Background: Up to half of antibiotics used in nursing homes (NHs) are initiated in acute care hospitals prior to nursing home admission. Optimizing antibiotic prescribing on hospital discharge presents an opportunity to improve NH antibiotic use. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to optimal antibiotic prescribing on discharge from the hospital to NHs. Methods: This was a qualitative thread of a convergent parallel mixed methods study to identify high-value targets to optimize antibiotic prescribing on discharge from the hospital to NHs. We conducted 32 qualitative interviews: 16 with prescribers (9), pharmacists (6), and a care manager (1) from 3 acute care hospitals and 16 with advanced practice providers (12) and registered nurses/nurse managers (4) from 7 NHs in Oregon and Wisconsin. Interview participants were asked to describe their typical practice for prescribing antibiotics on discharge to NHs or admitting patients with antibiotic prescriptions from hospitals, and about barriers and facilitators for optimal antibiotic prescribing during these transitions. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed by 3 investigators using the qualitative descriptive analysis Results: Hospital healthcare workers described that there are different practice flows for oral and intravenous (IV) antibiotic prescribing. IV antibiotic orders are typically routed to the infectious diseases (ID) specialists and ID pharmacists to review and verify appropriateness. There were minimal established workflows to review and verify oral antibiotic orders. Pharmacists appeared integral to optimal antibiotic prescribin; however, the high frequency of oral prescriptions and short turnaround times from discharge orders to transportation limited pharmacists’ abilities to review these orders. With limited pharmacist involvement, the quality of oral antibiotic prescription relied on the prescribers’ knowledge, and there was no systematic oversight for inexperienced prescribers or specialists who may not be familiar with the adequacy of antibiotic use for NH residents. NH participants perceived that most antibiotics prescribed from hospitals were appropriate. Yet, some commented that they occasionally observe inadequate or unusual prescriptions from newer prescribers or specialists. NH participants most common concern related to antibiotic prescriptions was missing information including unclear or lack of antibiotic indications or stop dates. NH participants also stated that the frequent need to contact the hospital to obtain missing information is challenging and burdensome. Conclusions: Qualitative interviews identified several barriers and facilitators to optimal antibiotic prescribing on discharge to NHs. These results will be used to develop an intervention to improve antibiotic prescribing during these transitions.

Background: Approximately half of antibiotics used in nursing home (NHs) are initiated in acute care hospitals prior to NH admission. Optimizing antibiotic prescribing on hospital discharge to these facilities presents an opportunity to improve NH antibiotic use. We aimed to identify intervention targets to optimize antibiotic use on discharge from the hospital to NHs. Methods: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study across 9 acute care hospitals in Oregon, Wisconsin, and Washington. We selected a 20% random sample of adult (age >18) inpatients prescribed at least one antibiotic on discharge from the hospital to a NH between 2016-2018. We excluded patients discharged from the emergency department or an intensive care unit. Study data were electronically extracted from patients’ electronic health records and supplemented with manual chart review. Antibiotic optimization opportunities were determined by an infectious diseases (ID) physician or ID pharmacist and classified as definitely, possibly, or unlikely. Expert reviewers also recorded the type of optimization opportunity and the rationale for each determination. A gamma lasso algorithm was used to identify patient-level characteristics associated with definite optimization opportunity, which were then included in a logistic regression model. Results: There were 2761 antibiotic prescriptions among 2215 patients. Mean (standard deviation) age was 71.9 (14.3) years and 48.8% were male. Most discharges (83.1%) were prescribed one antibiotic, 15.2% were prescribed two antibiotics, and 1.8% were prescribed three antibiotics. The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were cephalexin (10.4%), vancomycin (9.8%), and amoxicillin clavulanate (8.4%). Among the 2761 antibiotic prescriptions, expert reviewers determined that 18.4% could definitely be optimized, 36.0% could possibly be optimized, and 45.3% unlikely could have been optimized. Among the 508 definite antibiotic optimization opportunities, 25.2% were to subtract the antibiotic, 56.3% were to change the antibiotic, 11.0% were to change the dose, 25.0% were to change the duration, 0.8% were to change the route, and 1.8% were to change the schedule. Patient-level characteristics found to be associated with definite antibiotic optimization opportunity included age over 80 years (odds ratio (OR)=1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI): [1.14, 1.82]), length of stay < 8 days (OR=1.40, 95% CI: [1.09, 1.81]), discharge with multiple antibiotic prescriptions (OR=1.92, 95% CI: [1.39, 2.63]), and discharge with prescription for oral vs intravenous (IV) antibiotics (OR=2.08, 95% CI: [1.49, 2.95]). Conclusion: We identified several patient and antibiotic characteristics which may serve as intervention targets to optimize antibiotic prescribing on discharge from the hospital to nursing homes.

Background: Nursing home (NH) residents are at high risk of COVID-19 from exposure to infected staff and other residents. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA kinetics in residents and staff can guide testing, isolation, and return to work recommendations. We sought to determine the duration of antigen test and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity in a cohort of NH residents and staff. Methods: We prospectively collected data on SARS-CoV-2 viral kinetics from April 2023 through November 2023. Staff and residents could enroll prospectively or upon a positive test (identified through routine clinical testing, screening, or outbreak response testing). Participating facilities performed routine clinical testing; asymptomatic testing of contacts was performed within 48 hours if an outbreak or known exposure occurred and upon (re-) admission. Enrolled participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were re-tested daily for 14 days with both nasal antigen and nasal PCR tests. All PCR tests were run by a central lab with the same assay. We conducted a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis on time to first negative test restricted to participants who initially tested positive (day zero) and had at least one test ≥10 days after initially testing positive with the same test type; a participant could contribute to both antigen and PCR survival curves. We compared survival curves for staff and residents using the log-rank test. Results: Twenty-four nursing homes in eight states participated; 587 participants (275 residents, 312 staff) enrolled in the evaluation, participants were only tested through routine clinical or outbreak response testing. Seventy-two participants tested positive for antigen; of these, 63 tested PCR-positive. Residents were antigen- and PCR-positive longer than staff (Figure 1), but this finding is only statistically significant (p=0.006) for duration of PCR positivity. Five days after the first positive test, 56% of 50 residents and 59% of 22 staff remained antigen-positive; 91% of 44 residents and 79% of 19 staff were PCR-positive. Ten days after the first positive test, 22% of 50 residents and 5% of 22 staff remained antigen-positive; 61% of 44 residents and 21% of 19 staff remained PCR-positive. Conclusions: Most NH residents and staff with SARS-CoV-2 remained antigen- or PCR-positive 5 days after the initial positive test; however, differences between staff and resident test positivity were noted at 10 days. These data can inform recommendations for testing, duration of NH resident isolation, and return to work guidance for staff. Additional viral culture data may strengthen these conclusions.

Disclosure: Stefan Gravenstein: Received consulting and speaker fees from most vaccine manufacturers (Sanofi, Seqirus, Moderna, Merck, Janssen, Pfizer, Novavax, GSK, and have or expect to receive grant funding from several (Sanofi, Seqirus, Moderna, Pfizer, GSK). Lona Mody: NIH, VA, CDC, Kahn Foundation; Honoraria: UpToDate; Contracted Research: Nano-Vibronix

Background: Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) seek to reduce the prevalence of antimicrobial-resistant and healthcare-associated infections. There are limited infectious disease (ID) physicians and pharmacists to support these ASPs, particularly in rural areas. The Veterans Health Administration has a robust telehealth program in place. Our previous work has demonstrated the feasibility of using telehealth modalities to support ASPs at rural Veterans Affairs medical centers (VAMCs) by pairing them with an ID expert from a larger, geographically distant, VAMC. This program, dubbed the Videoconference Antimicrobial Stewardship Team (VAST), emphasizes discussion of patients undergoing treatment for an active infection and additional relevant clinical topics with a multidisciplinary team at the rural VA. VAST implementation is ongoing at VAMCs. To understand and compare the qualitative differences in implementation, we used process maps to describe the VAST at 3 VAMC dyads. Methods: Team members from each dyad participated in interviews at 3, 6, and 9 months after beginning their VAST sessions. Questions addressed several aspects of VAST implementation and included identifying cases and topics to discuss; advance preparation for meetings; the frequency and general structure of VAST meetings; and documentation including workload capture. The research team used the responses to develop process maps to permit visual display and comparison of VAST implementation. Results: The first dyad began in January 2022 and the third in March 2022. The sessions had 3 phases: preparation, team meeting, and documentation of experts’ recommendations. Tasks were shared between VAST champions at the rural VAMC and the ID experts (Fig. 1). The preparation phase showed the most variation among the 3 dyads. In general, champions at the rural VA identified cases and topics for discussion that were sent to the ID expert for review. The approaches used to find cases and the type of preparatory work by the ID expert differed. Team meetings differed in both frequency and participation by professionals from the rural site. Documentation of expert recommendations processes appeared similar among the dyads. Discussion: Each of the 3 dyads implemented VAST differently. These results suggest that the overall structure of the VAST is readily adaptable and that each site tailored VAST to suit the clinical needs, workflow, and culture of their partner facility. Future work will seek to determine which aspects in the preparation, team meeting, or documentation phases are associated with successful ASPs, including assessment of quantitative and qualitative outcomes.

Disclosures: None

Background: Healthcare settings without access to infectious diseases experts may struggle to implement effective antibiotic stewardship programs. We previously described a successful pilot project using the Veterans Affairs (VA) telehealth system to form a Videoconference Antimicrobial Stewardship Team (VAST) that connected multidisciplinary teams from rural VA medical centers (VAMCs) with infectious diseases experts at geographically distant locations. VASTs discussed patients from the rural VAMC, with the overarching goal of supporting antibiotic stewardship. This project is currently ongoing. Here, we describe preliminary outcomes describing the cases discussed, recommendations made, and acceptance of those recommendations among 4 VASTs. Methods: Cases discussed at any of the 4 participating intervention sites were independently reviewed by study staff, noting the infectious disease diagnoses, recommendations made by infectious diseases experts and, when applicable, acceptance of those recommendations at the rural VAMC within 1 week. Discrepancies between independent reviewers were discussed and, when consensus could not be reached, discrepancies were discussed with an infectious diseases clinician. Results: The VASTs serving 4 different rural VAMCs discussed 96 cases involving 92 patients. Overall, infection of the respiratory tract was the most common syndrome discussed by VASTs (Fig. 1). The most common specific diagnoses among discussed cases were cellulitis (n = 11), acute cystitis (n = 11), wounds (n = 11), and osteomyelitis (n = 10). Of 172 recommendations, 41 (24%) related to diagnostic imaging or laboratory results and 38 (22%) were to change the antibiotic agent, dose, or duration (Fig. 2). Of the 151 recommendations that could be assessed via chart review, 122 (81%) were accepted within 1 week. Conclusions: These findings indicate successful implementation of telehealth to connect clinicians at rural VAMCs with an offsite infectious diseases expert. The cases represented an array of common infectious syndromes. The most frequent recommendations pertained to getting additional diagnostic information and to adjusting, but not stopping, antibiotic therapy. These results suggest that many of the cases discussed warrant antibiotics and that VASTs may use the results of diagnostic studies to tailor that therapy. The high rate of acceptance suggests that the VASTs are affecting patient care. Future work will describe VAST implementation at 4 additional VAMCs, and we will assess whether using telehealth to disseminate infectious diseases expertise to rural VAMCs supports changes in antibiotic use that align with principles of antimicrobial stewardship.

Disclosures: None

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid mandated that nursing homes implement antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) by November 2017. We conducted surveys of Wisconsin nursing-home stewardship practices before and after this mandate. Our comparison of these surveys shows an overall increase in ASP implementation efforts, but it also highlights areas for further improvement.

Antibiotics are among the most common medications prescribed in nursing homes. The annual prevalence of antibiotic use in residents of nursing homes ranges from 47% to 79%, and more than half of antibiotic courses initiated in nursing-home settings are unnecessary or prescribed inappropriately (wrong drug, dose, or duration). Inappropriate antibiotic use is associated with a variety of negative consequences including Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), adverse drug effects, drug–drug interactions, and antimicrobial resistance. In response to this problem, public health authorities have called for efforts to improve the quality of antibiotic prescribing in nursing homes.

Background: An antibiogram is a tool for tracking and reporting antimicrobial resistance; the CDC has endorsed as part of a comprehensive antimicrobial stewardship program in nursing homes. We have previously shown that antibiogram utilization has increased in nursing homes, but most facilities employ tools that are not based on facility-specific data. In this study, we investigate the feasibility to develop antibiograms using facility-specific data and compare these results with antibiograms developed using data from multiple facilities that share the same lab and geographic region. Methods: Raw, de-identified culture results from January 1 through December 31st, 2018 were collected from participating nursing homes and their consulting microbiology laboratories under an IRB-exempt protocol. Culture results were entered and stored in REDCap. Number of isolates per species was examined based on nursing home, nursing home laboratory network, and region. Percentage sensitivities of the most frequently isolated species to commonly used antibiotics were calculated at the nursing home and regional level and compared. T tests of the absolute difference between nursing home- and regional level percentage sensitivities were performed. All data analyses were performed in R software. Results: The mean annual cultures per nursing home was 23.5 (SE, ±3.29). Grouping cultures by lab and region increased the mean culture count 6-fold and 12-fold, respectively. The most commonly isolated species were Escherichia coli (29.7%), Enterococcus spp (11.6%), Proteus spp (10%), Klebsiella spp (8.5%). None of the nursing homes had >30 isolates of a single species (Fig. 1). Escherichia coli was the only species that exceeded the 30-isolate threshold when aggregated at the laboratory network level (Fig. 2). Grouping nursing home cultures by region provided the greatest average isolate count across the most common species. The greatest differences in percentage sensitivity between nursing homes and their region were noted for Escherichia coli and Proteus spp to fluoroquinolones (>20% difference; P < .01). The difference in sensitivity was <5% for Escherichia coli to nitrofurantoin. Conclusions: Nursing homes do not generate enough annual isolates to create antibiograms compliant with Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute guidelines. Grouping isolates from multiple nursing homes at the regional level does reliably exceed the 30-isolate threshold for multiple bacterial species but leads to susceptibility estimates that may vary substantially from those observed at the facility level. Alternative tools for tracking antibiotic resistance and guiding antibiotic prescribing decisions at the local level are needed.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Background: Suspicion of urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common justification for prescribing antibiotics in nursing homes. More than half of antibiotic prescriptions for treatment of UTI in nursing homes are either unnecessary or inappropriate. Achieving a better understanding of the factors that underlie UTI treatment decisions is necessary to improve the quality of antibiotic prescribing in nursing homes. An ongoing hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized trial of a recently developed nursing home UTI recognition and management tool kit provided us with an opportunity to explore the influence of organizational, clinical, and staff attributes on UTI antibiotic prescribing practices in nursing homes. Methods: Data on antibiotic starts for suspected UTIs were collected in 29 nursing homes over a 9-month period. Antibiotic practices evaluated included total antibiotic starts per 1,000 resident days, % antibiotic starts with treatment duration >7 days, % antibiotic starts in which the initial antibiotic choice was a fluoroquinolone, and % antibiotic starts meeting UTI tool-kit criteria of appropriateness. Prior research and bivariate analyses were used to select clinical and organizational attributes as well as individual nursing staff-level retention rates for inclusion in a stepwise linear regression model for each antibiotic practice outcome. Results: In total, 602 UTI antibiotic events were evaluated. Four associations were identified for antibiotic starts including nursing home urine culture rate, ICP status, nonprofit and part-time LPN retention. Nursing homes with higher full-time LPN retention had a lower rate of antibiotic treatment duration >7 days. Full-time CNAs and part-time LPNs retention and for-profit status was associated with the proportion of fluoroquinolone antibiotic starts. No attributes influenced the proportion of antibiotic starts meeting appropriateness criteria (Fig. 1). Urine culture rates are driving overall nursing home antibiotic prescribing. Conclusions: Urine culture practices was strongly associated with UTI treatment rates in nursing homes. A variety of organizational characteristics were also associated with UTI treatment rates as well as other UTI antibiotic prescribing practices. Some of these associations appear paradoxical but may reflect increasing resident acuity and increased capacity to standardize practices through organizational centralization.

Funding: Support for the project provided by the Wisconsin Partnership Program.

Disclosures: None

Our stewardship team evaluated 19 months of discharge antibiotic prescriptions to determine prescribing appropriateness and to characterize the interventions made. Intervention occurred in 9.7% of patients, with a 58% acceptance rate. Most interventions were educational (antibiotic course was complete at time of intervention). Discharge antibiotic review is a potential stewardship tool.

Starting in 2016, we initiated a pilot tele-antibiotic stewardship program at 2 rural Veterans Affairs medical centers (VAMCs). Antibiotic days of therapy decreased significantly (P < .05) in the acute and long-term care units at both intervention sites, suggesting that tele-stewardship can effectively support antibiotic stewardship practices in rural VAMCs.