scholarly journals Importance of Infectious Diseases Consultation and the Use of Core Measures in the Management of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia (SAB) at a Tertiary Care Academic Medical Center

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis Crevecoeur ◽  
Dong Heun Lee ◽  
Nancy Law ◽  
Tiffany Bias ◽  
Sara Schultz
2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis Jones ◽  
Dustin Wilson ◽  
Christina Sarubbi ◽  
Deverick J. Anderson ◽  
Richard H. Drew

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (8) ◽  
pp. 932-935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline E. Sherbuk ◽  
Dayna McManus ◽  
Jeffrey E. Topal ◽  
Maricar Malinis

AbstractA retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the value of the antimicrobial stewardship team (AST) combined with infectious diseases consultation (IDC) on management and outcomes of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) in a tertiary-care academic center. Involvement of AST or IDC was associated with reduced mortality of SAB.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Taupin ◽  
Adolf W Karchmer ◽  
Roger B Davis ◽  
Mary T LaSalvia

Abstract We compared outcomes and clinical characteristics of uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia planned for a 14-day or >14-day course of intravenous antibiotics. Treatment failure was infrequent in both groups (0% and 5%, respectively). Catheter-associated deep vein thrombosis, immunosuppression, and valvular dysfunction were associated with a longer planned duration of therapy.


2017 ◽  
Vol 74 (23) ◽  
pp. 1997-2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis M. Jones ◽  
Richard H. Drew ◽  
Dustin T. Wilson ◽  
Christina Sarubbi ◽  
Deverick J. Anderson

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s168-s169
Author(s):  
Rebecca Choudhury ◽  
Ronald Beaulieu ◽  
Thomas Talbot ◽  
George Nelson

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


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 ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S311-S311
Author(s):  
Laura Selby ◽  
Richard Starlin

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


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S149-S149
Author(s):  
Mohammed Aldhaeefi ◽  
Jeffrey Pearson ◽  
Sanjat Kanjilal ◽  
Brandon Dionne

Abstract Background Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia is a significant cause of mortality. Penicillin (PCN) may have a role in the treatment of penicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (PSSA) bacteremia as it has a narrower spectrum of activity than cefazolin and is better tolerated than antistaphylococcal penicillins (ASPs). The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of PCN versus cefazolin or ASPs in the treatment of PSSA bacteremia. Methods This is a single-center, retrospective study at a tertiary academic medical center. All patients with a PSSA blood culture from January 1, 2012 to September 1, 2019 were screened. Patients were excluded if they were treated with a definitive antibiotic (defined as antimicrobial therapy received 72 hours after positive blood culture) other than the study comparators, or if they received combination antibiotic therapy >72 hours from the initial positive blood culture result. The primary outcome was 60-day clinical failure, which was a composite endpoint of change in antibiotic after 72 hours of definitive therapy, recurrence of PSSA bacteremia, infection-related readmission, or all-cause mortality. Results Of 277 patients with PSSA bacteremia, 101 patients were included in the study; 62 (61%) were male and 11 (11%) had a β-lactam allergy. At baseline, 40 patients (40%) had hardware, 25 (25%) had an intravenous line, 6 (6%) were on dialysis, and 4 (4%) had active IV drug use, with similar distribution across antibiotic groups. Penicillin was the most common antibiotic used (Table 1). There was a significant difference among groups with respect to the 60-day clinical failure (log-rank p=0.019). In terms of unadjusted 60-day clinical failure, penicillin had similar outcomes to cefazolin (95% CI -0.29 to 0.104, p=0.376), however, it had statistically significant better outcomes in comparison to the ASPs, nafcillin or oxacillin (95% CI 0.023 to 0.482, p=0.031) (Table 1). Table 1. 60-day outcomes of PSSA bacteremia Conclusion Penicillin is effective and safe in the treatment of PSSA bacteremia and may be preferable to antistaphylococcal penicillins Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document