Background: Medical tape is one of the most ubiquitous resources in the hospital. Although tape is advertised by manufacturers as a single patient-use item, half-used rolls are a common sight in hospitals. Tape is often manipulated by un-sanitized and ungloved hands and comes in close contact with patient skin. Medical tape has the potential to be a source of hospital-acquired infection as it has been documented to be colonized with pathogens ranging from MRSA to Rhizopus. Despite infection risk, currently the only clinical guidelines of tape use are outlined in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services guidance for Hemodialysis patients issued in 2008 that requires “tape should be dedicated to a single patient and discarded after use” as hemodialysis patients are at higher risk of infection. However, there is a lack of standards in the practice of tape use across hospital systems. Methods: To understand the current practices and beliefs of tape use at our institution, we developed a standardized survey to query individuals from various roles (RN, Physician, Patient Care Technicians, respiratory therapists, phlebotomists) across all patient care areas at a 746-bed academic, tertiary care center. Results: 52 units were surveyed, including 225 employees. Qualitative analysis revealed a wide variety of uses for medical tape for patient care, with venipuncture, securing IVs, and wound dressings being the most common. Only 1.4% of individuals reported single use of tape rolls. 54% of individuals reported tape use behaviors that carry an elevated risk for inoculation of pathogens. 70% of individuals reported that tape was discarded after the patient was discharged from their respective area. These practices did not change across procedure-heavy areas such as the Emergency Department or the Operating Rooms, in fact only 22% of individuals surveyed reported single use of tape in these areas. Beliefs about tape use varied: 95% of individuals agreed that a roll of tape could be used multiple times on a single patient, and 52% of individuals agreed that a roll of tape could be used on multiple patients. Conclusions: Tape use practices varied across hospital units, indicating the need for standardized policies for tape use and storage. Beliefs about tape not being a single-use item were consistent across the hospital and suggest that education and culture change efforts are needed to decrease the risk for hospital-acquired infections from improper medical tape use.

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) tools have demonstrated success in US medical licensing examinations; however, their utility in infection prevention and control (IPC) remains unknown. Methods: The program of hospital epidemiology handles consultation calls and records each question and answer. Using 2022 data, we selected 31 frequently asked questions. We utilized four AI tools, including Chat GPT-3.5 and 4.0, Bing AI, and OpenEvidence, to generate answers. We predefined scales (Table 1) to capture responses by three reviewers, including two hospital epidemiologists and one infection preventionist. The mean score of ≥ 3 and ≥ 4 was considered acceptable in accuracy and completeness, respectively. We reported the percentage of responses with acceptable accuracy and completeness out of assessed questions for each category. Results: Among 31 questions, 16 were associated with isolation duration, 9 with healthcare personnel (HCP) exposure, 4 with cleaning contaminated rooms, and 2 with patient exposure. Regarding accuracy, most AI tools performed worse in questions about isolation duration, ranging between 75% and 93.8%. All AI tools, except OpenEvidence, had a 100% accuracy rate for HCP and patient exposure. All AI tools had a 100% accuracy rate for contaminated room handling. The highest overall acceptable accuracy rate was observed in Chat GPT-3.5. Regarding completeness, most AI tools performed worse in questions about isolation duration, ranging between 44% and 75%. All AI tools, except OpenEvidence, had a 100% completeness rate for contaminated rooms and patient exposure. The highest overall acceptable completeness rate was observed in Bing AI (Table 2). Conclusions: All AI tools provided reasonable answers to commonly asked IPC-related questions, although, there were variations among different tools used. AI could be used to supplement the infection control program, especially if resources are limited.

Background: Chlorhexidine gluconate bathing (CHGB) prevents healthcare associated infections (HAIs). CHGB quality is rarely assessed; prior studies identified that concentrations of CHG can be suboptimal, particularly at the neck, and if rinsed after application. In the setting of increased HAI rates on 3 high-risk units, we evaluated CHG skin concentrations, comparing results to bathing documentation and patient reports as part of a quality improvement initiative. Methods: All patients admitted to 3 high-risk units were swabbed for CHG concentration testing at the neck, bilateral upper arms, and groin. Swabs were processed using a semi-quantitative colorimetric CHG assay. A threshold of 0.001875% CHG was used to determine adequacy based on prior studies. Adequacy was assessed by body site, timing of bath, and patient-reported skin care activities using Chi-square tests in SAS 9.4. Per hospital policy, all admitted patients are bathed daily with 2% CHG pre-packed wipes. Patients without a documented CHGB for the duration of the admission were excluded. Results: CHG testing was completed on 63 patients: 23 on medical ICU, 18 surgical ICU, 22 oncology ward, yielding 249 samples. Only ward patients could report the time of last CHGB, which agreed with nursing documentation for 12/21(57%) Adequacy by sample was no different across units: 59/88(67%) Oncology, 68/90(76%) MICU, 56/71(79%) SICU, p=0.2091. Site adequacy was different by site: neck 36/63(57%), left arm 49/62(79%), right arm 50/62(81%), groin 48/62(77%), p=0.0083. Samples taken from the 11 patients with > = 24 hours since last CHGB were more likely to be below threshold concentration: 19/47(40%) versus 47/202(23%) not adequate in the recent treatment grouping. Three patients reported showering soon after the CHGB and 8 patients used moisturizing lotion. The percent of samples below threshold for the showering patients (6/12, 50%) and lotion-users (11/32, 34%) were not significantly different from the non-showering or non-lotion using patient samples (p=0.0588 and 0.2800 respectively). Conclusion: In a facility with longstanding daily CHGB policies in place, 66/249 samples from 63 patients lacked adequate concentrations of CHG for optimal HAI prevention. Even in patients with recent CHGB, 23% of sites tested revealed inadequate levels of CHG, while 60% of those overdue for CHGB kept adequate concentrations. Reliable implementation strategies are required for CHGB so as to ensure maximal infection prevention impact.

Background: External comparisons of antimicrobial use (AU) may be more informative if adjusted for encounter characteristics. Optimal methods to define input variables for encounter-level risk-adjustment models of AU are not established. Methods: This retrospective analysis of electronic health record data included 50 US hospitals in 2020-2021. We used NHSN definitions for all antibacterials days of therapy (DOT), including adult and pediatric encounters with at least 1 day present in inpatient locations. We assessed 4 methods to define input variables: 1) diagnosis-related group (DRG) categories by Yu et al., 2) adjudicated Elixhauser comorbidity categories by Goodman et al., 3) all Clinical Classification Software Refined (CCSR) diagnosis and procedure categories, and 4) adjudicated CCSR categories where codes not appropriate for AU risk-adjustment were excluded by expert consensus, requiring review of 867 codes over 4 months to attain consensus. Data were split randomly, stratified by bed size as follows: 1) training dataset including two-thirds of encounters among two-thirds of hospitals; 2) internal testing set including one-third of encounters within training hospitals, and 3) external testing set including the remaining one-third of hospitals. We used a gradient-boosted machine (GBM) tree-based model and two-staged approach to first identify encounters with zero DOT, then estimate DOT among those with >0.5 probability of receiving antibiotics. Accuracy was assessed using mean absolute error (MAE) in testing datasets. Correlation plots compared model estimates and observed DOT among testing datasets. The top 20 most influential variables were defined using modeled variable importance. Results: Our datasets included 629,445 training, 314,971 internal testing, and 419,109 external testing encounters. Demographic data included 41% male, 59% non-Hispanic White, 25% non-Hispanic Black, 9% Hispanic, and 5% pediatric encounters. DRG was missing in 29% of encounters. MAE was lower in pediatrics as compared to adults, and lowest for models incorporating CCSR inputs (Figure 1). Performance in internal and external testing was similar, though Goodman/Elixhauser variable strategies were less accurate in external testing and underestimated long DOT outliers (Figure 2). Agnostic and adjudicated CCSR model estimates were highly correlated; their influential variables lists were similar (Figure 3). Conclusion: Larger numbers of CCSR diagnosis and procedure inputs improved risk-adjustment model accuracy compared with prior strategies. Variable importance and accuracy were similar for agnostic and adjudicated approaches. However, maintaining adjudications by experts would require significant time and potentially introduce personal bias. If findings are confirmed, the need for expert adjudication of input variables should be reconsidered.

Disclosure: Elizabeth Dodds Ashley: Advisor- HealthTrackRx. David J Weber: Consultant on vaccines: Pfizer; DSMB chair: GSK; Consultant on disinfection: BD, GAMA, PDI, Germitec

Background: Clinical laboratories perform antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) primarily by determining the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for an organism–antimicrobial combination and comparing it with established breakpoints to generate interpretations. The Antimicrobial Resistance (AR) Option of CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) permits hospitals to submit clinical isolate AST data, including test values and interpretations (Figure 1). The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) periodically revises breakpoints, but their adoption by clinical laboratories can be delayed, potentially affecting national AR surveillance data accuracy. Using MIC values, instead of clinical laboratory interpretations, can improve surveillance data accuracy and overcome misclassification due to delayed uptake of revised breakpoints. We evaluated the completeness and consistency of MIC data submitted to the AR Option for fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Methods: We included data on (1) E. coli isolates tested for ciprofloxacin or levofloxacin susceptibility and (2) S. aureus isolates tested for oxacillin or cefoxitin susceptibility in 2022 and reported by October 1, 2023. We evaluated completeness among isolates reporting a final AST interpretation as the proportion of isolates reporting both an MIC value and interpretation. We evaluated consistency using percent agreement comparing the laboratory’s MIC interpretation (classified as resistant or not resistant) with the interpretation derived by applying 2021 CLSI M100 breakpoints to the MIC values reported for the same isolate. Results: Across 974 hospitals, fluoroquinolone MICs and interpretations were reported for 172,012/393,359 E. coli isolates (43.7%), and oxacillin or cefoxitin MICs and interpretations were reported for 38,519/79,372 S. aureus isolates (48.5%). Of isolates with both MIC values and interpretations, 157,902 (91.8%) E. coli and 7,808(79.7%) S. aureus isolates had MICs that could be classified as resistant or non-resistant (i.e., intermediate or susceptible) per CLSI breakpoints (Figure 2). The remaining MICs were unclassifiable (reported as intervals spanning CLSI breakpoints, e.g., ≤1 μg/ml ciprofloxacin for E. coli). Among isolates with classifiable MICs, the agreement between the clinical laboratory and CLSI-based interpretation was 99.5% for E. coli and 99.7% for S. aureus. Conclusion: MIC values and interpretations were available for

Background: The 2022 Special Report: COVID-19 U.S. Impact on Antimicrobial Resistance identified continued increases in the rate of extended- spectrum beta-lactamase producing (ESBL) infections in the United States from 2017 through 2020. Using similar data sources and methodology, we examined the trends of species-specific ESBL infections from 2012-2021. Methods: We identified a cohort of patients from the PINC AI and BD Research Insights databases with a clinical culture yielding a Klebsiella pneumoniae or Escherichia coli isolate with accompanying susceptibility testing. E. coli or K. pneumoniae isolates non-susceptible to ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, ceftazidime, or cefepime were considered suggestive of ESBL production. Isolates from patients with no culture yielding the same resistance phenotype of interest in the previous 14 days were counted as an incident case. Community-onset (CO) cultures were obtained ≤ day 3 of hospitalization; hospital-onset (HO) cultures were obtained ≥ day 4. We used a raking procedure to determine weights for extrapolating the number of discharges included in our sample to match the distribution of discharges, stratified by bed size, U.S. census division, urban/rural designation, and teaching status, for U.S. hospitals included in the American Hospital Association survey. We evaluated rates over time due to the changes in number of hospitalizations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results were stratified by HO and CO, and sterile and non-sterile specimen sources. Results: In 2021, there were 48,936 ESBL K. pneumoniae and 153,112 ESBL E. coli infections among approximately 32 million discharges. Overall, most infections were CO and from non-sterile specimens. From 2012-2021, the rate of ESBL K. pneumoniae increased from 9.54 to 15.28 per 10,000 discharges. ESBL E. coli infections increased from 2012-2020 (30.18 to 51.32 per 10,000 discharges), then declined in 2021 (47.81 per 10,000 discharges) (Table 1, Figure 1). The proportion of non-sterile ESBL E. coli declined from 88% in 2012 to 83% in 2021, and the proportion of non-sterile ESBL K. pneumoniae was 85-87% over the study period (Figure 2). Conclusion: ESBL E. coli and K. pneumoniae infections increased from 2012-2021, although the CO ESBL E. coli rate decreased between 2020 and 2021. Understanding changes in culturing practices over time may provide insights into the increased proportion of ESBL E. coli from sterile sites. Additionally, further investigation into differences in organism trends, particularly in 2021, may inform prevention strategies.

Background: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cultures are commonly performed to evaluate patients with suspected bacterial meningitis. These cultures, however, can take up to 72 hours, leading to delays in antibiotic de-escalation and increased antimicrobial utilization. The turnaround for the BioFire® FilmArray® Meningitis/Encephalitis(FA/ME) panel is less than an hour, which may facilitate early de-escalation. Our study aimed to assess whether the use of FA/ME panels in combination with CSF cultures could impact antimicrobial therapy compared to cultures alone in patients treated for suspected bacterial meningitis. Methods: Our retrospective study included patients from five hospitals in Texas (2017-2023) who received empiric antibiotics for suspected community-acquired meningitis and underwent a lumbar puncture within 96 hours of admission. Patients with ventricular drains, traumatic brain injury, and non-central nervous system infections were excluded. Cases comprised patients who had an FA/ME panel performed, while controls included patients without the panel. Outcomes were defined as the empiric duration of antimicrobial therapy (days) and total days of antibiotic therapy (DOT). Wilcoxon Rank Sum test and multiple linear regression models were applied to assess the relationship between the use of the FA/ME panel and study outcomes. Independent variables comprised demographics, institution type, acuity, clinical presentation, CSF values, and FA/ME panel use. Imputation was performed using multiple imputation by chained equations. Results: A total of 193 patients were included in our study. Seventy-one patients received the FA/ME panel (along with the CSF culture), while 122 patients received the CSF culture alone (controls). The median empiric duration of antibiotic therapy in the cases and controls were 1.71 days and 1.18 days, respectively (p = .160). The median DOT in the cases and controls were eight days and six days, respectively (p = .045). After adjusting for confounders, the FA/ME panel was not significantly associated with changes in the empiric duration of antibiotic therapy (B= 0.18, p = .669, Figure 1) or DOT (B= 1.28, p = .170, Figure 2).

Conclusion: Providing FA/ME panel testing without active antimicrobial stewardship interventions did not result in a change in antimicrobial prescribing patterns. The difference from prior literature could be explained by the smaller sample size, limiting the power of the study. Further prospective antimicrobial stewardship efforts should focus on training providers on interpreting FA/ME panel results and providing prospective audits and feedback.

Background: Oral antimicrobial therapy for osteoarticular infections in adults is increasingly adopted; however, the preponderance of published data and experience with oral antibiotics involves agents such as fluoroquinolones, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and clindamycin. Data supporting the use of narrower-spectrum, stewardship-friendly oral antibiotics with favorable toxicities profiles (e.g. cefadroxil) are needed. Methods: We report a case series of adults who underwent surgery for monomicrobial Gram-positive osteomyelitis, native joint septic arthritis (NJSA), prosthetic joint infection (PJI), or other orthopedic hardware infection at our institution from January 2019 through January 2022 and who subsequently received at least two weeks of oral cefadroxil. We excluded patients who had polymicrobial infection or curative amputation, or who received cefadroxil only as suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT). Our primary outcome of interest was treatment success during followup, defined as freedom from death, unplanned surgery for infection, or readmission for worsening infection. Results: We identified 22 patients who received cefadroxil for primary treatment of osteoarticular infection. The mean age was 57.6 years, mean weight 98.6 kg, 68% were male, and none had peripheral vascular disease. Infections included PJI in 12, NJSA in 8, osteomyelitis in 7, and other hardware infections in 5; some patients had multiple infectious syndromes. Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) was the most common pathogen (73%), followed by streptococci (18%), other methicillin-susceptible staphylococci (14%), and Cutibacterium acnes (5%). Half of patients received 120kg who had device infections with MSSA, two of which were managed with implant retention, suggesting pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic factors and biofilm burden could influence treatment outcome. Limitations of this study include its small sample size, noncomparative nature, lengthy initial intravenous antibiotic durations, and limited durations of followup. These data suggest cefadroxil merits investigation for adult osteoarticular infection in larger comparative (and ideally, prospective randomized) studies.

Background: An overall decrease of prescriptions for outpatient fluoroquinolones (FQs) following the FDA’s release of boxed warnings in 2016 was shown in a previous analysis1. An additional study found that this decline held true when further broken down by specialty 2. We sought to determine which different clinician specialties in Washington State (WA) continue to prescribe FQs and if these rates are congruent with previously conducted national analyses. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive analysis of Medicare Part D data from 2021. We identified specialty types contributing the highest proportions of FQ claims from the total volume of claims in 2021. Subsequently, we calculated the average FQ claims per 1,000 Medicare Part D beneficiaries for each specialty. The analysis excluded providers with missing beneficiary data. All dosage formulations were included (i.e. topical & oral). We repeated this process for each year from 2021 to 2013 to assess changes in the average FQ prescription rate for each specialty over time. Results: Our analysis encompassed 99,250 FQ prescriptions involving 976,209 Medicare Part D beneficiaries from January 1 to December 30, 2021. Among the specialties, urologists emerged as the highest prescribers of FQs to Medicare Part D beneficiaries, closely followed by ophthalmologists and family practitioners (Table 1). Notably, 72.4% of urologists prescribed FQs, while only 12.4% of family practitioners did so in 2021. Trend analysis indicated that the average FQ claims per 1,000 beneficiaries for urologists decreased from 251 claims per 1,000 beneficiaries (SD = 177.98) in 2013 to 130 claims per 1,000 beneficiaries (SD = 122.50) in 2021 (Figure 1A). In contrast, the only specialty types that had positive trends in average FQ claims per 1,000 beneficiaries from 2013 to 2021 included ophthalmologists, optometrists, and otolaryngologists (Figure 1A). Conclusion: Throughout the years leading up to 2021, most prescriber specialties contributing high volumes of FQ claims experienced a decline in FQ prescriptions. The positive trend noted amongst ophthalmologists, optometrists, and otolaryngologists could be due to the limited ability to differentiate between oral & topical FQ formulations within the dataset. These findings underscore the importance of understanding specialist prescribing behaviors and partnering with them to formulate tailored antibiotic stewardship guidance. By doing so, we can further promote patient safety and well-being in the context of FQ usage. Public health departments can promote more holistic antibiotic stewardship interventions and better patient safety outcomes with FQs. Ambulatory Fluoroquinolone Use in the United States 2015–2019 Outpatient Fluoroquinolone Prescription Fills.

Disclosure: Erica Stohs: Contracted research - Merck; Contracted research – bioMerieux

Background: The BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) Panel is used to identify organisms present in positive blood cultures within hours of detection at Virginia Commonwealth University Health System (VCUHS). BCID2 is also able to detect common resistance mechanisms including CTX-M, the most common extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) in the United States, and several carbapenemases. The Antimicrobial Stewardship Program (ASP) at VCUHS established optimal treatment recommendations for each organism identified by BCID2 based on the detection of a resistance mechanism and local resistance patterns. The recommendation for the majority of Enterobacterales without a detected resistance mechanism is ceftriaxone. However, providers are often reluctant to de-escalate antibiotics without confirmed susceptibility testing, as there may be other mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in Gram-negative organisms. The objective of this evaluation was to measure the degree of congruence between BCID2 resistance mechanism detection and susceptibility testing by disk diffusion, and to validate the adequacy of the VCUHS ASP BCID2 treatment recommendations for Enterobacterales bacteremia. Methods: Patients with positive Enterobacterales BCID2 results from March 12 to June 19, 2023 were retrospectively identified. Organisms identified by BCID2 that were considered high-risk for clinically significant AmpC production due to an inducible AmpC gene (i.e., K. aerogenes, E. cloacae complex) were excluded. Results: A total of 270 results were included. The most commonly identified organism was E. coli (n = 139, 51.5%), followed by K. pneumoniae (n = 74, 27.4%). There were 27 (10%) isolates positive for CTX-M and 1 (0.4%) isolate positive for KPC. All CTX-M isolates were ceftriaxone resistant, and the KPC isolate was meropenem resistant. The remaining 242 isolates were negative for all resistance markers detected by BCID2. Of these, only 3 (1.2%) were resistant to ceftriaxone and notably, 8 (3.3%) were resistant to piperacillin/tazobactam. Overall, BCID2 CTX-M detection was 90% sensitive and 100% specific for predicting ceftriaxone resistance in Enterobacterales. Conclusion: CTX-M detection by BCID2 is highly sensitive and specific for predicting ceftriaxone resistance in Enterobacterales. CTX-M negative isolates were more often susceptible to ceftriaxone than to piperacillin/tazobactam, which is commonly used as empiric therapy for Gram-negative organisms at our institution. This highlights an excellent opportunity for safe and effective early de-escalation of antibiotics for treatment of Enterobacterales bacteremia.

Background: Appropriate antibiotic use has been described as one of the key strategies in tackling antibiotic resistance. Although the majority of antimicrobial therapy is completed following discharge, there lacks clear guidance in addressing antibiotic stewardship in the outpatient setting. Particularly, broader coverage as well as longer durations of therapy are often encountered following hospitalization. In our study we examine the various antibiotic prescribing practices on hospital discharge for management of urinary tract infections (UTI). Methods: We conducted a single-center, retrospective observational chart review of patients discharged from St. Francis Hospital and Medical Center in Hartford between May and July 2022. Medical records were reviewed for patients who were prescribed antibiotic therapy for management of UTI and met inclusion criteria. Variables of interest included type of UTI treated, antibiotic used, duration of antibiotics during and following hospitalization, fluoroquinolone use, as well reported adverse events. Total duration of therapy was defined as days on susceptible antimicrobials with appropriate source control. Results: A total of 84 patients met inclusion criteria. 44 received treatment for simple UTI (sUTI) and 40 for complicated UTI (cUTI). Figure 1 shows the various organisms identified on culture. The most common antimicrobials prescribed on discharge were cefpodoxime and ciprofloxacin [figure 2]. Quinolones were prescribed in 11.4% of sUTIs and 39.1% of cUTIs on hospital discharge. Of those, only one patient had no alternative to quinolone use due to drug allergies. The mean duration of therapy for treatment of sUTI was 6.4 days total (SD 2.40) with 3.9 days outpatient (SD 1.78). The mean duration of therapy for treatment of cUTI was 10.9 days total (SD 3.62) with 6.7 days outpatient (SD 2.99). Comparison of mean durations is shown in figure 3. In 49% of all cases (including both sUTI and cUTI) patients received greater than 7 days of antimicrobial therapy. Conclusion: There is increased evidence favoring shorter courses of antimicrobial therapy for management of both simple and complicated UTIs. A 7-day course has been shown as effective duration of therapy for cUTI with appropriate source control, regardless of presence of bacteremia. Results from our single center-study show both sUTI and cUTI are subject to unnecessarily prolonged durations of therapy on hospital discharge. In addition we noted a significant use of fluoroquinolones in cUTI treatment. We believe stewardship interventions at time of discharge may particularly benefit shorter courses of therapy for cUTI as well as reduced quinolone use.

Background: In 2023, Nebraska held its 4th state antimicrobial stewardship (AS) educational conference, an annual one-day in-person event with continuing education offered for nurses, pharmacists, microbiology lab technicians, and physicians. One challenge of educational events is determining if content has been translated into practice. We sought to assess AS-related practice changes implemented by conference attendees. Methods: Conference attendees were sent 2 surveys by email following the conference. Survey 1 questions were integrated into the continuing education credit evaluation immediately following the conference. Survey 2 was sent three months later to all registered attendees. Qualitative responses were grouped by theme and descriptive statistics were used to evaluate Results: There were 203 attendees from across the state including a diverse group of learners (Table 1) representing metropolitan and rural areas of Nebraska (Figure 1) from acute care hospitals, critical access hospitals, long-term care settings, and public health. A total of 148 attendees (73%) answered questions in Survey 1 (Table 2), and 79 (39%) attendees responded to Survey 2. On Survey 1, 94% of respondents indicated that they intended to make practice changes, though 60% anticipated barriers including further staff training needs and lack of resources and health system support. On Survey 2, 83% of respondents indicated successful implementation of practice changes at three months after the conference. The most common practice changes included enhanced communication strategies, improved antibiotic tracking, monitoring, and review, policy and procedure updates, and AS tool implementation. On Survey 1, 26% (35/131) strongly agreed that their ability to treat patients was adequate prior to the conference; this increased to 55% (72/131) post-conference. On Survey 2, 56% (22/39) of respondents reported improvement in patient outcomes because of implemented practice changes following conference attendance. However, some also mentioned a short follow-up survey timeline as a limitation in assessing patient outcome improvements. Reported outcomes included improved receptiveness from providers, patients, and families to antibiotic use recommendations, shorter prescribed durations, and more appropriate initial antibiotic selection. Improved team performance was noted by 73% (27/37) of respondents. Themes included improved communication with internal and external stakeholders, more collaborative team discussions, increased confidence in recommendations, expanded provider and staff engagement, and increased leadership involvement. Conclusions: In addition to improved knowledge and understanding for a variety of AS-related areas, attendees of the conference also reported a high rate of practice changes that led to perceived improvements in patient outcomes and team function.

Background: Tracking antimicrobial use (AU) is a Core Element of Hospital Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs and important to help curb the public health threat of antimicrobial resistance. The National Healthcare Safety Network’s (NHSN) AU Option serves as a way for facilities, healthcare systems, and health departments to track and report AU rates within their jurisdictions. Many analyses at the state and national levels do not assess unit-level AU rates. This study investigates AU rates among patient care units in Tennessee reporting facilities from 2015 to 2023 and the most frequently used antimicrobial agents based on AU rates within select unit types. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted utilizing data obtained from the NHSN AU Option for inpatient units in Tennessee acute care hospitals. Units were defined as critical care (including neonatal), ward, oncology ward, stepdown, operating room (OR), and mixed acuity and specialty care areas, termed ‘other’. Unit types with fewer than five facilities represented were excluded. AU rates were determined by Antimicrobial Days of Therapy (DOT) per 1000 Days Present (DP). Statistical analyses , including descriptive statistics and comparison among the units by ANOVA test , were calculated using SAS Version 9.4. Results: Eighty-three facilities reported at least one month of data into the NHSN AU Option between 2015–2023. Among 70 facilities reporting inpatient units, the highest AU rate was observed in oncology ward units (n=12, 1114.6 DOT/1000 DP). A significant difference in AU rates was observed between oncology ward units compared to different unit types (p < 0 .001). Vancomycin, ceftriaxone, and piperacillin/tazobactam were the most used antimicrobials with AU rates of 83, 76, and 65 DOT/1000 DP, respectively. Vancomycin AU rates were significantly higher in oncology ward units compared to stepdown, ward, other, and OR units (p < 0 .0001). Ceftriaxone AU rate was significantly higher in stepdown units compared to oncology ward, other, and OR units (p < 0 .0001). Piperacillin/tazobactam AU rate was significantly higher in critical care units compared to different unit types (p < 0 .0001). Conclusion: During the study period, the AU rate varied across hospital inpatient units in Tennessee, with the highest AU rate in oncology wards. This unit-specific approach is critical to address the diverse antimicrobial prescribing behaviors observed, indicating that interventions should be customized to each unit’s distinct antimicrobial usage patterns for successful stewardship efforts. Targeted strategies focused on individual wards rather than facility-wide initiatives appear essential for effective reduction in antibiotic usage.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) remains a crucial, healthcare issue for which many countries have devised a national action plan. In Japan as well, antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) are being implemented in acute care hospitals under this policy framework. Clinical pharmacists play a central role in ASP, often jointly with infectious disease (ID) physicians. However, in Japan, a shortage of ID physicians has resulted in some ASP being led solely by pharmacists. While reports of the short-term effects of this situation are emerging, the long-term impact of pharmacist-led ASP is still largely unknown in Japan. The present study retrospectively examined the long-term effects of pharmacist-led ASP in a small, Japanese, acute care hospital. Method: The present study examined a pharmacist-led ASP in an acute care hospital (287 beds) in Japan which was launched in August 2015 and assessed the duration of therapy per 1000 patient-days (DOT) as the primary outcome by comparing the pre-intervention period (April 2013-July 2015) with the intervention period (August 2015-March 2023) using linear regression analysis. Additionally, segmented time-series analysis was conducted for each, additional intervention, and the impact of reduced activity due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic during the intervention. The DOT at the study center were compared with the national average of facilities implementing ASP. Result: While the DOT for all intravenous antimicrobials showed a slight increase on linear regression (r=0.01; P=0.1), the DOT of antipseudomonal intravenous antimicrobials significantly decreased (r=-0.027; P < 0 .01). Moreover, a significant reduction in DOT was observed immediately after the initiation of prospective review and feedback for carbapenems and daily prospective review and feedback for all intravenous antimicrobials (-3.2 and -2.4; P < 0 .001 for the intercept). An increase in DOT was observed during the COVID-19 pandemic-related reduction in activity time, and a rapid decline was observed upon the resumption of activities. Conversely, the average, nationwide DOT significantly increased for all intravenous antimicrobials as well as for antipseudomonal intravenous antimicrobials (r=0.02 and r=0.004; P < 0 .01) Conclusion: Sustaining an effective, pharmacist-led antimicrobial stewardship program led to a continual decrease in the DOT of antipseudomonal intravenous antimicrobials in a small, Japanese, acute care hospital despite a nationwide increase in their use following implementation of the national AMR action plan. Detailed analysis of pharmacists’ activities across multiple facilities is necessary to verify these effects.

Background: Data on antimicrobial use at the national level is crucial to establish domestic antimicrobial stewardship policies and enable medical institutions to benchmark against each other. This study aimed to analyze antimicrobial use in Korean hospitals. Methods: We investigated the antimicrobials prescribed in Korean hospitals between 2018 and 2021, using data from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment. Primary care hospitals (PCHs), secondary care hospitals (SCHs), and tertiary care hospitals (TCHs) were included in this analysis. Antimicrobials were categorized according to the Korea National Antimicrobial Use Analysis System (KONAS) classification, which is suitable for measuring antimicrobial use in Korean hospitals. Results: Out of more than 1,900 hospitals, PCHs and TCHs represented the largest and lowest percentage of hospitals, respectively. The most frequently prescribed antimicrobial in 2021 was piperacillin/β-lactamase inhibitor (9.3%) in TCHs, ceftriaxone (11.0%) in SCHs, and cefazedone (18.9%) in PCHs. Between 2018 and 2021, the most used antimicrobial class according to the KONAS classification was ‘broad-spectrum antibacterial agents predominantly used for community-acquired infections’ in TCHs and SCHs, and 'narrow spectrum beta-lactam agents' in PCH. Total consumption of antimicrobials has decreased from 951.7 to 929.9 days of therapy (DOT)/1,000 patient-days in TCHs and from 817.8 to 752.2 DOT/1,000 patient-days in SCHs during study period, but not in PCHs (from 504.3 to 527.2 DOT/1,000 patient-days). Moreover, in 2021, while use of reserve antimicrobials has decreased from 13.6 to 10.7 DOT/1,000 patient-days in TCHs and from 4.6 to 3.3 DOT/1,000 patient-days in SCHs, it has increased from 0.7 to 0.8 DOT/1,000 patient-days in PCHs. Conclusion: This study confirms that antimicrobial use differs by hospital type in Korea. Recent increases of use of antimicrobials, including reserve antimicrobials, in PCHs reflect the challenges that must be addressed.

Background: CAP is often inappropriately treated with agents active against multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO; methicillin-resistant S. aureus [MRSA] and P. aeruginosa [PSA]) and for prolonged duration. We assessed the relationship between antibiotic use with ATS/IDSA guideline-unjustified empiric and definitive MDRO therapy and prolonged duration in non-ICU inpatients with CAP at 105 VA Medical Centers. Methods: From VA Corporate Data Warehouse data, we identified patients with discharge ICD-10-CM codes consistent with CAP from 1/2022-3/2023, excluding cases with 14 days of antibiotic therapy, ICU admission, concurrent infections, or severe immunocompromise. We considered as jultified empiric (≤third day of hospitalization) therapy: anti-MRSA therapy for patients with prior positive MRSA cultures, anti-PSA therapy for patients with prior positive PSA cultures, and both anti-MRSA & anti-PSA therapy in patients with severe pneumonia and intravenous antibiotics in the prior 3 months. Definitive (>third day of hospitalization) anti-MDRO therapy was considered unjustified in patients who had achieved clinical stability and whose cultures did not grow MRSA or PSA. Prolonged duration (>6 days of therapy) was unjustified if patients were clinically stable or discharged by day 5. Results: The median age of the 29,260 patients was 75 (IQR 69,81); 4.6% were women. While 33% and 22% of patients received empiric or definitive MDRO therapy, such therapy was jultified in 12% and 0.5%, respectively. Median facility use of empiric and definitive MDRO therapy was 31% (IQR 25%,38%) and 20% (15%,23%), respectively (Figure 1); this use was unjustified in 89% (85%,93%) and 100% (100%,100%), respectively. Pearson’s correlation coefficient between MDRO therapy and rates of unjustified empiric and definitive MDRO therapy for CAP was 0.54 and 0.61, respectively (Figure 2). Although 99% of patients were discharged or stable by day 5, 42% received prolonged therapy. The median frequency of prolonged therapy was 39% (33%,48%); facility rates of prolonged therapy had a correlation of 0.56 with total antibiotic use and 0.46 with MDRO therapy (Figure 3). Discussion: Based on electronic documentation, we identified 1) substantial opportunities to reduce unjustified anti-MDRO therapy and the duration of therapy in hospitalized non-ICU patients with CAP; 2) a moderate correlation of unjustified anti-MDRO therapy with increased MDRO antibiotic use and of prolonged duration of therapy with increased total and MDRO antibiotic use. The correlation of lower quality prescribing with increased antibiotic use provides further impetus for tools such as dashboards (Figure 4) to assist antibiotic stewards in designing and monitoring interventions to reduce unjustified therapy.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance is a serious public health threat. Overuse of antibiotics leads to the development and spread of antibiotic resistant pathogens. Antibiotics are also responsible for a high percentage of emergency department visits for adverse drug events. Despite this, ambulatory and urgent care providers often cite patient expectations as a reason for inappropriate antibiotic prescribing practices. We investigated patient and community understanding of antibiotics and antimicrobial resistance to inform how they can be engaged as partners in combating antimicrobial resistance in our southwestern Virginia community. Methods: From July to September 2023, we conducted an online survey of patients and community members within the footprint of a large healthcare system in Southwest Virginia. Electronic medical records were used to randomly select and directly email the survey link to a representative sample of ambulatory patients who met criteria. Respondents were also recruited through the health system’s social media channels and through posters with quick response (QR) codes in outpatient offices. The survey used Likert scales and multiple-choice questions to understand experiences with and perceptions about antibiotics and antimicrobial resistance. We conducted a descriptive analysis of survey responses. Results: In total, 2,021 individuals completed the survey. Nearly 16% of respondents agreed with the statement “antibiotics can kill viruses” and almost 12% more were unsure. Thirty percent of respondents either agreed with or were unsure about the statement “antibiotics work on most coughs and colds”. When asked more directly about antimicrobial resistance, almost a quarter (25%) of respondents agreed with or were unsure about the statement “there is no connection between taking antibiotics and the development of resistant bacteria”. Responding to questions about possible negative effects of antibiotics, over 9% disagreed with the statement “antibiotics can kill the 'good' bacteria that normally live on the skin and in the gut” and another 19% were unsure. Similarly, over 20% disagreed with or were unsure about the statement “bacteria that do not respond to antibiotics could infect me or my family”. Reflecting on their own providers, nearly 83% of respondents trusted their doctor’s or nurse’s advice about antibiotic necessity. Conclusions: There are opportunities for patient and community engagement around antibiotic effectiveness for common viral illnesses and about the negative effects of overuse of antibiotics. Our data suggests most patients trust their providers as it relates to antibiotic prescribing and may be receptive to discussions and strategies that promote antimicrobial stewardship.

Background: Inappropriate use of antimicrobials contributes to the growing threat of antibiotic resistance. While physicians encounter infections in virtually every facet of medical practice, research has shown that physicians have difficulty determining the need for antimicrobials and choosing the right drug. Physicians’ difficulties with antimicrobial prescribing likely begin early in medical education, yet little is known about how medical students learn to make antimicrobial choices. Our study sought to better understand how medical students learn antimicrobial decision-making, including the impact of a new learning tool introduced in the Infectious Diseases (ID) and Microbiology preclinical course. Method: From 2021-2023, we conducted 18 individual interviews with a purposive sample of medical students at the University of Michigan who had taken the preclinical ID/Microbiology course during the 2019-2021 curricular years. We asked participants how they learned to make antimicrobial decisions and how the course and clinical rotations influenced their understanding of antimicrobial choice. The six participants who took the 2021 course were additionally asked how an antimicrobial decision-making tool introduced that year impacted that process (Figure 1). The tool was adapted from prior work on antimicrobial reasoning (Abdoler et al, 2020). Participants were asked whether they remembered being introduced to the tool (approximately 18 months prior) and if they utilized it during their clinical rotations. Results were analyzed using Dedoose Software to facilitate thematic analysis. Result: Several themes emerged on analysis. Nearly all participants reflected that they learned elements of antimicrobial decision-making during clinical rotations, through observation or direct interaction with physician mentors and patients. Several participants described the preclinical period as content learning, with clinical rotations providing a space to consolidate and scaffold knowledge, as well as transfer knowledge to new situations or tasks. Of the 6 students interviewed regarding the antimicrobial decision-making tool, only one remembered it and could accurately describe its components prior to being shown the tool during the interview. Conclusion: Results suggest that participants view the preclinical ID/Microbiology course primarily as an opportunity to learn content, and perceive learning antimicrobial decision-making directly from practicing physicians in the clinical portion of medical school. An antimicrobial decision-making tool introduced during the preclinical ID/Microbiology course in 2021 did not impact students’ conceptualization of how they learned this skill. Given that practicing physicians often make antimicrobial prescribing errors, regular re-introduction of the tool during clinical rotations may help bridge preclinical antimicrobial educational content to the clinical phase of learning, counteract inappropriate antimicrobial lessons encountered clinically, and ground students' burgeoning antimicrobial prescribing skills in a logical reasoning model.

Background: Asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) is often treated with antibiotics despite recommendations against screening for and treating ASB in most populations. Some providers cite concern for progression of ASB to a symptomatic urinary tract infection (UTI) as the jultification for antibiotic use. While the 2019 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) ASB guidelines refute this concern, most evidence is derived from studies done in females, potentially limiting external validity. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of patients with ASB who received antibiotic treatment versus those who did not in a primarily male population. Methods: This is a multi-center, retrospective, cohort study conducted by the 5 sites within the Veterans Affairs MidSouth Healthcare Network. Patients with a positive urine culture (defined as cultures with a colony forming unit count >100,000) collected from January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2021 were identified. ASB was determined via chart review using pre-determined criteria (positive culture in the absence of reported or documented signs or symptoms attributable to UTI as defined by the 2019 IDSA ASB guidelines). Additional data collected included antibiotic use, clinic visits and hospital admissions related to UTI or sepsis from a UTI. The primary outcome was the comparison of UTI incidence at 30 days, 6 months, and 1 year in those untreated versus treated with antibiotics. Secondary outcomes included a comparison of admissions with sepsis from UTI and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) between the cohorts. Continuous data were analyzed using a Student’s t-test. Discrete data were analyzed using either a Chi-squared or Fisher’s exact test. Results: The study population was primarily elderly (73 years, range 27-99 years) and male (79.7%). Of the 281 patients with ASB, 127 (45.2%) and 154 (54.8%) were untreated and treated, respectively. The incidence of UTI was 3% versus 1% (p = 0.41) at 30 days, 10% versus 12% (p = 0.61) at 6 months and 11% versus 12% (p = 0.94) at 12 months in the untreated and treated cohorts, respectively. There was no difference in admissions for UTI, sepsis from UTI or ADRs at 30 days. Conclusion: This study found no difference in the development of symptomatic UTI in veterans with untreated ASB compared to those treated with antibiotics. These findings align with current ASB guideline recommendations and support avoidance of unnecessary antibiotic use in the veteran population.

Background: Longer courses of antibiotics can be associated with antimicrobial resistance and adverse effects. Randomized clinical trials support treating gram-negative bloodstream infections (GN-BSI) for a shorter duration with a consensus that a seven-day course of antibiotics is appropriate for uncomplicated GN-BSI. Prior to the implementation of a GN-BSI treatment guideline at our institution, we aimed to evaluate the characteristics of patients with GN-BSI and the duration of antibiotic therapy (DOT). Method: We retrospectively reviewed adult inpatients who had a blood culture with at least 1 gram-negative organism within 6 months (November 2022 to April 2023). Patients were excluded if they had a concomitant gram-positive bloodstream infection or if they were transitioned to comfort-focused care within 48 hours of their first positive blood culture. Complicated GN-BSI was defined as exhibiting any of the following: involvement of bone, joint, endovascular system, or foreign body, an inability to achieve source control, immunocompromised status, or failure to demonstrate clinical improvement or culture clearance within 72 hours. The primary outcome of this study was the mean DOT in patients with GN-BSI. Result: 100 patients met the inclusion criteria. Escherichia coli, identified in 54 cases, emerged as the most frequent organism. Urine (41) was the predominant source of bacteremia. Cefepime (48) was the most common empiric agent used. Of the 91 patients with available ceftriaxone susceptibility results, 84% had a susceptible organism. Amongst the 51 patients classified as having a complicated GN-BSI, the leading reason was immunosuppression. Table 1 presents a comparative analysis of complicated vs. uncomplicated GN-BSI. The average DOT for complicated GN-BSI was longer than the uncomplicated infections (20 vs. 11 days, P < 0 .005). Additionally, fewer patients transitioned to oral therapy in the complicated group (33% vs. 67%, P < 0 .005). Conclusion: At our institution, patients with uncomplicated GN-BSI have a shorter DOT and are more likely to transition to oral therapy than those with complicated GN-BSI. However, the mean DOT for uncomplicated infections remained longer than seven days and a large number of uncomplicated GN-BSI patients did not transition to oral therapy, indicating room for improvement in local practice through antimicrobial stewardship initiatives.