We performed systematic review on 40 paired hospital and nursing home charts from a clinical trial to evaluate the fidelity of transitions of care among those discharged on antibiotics. We found that 30% of transitions included an inappropriate change to the patient’s antibiotic plan of care.
Cefepime is a fourth-generation cephalosporin usually reserved to treat severe infections or those caused by multi-resistant microorganisms. Neurotoxicity is attributed to its ability to cross the blood-brain barrier and produce gamma-aminobutyric acid antagonism. Neurological symptoms may range from mild somnolence to seizures and coma. Our patient is an 88-year-old man who presented from a nursing home due to worsening pressure ulcers. After cefepime was started, he started developing worsening altered mental status and hallucinations. Cefepime was discontinued and his neurological symptoms improved shortly afterward. He was discharged to a long-term acute facility for antibiotic therapy where he recovered. Our case illustrates a commonly missed side effect of cefepime. Prompt recognition of this adverse effect is paramount to prevent disease progression and avoid permanent neurological damage.
Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is responsible for the largest number of invasive infections due to a multidrug-resistant pathogen. Approximately 10% of hospitalized carriers will experience invasive MRSA disease in the year following discharge incurring antibiotic therapy beyond focused treatment of MRSA. Objective: We aimed to quantify the extent of non-MRSA empiric antibiotics incurred by MRSA infections and further assess the risk of Clostridioides difficile Infection (CDI) as a result of treatment of MRSA infection. Methods: The CLEAR Trial was a postdischarge randomized controlled trial of 2,121 MRSA carriers comparing MRSA education alone to education plus repeated decolonization that demonstrated a 30% reduction in MRSA infection and a 17% reduction in all-cause infection attributable to decolonization in the year following hospital discharge (Huang SS, NEJM 2019). We included all hospitalization outcomes due to MRSA infection in the CLEAR Trial with detailed medication administration records to quantify unintended consequences of MRSA infection related to empiric non-MRSA antibiotic use and resultant CDI. Full-text medical records were reviewed with a standardized abstraction form to collect inpatient administered antibiotics and hospital-associated CDI. Results: In total,154 hospitalizations due to MRSA infection with a mean length-of-stay of 10.6 days were identified. During 25 hospitalizations (16.2%), patients received only anti-MRSA antibiotics. During the remaining 129 (83.8%) hospitalizations, patients received a mean of 1.6 distinct non-MRSA antibiotics totaling a mean of 6.6 days of therapy (DOT). Empiric non-MRSA therapy was given for 3.2 DOT before MRSA culture results became available and was continued for an additional 3.4 DOT afterward. Among all 849 non-MRSA DOT, the most common were due to piperacillin-tazobactam (293 DOT, 34.5%), levofloxacin (105 DOT, 12.4%), and metronidazole (93 DOT, 11.0%). Across all 154 hospitalizations, a mean of 5.5 non-MRSA DOT was calculated per MRSA hospitalization, with 6 CDI cases (3.9%) as a direct sequelae of empiric non-MRSA antibiotics provided for MRSA infection. Conclusions: Hospitalization for MRSA infection results in extensive non-MRSA empiric antibiotic therapy both before and after MRSA culture results are known. This antibiotic use is associated with a 3.9% risk of CDI that exceeds the national risk of acquiring CDI (3.2 per 1,000 admissions) by 12-fold during any hospital stay (Barrett ML, AHRQ 2018). The CLEAR Trial findings that postdischarge decolonization reduces MRSA infection and hospitalization by 30% suggests that decolonization may also reduce non-MRSA antibiotic use and CDI in this population.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None
Background: Greater than 10% of hospitalized MRSA carriers experience serious MRSA infection in the year following discharge. Prevention opportunities have primarily focused on hospital stays; however postdischarge interventions have the potential to reduce morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. The CLEAR trial found a 30% hazard reduction in postdischarge MRSA infections among patients who had inpatient MRSA cultures and were given postdischarge decolonization (5 days twice-a-month for 6 months) relative to hygiene education alone. We conducted a cost analysis of the CLEAR intervention to quantify the economic implications and understand the value of adopting this MRSA decolonization strategy. Methods: We constructed a decision model to estimate the one-year healthcare utilization and costs associated with postdischarge decolonization relative to hygiene education. Trial results for MRSA infection risk and downstream outcomes (including outpatient and emergency room visits, hospitalizations, related nursing home stays, and postdischarge antibiotics) were used to parameterize the model. Other medical care and prescription drug costs were based on Medicare Fee Schedules, Red Book and the literature. Patient out-of-pocket costs and time costs associated with subsequent infections were from a survey of trial participants experiencing infection (n=405). All costs were reported in 2019 US dollars. The analysis was conducted using healthcare system and societal perspectives. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on key parameters. Results: Among a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 hospitalized MRSA carriers, we estimated that a postdischarge decolonization intervention versus hygiene education would result in at least 36 fewer subsequent MRSA infections (130 vs 93 of 1,000, respectively) and >40 fewer MRSA-attributable healthcare events including 32 hospitalizations and 6 postdischarge nursing home visits over the course of a year. Assuming an intervention cost of $185 per individual, the program would result in an overall cost savings of $469,000 per 1,000 MRSA carriers undergoing decolonization. This translates to an overall savings of $13,200 per infection averted and $9,000 per infection averted from the healthcare system perspective. Even assuming a lower infection rate or a less effective intervention (15% reduction in infections vs 30% in the CLEAR trial), or a more expensive (up to $653 per patient) intervention, a decolonization program would still result in cost-savings for society, the healthcare system and patients. Conclusions: In addition to health benefits of preventing infections, postdischarge decolonization of MRSA carriers yields substantial savings to society and the healthcare system. Future recommendations for reducing postdischarge MRSA-related disease among MRSA carriers should consider routine decolonization at hospital discharge.Funding: This study was supported by a grant from the AHRQ Healthcare-Associated Infections Program (R01HS019388) and by the University of California Irvine Institute for Clinical and Translational Science, which was funded by a grant from the NIH Clinical and Translational Sciences Award program (UL1 TR000153).Disclosures: Dr. Huang reports conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker (Sage Products), Mölnlycke, 3M, Clorox, Xttrium Laboratories, and Medline. Ms. Singh reports conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker (Sage Products), 3M, Clorox, Xttrium Laboratories, and Medline. Dr. Rashid, conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker(Sage Products), Clorox, and Medline. Dr. McKinnell reports receiving grant support to his institution from Melinta Therapeutics, and fees for serving as a research investigator from Lightship, conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker (Sage Products), 3M, Clorox, Xttrium Laboratories and Medline, and serving as cofounder of Expert Stewardship. Dr. Miller reports receiving grant support from Gilead Sciences, Merck, Abbott, Cepheid, Genentech, Atox Bio, and Paratek Pharmaceuticals, grant support and fees for serving on an advisory board from Achaogen and grant support, consulting fees, and fees for serving on an advisory board from Tetraphase and conducting clinical studies in which participating nursing homes and hospitals received donated products from Stryker (Sage Products), 3M, Clorox, Xttrium Laboratories, and Medline.
Epiglottitis is inflammation of the epiglottis with or without the involvement of supraglottic structures including the hypopharynx. Timely diagnosis is crucial as the treatment of epiglottitis is tailored to the degree of airway obstruction. Most patients improve with conservative measures, while some require an emergent airway intervention. We report a case of a 39-year-old Caucasian male with a history of uncontrolled diabetes mellitus and smoking who presented to the emergency department (ED) with a sore throat, dry cough, odynophagia, and difficulty swallowing. He was afebrile, tachycardic, tachypneic, hypertensive, and saturating at 99% on room air. His physical examination was remarkable for drooling, muffled voice, pharyngeal swelling, and erythema. Laboratory tests were significant for leukocytosis, hyperglycemia, and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of 14.3% with a negative infectious workup. Lateral neck X-ray and emergent direct fiberoptic laryngoscopy revealed findings of epiglottitis with airway patency. The patient did not require intubation and was started on intravenous dexamethasone, vancomycin, ampicillinsulbactam, and humidified air with suctioning of secretions and quickly recovered. In addition to known risk factors for developing epiglottitis such as uncontrolled diabetes and smoking, our patient was exposed to metal shavings at his new job, an occupational hazard that might have contributed to his clinical presentation. Our case highlights the importance of a prompt diagnosis and risk factor identification in the management of epiglottitis in adults.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.