Background: Patients with recurrent urinary tract infections (rUTI) experience frequent exposure to antimicrobial regimens, leaving them at higher risk for developing antibiotic resistance. Little information on the prevalence of antibiotic resistance among patients with rUTI has been published. Although the IDSA recommends using a prior culture to guide empiric treatment, studies have not examined the predictive ability of a prior culture among patients meeting rUTI criteria. We constructed an antibiogram and evaluated test metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) of a prior culture (any organism), on predicting resistance (PPV) or susceptibility (NPV) of a future culture among patients with uncomplicated rUTI in an outpatient setting. Methods: We retrospectively extracted electronic health record data from outpatients aged ≥18 years who had an ICD-10 code for cystitis listed twice in 6 months or thrice in 12 months between November 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018. Patients sought care at either urology or primary care practices within an academic medical center in Houston, Texas. Patients with functional or structural abnormalities of the genitourinary tract, signs or symptoms of pyelonephritis, or pregnancy were excluded. Antibiogram data were reported for uropathogens with ≥30 isolates, and intermediate results were considered resistant. Test metrics and Bayes’ PPV and NPV were calculated using standard formulas. Results: We included 597 visits from 232 unique patients. Most were White (63%) and female (92%), and the cohort had a median age of 58 (IQR, 41–68). Among 310 rUTI episodes with a urine culture, 189 (61%) had at least 1 uropathogen isolated, and Escherichia coli (n = 130, 66%) was most common among all 196 uropathogens. E. coli isolates had >20% resistance to 10 of 18 antibiotics (Fig. 1). E. coli resistance to ciprofloxacin was 27.9%, resistance to nitrofurantoin was 5.5%, and resistance to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was 38.0%. The PPVs for predicting resistance were highest for ceftriaxone (0.86; 95% CI, 0.60–0.96), ciprofloxacin (0.84; 95% CI, 0.63–0.94), and levofloxacin (0.84; 95% CI, 0.63–0.94). NPVs of resistance were highest for gentamicin (0.97; 95% CI, 0.83–1.00), ceftriaxone (0.94; 95% CI, 0.86–0.98), and cefepime (0.94; 95% CI, 0.84–0.98), whereas NPVs for cefuroxime, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and nitrofurantoin were all >0.83. Conclusions: We detected considerable antibiotic resistance among patients with rUTI to commonly prescribed antibiotics. Prior urine culture susceptibility demonstrated moderate-to-high PPVs for predicting future resistance to ceftriaxone and fluoroquinolones as well as high NPVs for several cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones, which could inform empiric prescribing choices.

Funding: This investigator-initiated research study was funded by Rebiotix, a Ferring Company.

Disclosures: None

A β–lactam plus a macrolide or a respiratory fluoroquinolone alone is recommended as standard empiric antibacterial therapy for non-severe adults hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) per Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines. However, the evidence in support of adding empiric atypical antibacterial therapy, and specifically the addition of a macrolide, is conflicting and should be balanced with additional factors: the necessity of covering atypical organisms, benefits of macrolide-associated immunomodulation, harms associated with antibiotic use, and selection for antibiotic-resistant organisms. In this review, we examine the role of atypical coverage in standard treatment regimens for patients admitted with non-severe CAP and specifically focus on the addition of macrolides to β–lactams. We conclude that a subset of patients should not be given atypical coverage as part of their regimen.

Background: Inappropriate antimicrobial use continues to threaten modern medicine. The ongoing pandemic likely exacerbated this problem because COVID-19 presents similarly to bacterial pneumonia, confusion exists regarding treatment guidelines, and testing turnaround times (TATs) are slow. Our primary object was to quantify antimicrobial use changes during the pandemic to rates before the crisis. A subanalysis within the COVID-19 cohort was completed based on SARS-CoV-2 status. Methods: The pre–COVID-19 period was January–May 2019 and the COVID-19 period was January–May 2020. Subanalyses were used to explore differences in antibiotics use between persons not under investigation (non-PUIs), SARS-CoV-2–negative PUIs, and SARS-CoV-2–positive PUIs. Non-PUI patients were those without respiratory symptoms and/or fever. The χ2 and Wilcoxon signed rank-sum tests were used for analysis. Results: During the 2019 and 2020 study periods, 7,909 and 7,283 patients received >1 antimicrobial, respectively (Figure 1). Overall, antibiotic therapy per 1,000 patient days increased from 633.1 before COVID-19 to 678.5 during COVID-19, a 7.2% increase (Table 1). Notably, broad-spectrum respiratory antibiotics demonstrated a significant increase between pre–COVID-19 and COVID-19 cohorts (p < 0.001). Of the 7,283 patients within the COVID-19 cohort, 34.7% (n = 2,532) were PUI and 13.8% (n = 1,002) of these patients tested SARS-CoV-2 positive. Again, broad-spectrum respiratory antibiotics use was significantly increased for COVID-19 patients (p < 0.001). Of note, the proportion of patients receiving respiratory antibiotics steadily decreased over time (R2 = 0.99). Conclusions: There was a significant increase in antibiotic use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Encouragingly, antimicrobial use decreased over time, likely due to (1) faster TATs, (2) real-time education to clinicians and subsequent de-escalation of unnecessary antimicrobials, and (3) development of treatment guidelines as new research emerged.

Funding: No

Disclosures: None

Figure 1.

Table 1.

Background: Candida spp can cause a variety of infections known as candidiasis, ranging from severe invasive infections to superficial mucosal infections of the mouth and vagina. Fluconazole, a triazole antifungal, is commonly prescribed to treat candidiasis but increasing fluconazole resistance is a growing concern for several Candida spp. Although C. albicans has historically been the most common cause of candidiasis, other species are increasingly common and antifungal resistance is more prevalent in these non-albicans species, including C. glabrata, C. parapsilosis, and C. tropicalis, which were the focus of this analysis. Methods: We used the PINC AI healthcare data (PHD) database to examine fluconazole resistance for inpatient isolates between 2012 and 2021 from 187 US acute-care hospitals with at least 1 Candida spp culture with a fluconazole susceptibility result over the entire period. We calculated annual percentage fluconazole resistance for C. glabrata, C. tropicalis, and C. parapsilosis isolates using the clinical laboratory interpretation for resistance. Results: We identified 4,264 C. glabrata, 2,482 C. parapsilosis, and 2,283 C. tropicalis isolates between 2012 and 2021 with susceptibility results. The percentage of C. glabrata isolates resistant to fluconazole doubled between 2020 and 2021 (14.6% vs 29.3%) (Fig. 1a). The percentage of C. parapsilosis isolates resistant to fluconazole steadily increased since 2017 (Fig. 1b), with an 82% increase in 2021 compared with 2020 (3.8% in 2020 vs 6.9% in 2021). Fluconazole resistance among C. tropicalis isolates varied over the years, with a 0.3% decrease in 2021 from 2020 (Fig. 1c). Of hospitals reporting at least 1 result each year 2020–2021, 44% observed an increase in the proportion of C. glabrata isolates resistant to fluconazole in 2021 compared to 2020. Conclusions: Our analysis highlights a concerning increase in fluconazole resistance among C. glabrata and C. parapsilosis isolates in 2021 compared with previous years. Further investigation of the observed increases in fluconazole resistance among these Candida spp could provide further insight on potential drivers of resistance or limitations in reported results from large databases. More analyses are needed to understand rates, sites of Candida infections, and risk factors (eg, antifungal exposure) associated with resistance.

Disclosures: None

Background: Central-line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) significantly burden the US population and healthcare system. Reporting facilities in Tennessee consistently omit race and ethnicity data in the NHSN despite having the option to enter. Racial and ethnic disparities are well documented across many health outcomes, including patient safety. CLABSIs were compared among 3 racial groups to better understand the impact of race on CLABSI incidence in Tennessee. Methods: CLABSI data from NHSN were linked with records from the TN Hospital Discharge Data System (HDDS) for 2018–2021. A multivariable linear regression model was used to determine relative risk (RR) between racial groups for contracting a CLABSI after controlling for confounding variables including Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and social vulnerability index (SVI) scores. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. Data linkage and statistical analyses were performed in SAS version 9.4 software. Results: In Tennessee between 2018 and 2021, 342 (17.2%) of the 1,980 CLABSI events had race documented, and no ethnicity variables exist in the NHSN. The data linkage process yielded a 72% match (1,426 CLABSIs). The remaining 28% were excluded from the analysis. Per 1,000 central-line days (CL days) for all races, white patients had the highest CLABSI rate (17.5), followed by Black patients (1.36), and Native American or Alaskan Native patients (0.68). Per 1,000 admissions by race, Black patients had a higher CLABSI rate (1.26) than Native American/Alaskan Native patients (0.85) and white patients (0.75). The risk of contracting a CLABSI was 79% higher in Black patients than in white patients (RR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.55–2.07; P < .0001) when controlling for CCI, age group, and SVI. Conclusions: These results suggest that racial disparities between Black and white patients are present in Tennessee hospitals regarding CLABSIs. Although most CLABSI events were linked to HDDS patients, there were limitations in the ability to match all cases and calculate CL days by race. This study highlights the need for complete race and ethnicity data in the NHSN. Further studies should examine infection types at the regional and facility levels to target interventions for reducing HAI inequities in Tennessee.

Disclosures: None

Outpatient antibiotic use increases during winter months, but information on temporal changes in inpatient antibiotic use in US hospitals is limited. The use of certain inpatient antibiotics, including extended-spectrum cephalosporins, macrolides, and tetracyclines, was strongly associated with influenza activity during the 2015–2019 viral respiratory seasons.

A cluster of Rhizobium radiobacter isolates isolated from six unique surgical tissue cultures prompted an investigation ultimately identifying a pseudo-outbreak linked to errant laboratory tissue processing with contaminated, nonsterile saline. Timely response and multidisciplinary collaboration led to tangible system-level interventions and avoidance of unnecessary antibiotic exposures.

In this point-prevalence survey followed by prospective audit and feedback at 4 tertiary-care hospitals in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, we evaluated whether intravenous amoxicillin-clavulanate may be used as a narrower-spectrum alternative to intravenous piperacillin-tazobactam for patients admitted to general surgery services.

Background: Clinical pharmacists are a critical part of antibiotic stewardship. Stewardship often relies on relationships and persuasion, which may be affected by gender bias. Thus, we aimed to assess the association of sex with the acceptance of antibiotic stewardship recommendations. Methods: Between May and October 2019, medicine pharmacists at single hospital reviewed patients on antibiotics and–when a discharge was anticipated–led an antibiotic discussion (or “timeout”) prior to discharge. To explore differences in antibiotic timeout effectiveness by gender, we assessed the association of pharmacist sex with suggestion and acceptance of antibiotic changes using logistic regression controlling for patient characteristics. We also assessed whether hospitalist sex was associated with or moderated the effect of pharmacist sex on acceptance of timeout recommendations. Results: Between May 1, 2019, and October 31, 2019, pharmacists conducted 295 timeouts (patient characteristics in Fig. 1). Overall, 54% of timeouts were conducted by 12 female pharmacists and the remaining 46% were conducted by 8 male pharmacists. Overall, 82 (29%) of 295 timeouts resulted in a pharmacist recommending an antibiotic change, and male pharmacists were more likely to recommend a change: 52 (38%) of 137 versus 30 (19%) 158 (P Conclusions: In this discharge antibiotic intervention, timeouts conducted by women were less likely to result in an antibiotic change than those conducted by men. The difference in effectiveness resulted both from female pharmacists being less likely to recommend a change and from hospitalists being less likely to accept recommendations from a female pharmacist. These findings suggest that gender bias may play a role acceptance of antibiotic stewardship recommendations, which could affect antibiotic use, pharmacist job satisfaction, and patient outcomes.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

We evaluated the impact of preliminary blood-culture antibiotic susceptibility testing on time to optimal antibiotic therapy in a cohort of 503 patients with monomicrobial bloodstream infections. The median time from blood-culture collection to optimal antibiotics was 17 hours earlier in the preliminary antibiotic susceptibility testing group.

Background: Antibiotic use was common in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection; however, data emerged demonstrating low rates of bacterial coinfection (6%–10%). Antimicrobial stewardship best practice was challenged during this time, requiring new strategies and education to limit the inappropriate use of antibiotics. At the Veterans’ Affairs Maryland Healthcare System, we evaluated the use of community acquired pneumonia (CAP) specific antibiotics in COVID-19–positive patients after successive interventions. Methods: We conducted a pre–post evaluation of common CAP antibiotics (ceftriaxone IV/IM, cefpodoxime PO, azithromycin PO/IV, ampicillin/sulbactam IV, amoxicillin-clavulanate PO, levofloxacin) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The preintervention period was April–October 2020 and the postintervention period was November 2020–April 2021. During the preintervention period, intervention A was carried out as follows: (1) inpatient weekly virtual interdisciplinary COVID-19 rounds were led by an antimicrobial stewardship champion, (2) χprocalcitonin was implemented in clinical decision making, and (3) inpatient audit and feedback of active antibiotics was conducted by the antimicrobial stewardship team. In the postintervention period, intervention B was added as follows: (1) weekly educational COVID-19 virtual seminars were conducted for providers, and (2) targeted education was provided to emergency department and hospitalist directors. Comparisons of the proportions of antibiotics prescribed were made between the pre- and postintervention periods using X2 statistic, and data were stratified by location. The rates of CAP antibiotic prescription per 100 COVID-19–positive patients were also compared using Poisson distribution. Results: During the study period, 814 unique patients had COVID-19 infection: 182 (22.4%) patients admitted to the acute-care center, 66 (8.1%) long-term care residents, and 566 (69.5%) were managed outside the hospital. Of these 814 patients, 211 (25%) were prescribed a CAP antibiotic. Of the antibiotics prescribed, 223 (61%) were ceftriaxone, cefpodoxime, amoxicillin-clavulanate, or ampicillin-sulbactam; 123 (34%) were azithromycin; and 16 (4.4%) were levofloxacin. We observed a decrease in the frequency of all antibiotic prescriptions after intervention B was added: 32% (86 of 273) vs 23% (125 of 541) (P = .01). Decreases in antibiotic prescriptions were observed in all locations: acute care (57% vs 44%), long-term care (53% vs 41%) and outpatient care (19% vs 15%). The rates of CAP antibiotic prescribing per 100 COVID-19–positive patients were 114 in the preintervention period and 45 in the postintervention period, a rate difference of −70 antibiotics per 100 COVID-19–positive patients (pConclusions: Curbing antibiotic use for CAP indication during the COVID-19 pandemic was a challenge. A multifaceted approach focusing on education was an impactful intervention leading to significant decreases in antibiotic prescribing despite COVID-19 cases increasing.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: We evaluated the impact of a comprehensive SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection prevention (IP) bundle on rates of non–COVID-19 healthcare-acquired respiratory viral infection (HA-RVI). Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected respiratory viral data using an infection prevention database from April 2017 to January 2021. We defined HA-RVI as identification of a respiratory virus via nasal or nasopharyngeal swabs collected on or after hospital day 7 for COVID-19 and non–COVID-19 RVI. We compared incident rate ratios (IRRs) of HA-RVI for each of the 3 years (April 2017 to March 2020) prior to and 10 months (April 2020 to January 2021) following full implementation of a comprehensive COVID-19 IP bundle at Duke University Health System. The COVID-19 IP bundle consists of the following elements: universal masking; eye protection; employee, patient, and visitor symptom screening; contact tracing; admission and preprocedure testing; visitor restrictions; discouraging presenteeism; population density control and/or physical distancing; and ongoing attention to basic horizontal IP strategies including hand hygiene, PPE compliance, and environmental cleaning. Results: During the study period, we identified 715 HA-RVIs over 1,899,700 inpatient days, for an overall incidence rate of 0.38 HA-RVI per 1,000 inpatient days. The HA-RVI IRR was significantly higher during each of the 3 years prior to implementing the COVID-19 IP bundle (Table 1). The incidence rate of HA-RVI decreased by 60% after bundle implementation. COVID-19 became the dominant HA-RVI, and no cases of HA-influenza occurred in the postimplementation period (Figure 1). Conclusions: Implementation of a comprehensive COVID-19 IP bundle likely contributed to a reduction in HA-RVI for hospitalized patients in our healthcare system. Augmenting traditional IP interventions in place during the annual respiratory virus season may be a future strategy to reduce rates of HA-RVI for inpatients.

Table 1.

Figure 1.