During the COVID-19 pandemic, the implementation of antimicrobial stewardship strategies has been recommended. This study aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary care Spanish hospital with an active ongoing antimicrobial stewardship programme (ASP). For a 20-week period, we weekly assessed antimicrobial consumption, incidence density, and crude death rate per 1000 occupied bed days of candidemia and multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial bloodstream infections (BSI). We conducted a segmented regression analysis of time series. Antimicrobial consumption increased +3.5% per week (p = 0.016) for six weeks after the national lockdown, followed by a sustained weekly reduction of −6.4% (p = 0.001). The global trend for the whole period was stable. The frequency of empirical treatment of patients with COVID-19 was 33.7%. No change in the global trend of incidence of hospital-acquired candidemia and MDR bacterial BSI was observed (+0.5% weekly; p = 0.816), nor differences in 14 and 30-day crude death rates (p = 0.653 and p = 0.732, respectively). Our work provides quantitative data about the pandemic effect on antimicrobial consumption and clinical outcomes in a centre with an active ongoing institutional and education-based ASP. However, assessing the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antimicrobial resistance is required.

Elderly people confined to chronic care facilities face an increased risk of acquiring infections by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). This review presents the current knowledge of the prevalence and risk factors for colonization by MDROs in long-term care facilities (LTCF), thereby providing a useful reference to establish objectives for implementing successful antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs). We searched in PubMed and Scopus for studies examining the prevalence of MDROs and/or risk factors for the acquisition of MDROs in LTCF. One hundred and thirty-four studies published from 1987 to 2020 were included. The prevalence of MDROs in LTCF varies between the different continents, where Asia reported the highest prevalence of extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL) Enterobacterales (71.6%), carbapenem resistant (CR) Enterobacterales (6.9%) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (25.6%) and North America the highest prevalence to MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa (5.4%), MDR Acinetobacter baumannii (15.0%), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE) (4.0%), and Clostridioides difficile (26.1%). Furthermore, MDRO prevalence has experienced changes over time, with increases in MDR P. aeruginosa and extended spectrum ß-lactamase producing Enterobacterales observed starting in 2015 and decreases of CR Enterobacterales, MDR A. baumannii, VRE, MRSA and C. difficile. Several risk factors have been found, such as male sex, chronic wounds, the use of medical devices, and previous antibiotic use. The last of these aspects represents one of the most important modifiable factors for reducing colonization with MDROs through implementing ASPs in LTCF.

No abstract

No abstract

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

No abstract

The aim of this study was to describe the safety profile and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters in end‐stage renal disease patients who received gentamicin as empirical treatment in catheter‐related bacteremia when they showed infection signs, regardless of the timing of the next HD. Patients received gentamicin 3 mg/kg before blood culture extraction when they showed infection signs and regardless of the timing of next hemodialysis session. Serum concentrations were collected after the gentamicin administration (peak level) and before the next HD (trough level). Toxicities and adverse drug events were registered. The main pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic goal for Gram‐negative infections was peak:minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ≥10. Sixteen patients were included. Nephrotoxicity was not assessed in this population, and no ototoxicity was found. According to microbial isolation and gentamicin susceptibility, the value of peak:MIC was 5.4 ± 2.0. The administration of gentamicin in these conditions was safe. Estimated pharmacokinetic values were consistent with previous studies and appropriate according to peak:MIC goal for Gram‐negative organisms with MIC ≤1 mg/L.

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases characterized by sex disparities. Gender bias is a well-documented issue detected in the design of published clinical trials (CTs). International guidelines encourage researchers to analyze clinical data by sex, gender, or both where appropriate. The objective of this work was to evaluate gender bias in the published CTs of biological agents for the treatment of severe asthma. A systematic review of randomized controlled CTs of the biological agents (omalizumab, benralizumab, reslizumab, mepolizumab or dupilumab) for the treatment of severe asthma was conducted. The literature search was performed using PubMed and EMBASE without language restrictions. This study followed the corresponding international recommendations. We identified a total of 426 articles, of which 37 were finally included. Women represented 60.4% of patients included. The mean percentage of women in these trials was 59.9%, ranged from 40.8% to 76.7%. The separate analysis by sex of the main variable was only performed in 5 of the 37 publications included, and none of the trials analyzed secondary variables by sex. Only 1 of the articles discussed the results separately by sex. No study included the concept of gender in the text or analyzed the results separately by gender. The proportion of women included in CTs was higher compared to publications of other disciplines, where women were under-represented. The analysis of the main and secondary variables by sex or gender, even the discussion separately by sex, was insufficient. This gives rise to potential gender bias in these CTs.