ICU and non-ICU wards were 10.2 (range, 3.2–16.9) and 13.7 (range, 10.4–18.9), respectively. Units were divided into 3 categories by the number of teams, accounting for ≥70% of total patient days present (Fig. 1): “homogenous” (≤3), “pauciteam” (4–7 teams), and “heterogeneous” (>7 teams). In total, 12 (50%) units were “pauciteam”; 7 (29%) were “homogeneous”; and 5 (21%) were “heterogeneous.” Units could also be classified as “homogenous,” “pauciteam,” or “heterogeneous” based on team-level antibiotic utilization or DOT for specific antibiotics. Different patterns emerged based on antibiotic restriction status. Classifying units based on vancomycin DOT (unrestricted) exhibited fewer “heterogeneous” units, whereas using meropenem DOT (restricted) revealed no “heterogeneous” units. Furthermore, the average number of units where individual clinical teams prescribed an antibiotic varied widely (range, 1.4–12.3 units per team). Conclusions: Unit-based antibiotic utilization data may encounter limitations in affecting prescriber behavior, particularly on units where a large number of clinical teams contribute to antibiotic utilization. Additionally, some services prescribing antibiotics across many hospital units may be minimally influenced by unit-level data. Team-based antibiotic utilization may allow for a more targeted metric to drive individual team prescribing.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

scholarly journals Financial Impact of Tertiary Care in an Academic Medical Center

2000 ◽  
Vol 231 (6) ◽  
pp. 860-868 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas S. Huber ◽  
Lori M. Carlton ◽  
Donna G. O’Hern ◽  
Nancy S. Hardt ◽  
C. Keith Ozaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Financial Impact ◽  
Academic Medical

scholarly journals 421. Effect of SARs-Cov-2 mRNA Vaccination in Healthcare Workers with Household COVID Exposure

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S311-S311
Author(s):  
Laura Selby ◽  
Richard Starlin
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Limited Data ◽  
Viral Shedding ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Significant Burden

Abstract Background Healthcare workers have experienced a significant burden of COVID-19 disease. COVID mRNA vaccines have shown great efficacy in prevention of severe disease and hospitalization due to COVID infection, but limited data is available about acquisition of infection and asymptomatic viral shedding. Methods Fully vaccinated healthcare workers at a tertiary-care academic medical center in Omaha Nebraska who reported a household exposure to COVID-19 infection are eligible for a screening program in which they are serially screened with PCR but allowed to work if negative on initial test and asymptomatic. Serial screening by NP swab was completed every 5-7 days, and workers became excluded from work if testing was positive or became symptomatic. Results Of the 94 employees who were fully vaccinated at the time of the household exposure to COVID-19 infection, 78 completed serial testing and were negative. Sixteen were positive on initial or subsequent screening. Vaccine failure rate of 17.0% (16/94). Healthcare workers exposed to household COVID positive contact Conclusion High risk household exposures to COVID-19 infection remains a significant potential source of infections in healthcare workers even after workers are fully vaccinated with COVID mRNA vaccines especially those with contact to positive domestic partners. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals 154. Antibiotic Use During Three Separate Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic at a Large Academic Medical Center in Detroit, MI

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S188-S189
Author(s):  
Deepika Sivakumar ◽  
Shelbye R Herbin ◽  
Raymond Yost ◽  
Marco R Scipione
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Bacterial Pneumonia ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Percent Change ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Days Of Therapy ◽  
Time Periods ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Inpatient antibiotic use early on in the COVID-19 pandemic may have increased due to the inability to distinguish between bacterial and COVID-19 pneumonia. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of COVID-19 on antimicrobial usage during three separate waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of patients admitted to Detroit Medical Center between 3/10/19 to 4/24/21. Median days of therapy per 1000 adjusted patient days (DOT/1000 pt days) was evaluated for all administered antibiotics included in our pneumonia guidelines during 4 separate time periods: pre-COVID (3/3/19-4/27/19); 1st wave (3/8/20-5/2/20); 2nd wave (12/6/21-1/30/21); and 3rd wave (3/7/21-4/24/21). Antibiotics included in our pneumonia guidelines include: amoxicillin, azithromycin, aztreonam, ceftriaxone, cefepime, ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, linezolid, meropenem, moxifloxacin, piperacillin-tazobactam, tobramycin, and vancomycin. The percent change in antibiotic use between the separate time periods was also evaluated. Results An increase in antibiotics was seen during the 1st wave compared to the pre-COVID period (2639 [IQR 2339-3439] DOT/1000 pt days vs. 2432 [IQR 2291-2499] DOT/1000 pt days, p=0.08). This corresponded to an increase of 8.5% during the 1st wave. This increase did not persist during the 2nd and 3rd waves of the pandemic, and the use decreased by 8% and 16%, respectively, compared to the pre-COVID period. There was an increased use of ceftriaxone (+6.5%, p=0.23), doxycycline (+46%, p=0.13), linezolid (+61%, p=0.014), cefepime (+50%, p=0.001), and meropenem (+29%, p=0.25) during the 1st wave compared to the pre-COVID period. Linezolid (+39%, p=0.013), cefepime (+47%, p=0.08) and tobramycin (+47%, p=0.05) use remained high during the 3rd wave compared to the pre-COVID period, but the use was lower when compared to the 1st and 2nd waves. Figure 1. Antibiotic Use 01/2019 to 04/2019 Conclusion Antibiotics used to treat bacterial pneumonia during the 1st wave of the pandemic increased and there was a shift to broader spectrum agents during that period. The increased use was not sustained during the 2nd and 3rd waves of the pandemic, possibly due to the increased awareness of the differences between patients who present with COVID-19 pneumonia and bacterial pneumonia. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Economic Evaluation of a Pharmacist-Led 5-Day Therapeutic Hold of IV Levothyroxine at an Academic Medical Center

2020 ◽  
pp. 001857872097045
Author(s):  
Blake T. Barlow ◽  
Russel J. Roberts ◽  
Kelly Newman ◽  
Sarah K. Harrison ◽  
Jonathan H. Sin
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Surgical Trauma ◽  
Implementation Phase ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Pharmacokinetic Properties ◽  
Utilization Data ◽  
Surgical Icu

Objective: Providers often admit patients with active outpatient prescriptions for levothyroxine. During an inpatient admission, providers may instruct critically ill patients to take nothing by mouth, or nil per os (NPO). Thus, they may prescribe the intravenous (IV) formulation of levothyroxine during this period. However, levothyroxine possesses a prolonged half-life of up to 7 days; therefore, immediate transition to IV levothyroxine may not be clinically necessary in the acute NPO setting. Intravenous levothyroxine is significantly more expensive than equivalent oral doses and may prove to be a financial burden for an institution. By understanding the pharmacokinetic properties of levothyroxine, we implemented a cost-saving initiative involving a 5-day therapeutic hold of IV levothyroxine. Methods: This was a retrospective evaluation in 2 intensive care units (ICU): a 20-bed surgical/trauma ICU and an 18-bed mixed medical/surgical ICU. Patient data, utilization data, and documented pharmacist interventions were collected for 6 months prior to implementation of the 5-day IV levothyroxine therapeutic hold and for 6 months post-implementation. All patients prescribed IV levothyroxine during these timeframes were included. Results: During the 6-month pre-implementation phase, 674 doses (691 vials) of IV levothyroxine for 77 unique patients were dispensed from the 2 ICUs. During the 6-month post-implementation phase, 168 doses (188 vials) of IV levothyroxine were dispensed for 44 unique patients. Of the 44 patients (48 orders) who still received IV levothyroxine, 22.9% of orders were deemed clinically necessary by the pharmacist and were not recommended to be held under the protocol, 64.6% were due to the verifying pharmacist being unaware of the protocol, 8.3% of orders were due to protocol non-compliance, and 4.2% were verified after the 5-day hold was complete as the patient remained NPO. This pharmacy-led initiative resulted in a 75% decrease in usage post-implementation and an estimated annualized savings of $80,000. Conclusion: A pharmacy-led initiative comprised of a 5-day therapeutic hold of IV levothyroxine was feasible and led to a 75% reduction in usage and cost over a 6-month period in 2 ICU’s. Future steps include additional staff education for improved protocol adherence and expanding the protocol institution-wide for an even greater cost-savings potential.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Perioperative Medication Errors and Adverse Drug Events

2016 ◽  
Vol 124 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen C. Nanji ◽  
Amit Patel ◽  
Sofia Shaikh ◽  
Diane L. Seger ◽  
David W. Bates
Keyword(s):  
Medication Errors ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Study Staff ◽  
Chart Abstraction ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
Perioperative Medication

Abstract Background The purpose of this study is to assess the rates of perioperative medication errors (MEs) and adverse drug events (ADEs) as percentages of medication administrations, to evaluate their root causes, and to formulate targeted solutions to prevent them. Methods In this prospective observational study, anesthesia-trained study staff (anesthesiologists/nurse anesthetists) observed randomly selected operations at a 1,046-bed tertiary care academic medical center to identify MEs and ADEs over 8 months. Retrospective chart abstraction was performed to flag events that were missed by observation. All events subsequently underwent review by two independent reviewers. Primary outcomes were the incidence of MEs and ADEs. Results A total of 277 operations were observed with 3,671 medication administrations of which 193 (5.3%; 95% CI, 4.5 to 6.0) involved a ME and/or ADE. Of these, 153 (79.3%) were preventable and 40 (20.7%) were nonpreventable. The events included 153 (79.3%) errors and 91 (47.2%) ADEs. Although 32 (20.9%) of the errors had little potential for harm, 51 (33.3%) led to an observed ADE and an additional 70 (45.8%) had the potential for patient harm. Of the 153 errors, 99 (64.7%) were serious, 51 (33.3%) were significant, and 3 (2.0%) were life-threatening. Conclusions One in 20 perioperative medication administrations included an ME and/or ADE. More than one third of the MEs led to observed ADEs, and the remaining two thirds had the potential for harm. These rates are markedly higher than those reported by retrospective surveys. Specific solutions exist that have the potential to decrease the incidence of perioperative MEs.

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) Comes to America: Preliminary Experience with Colorectal ESD At An American Tertiary Care Academic Medical Center

2008 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. AB147
Author(s):  
Mainor R. Antillon ◽  
Wilson P. Pais ◽  
Christopher R. Bartalos ◽  
Alberto a. Diaz-Arias ◽  
Ghassan M. Hammoud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Submucosal Dissection ◽  
Academic Medical
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document