Urinary tract infections (UTI) are common and women with typical symptoms may be treated empirically without culture. We evaluated the utility of urine culture in men presenting with typical symptoms of uncomplicated UTI. Most pathogens isolated retained susceptibility to first-line antimicrobials suggesting urine cultures may be unnecessary in this population.

Rapid blood culture identification is most effective with antimicrobial stewardship feedback, which is limited during non-business hours. We implemented overnight review of Blood Culture Identification 2 panel results by intensive care unit pharmacists and demonstrated reduced time to evaluation (3.6 vs 9.3 hours, P < .01).

Ambulatory antibiotic stewardship has traditionally focused on acute respiratory infections with few studies evaluating metrics for other commonly encountered ambulatory conditions, including urinary tract infections (UTI). We describe the development and validation of an electronically captured appropriate antibiotic use metric for ambulatory UTIs using coding data.

The negative predictive value of blaCTX-M on BCID2 for ceftriaxone resistance in E. coli and K. pneumoniae group was 97% and 94%, respectively. Creation of a genotypic antibiogram led to updated local guidance for clinicians to utilize for empiric treatment of Enterobacterales bloodstream infections identified via rapid diagnostics.

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.

Our institution sought to evaluate our antimicrobial stewardship empiric treatment recommendations for Salmonella. Results from 36 isolates demonstrated reduced susceptibilities to fluoroquinolones with 1 isolate susceptible only to ceftriaxone. Analysis supports the current recommendation of empiric ceftriaxone therapy for severe infection and updated recommendation for sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim in non-severe infections.

Background: Prescribing errors related to the COVID-19 oral antiviral agent nirmatrelvir-ritonavir have been reported and are primarily due to improper renal dosing and significant drug–drug interactions. These patient safety issues are particularly concerning in the long-term care facility (LTCF) population. The Nebraska Antimicrobial Stewardship Assessment and Promotion Program (ASAP) is a unique collaborative partnership involving the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Nebraska Medicine, and the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). ASAP is funded through the Nebraska DHHS healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance (HAI/AR) program and was established in 2016, with a primary focus of promoting safe and effective antimicrobial use in Nebraska. In 2022, ASAP developed a statewide pharmacist-led service to assist LTCFs in evaluating prescriptions for COVID-19 oral therapeutics. We studied the impact of ASAP pharmacist intervention on COVID-19 oral antiviral prescriptions. Methods: ASAP created a centralized LTCF treatment request process for oral antivirals. A REDCap survey hosted on a dedicated program webpage was used to collect requests for treatment submitted by any LTCF in Nebraska, including assisted living facilities. An ASAP pharmacist reviewed each survey submission for renal and hepatic function, drug–drug interactions, date of symptom onset, and ability to take oral medications. After pharmacist approval, delivery of the appropriate COVID-19 therapeutic to the LTCF was coordinated with the dispensing pharmacy. The pharmacists recorded the specific interventions for each treatment in the program database. Descriptive analyses were used to study the program impact. Results: In total, 630 courses of oral COVID-19 antivirals were administered to Nebraska LTCF residents through the ASAP program in 2022. The median patient age was 84 years, and 59% were female. Most dispensed courses (n = 410, 65%) needed pharmaceutical interventions upon review for 506 individual interventions. The most frequent intervention was to hold or adjust doses of concomitant medications in 205 patients (33%), followed by antiviral dose adjustment for renal function in 117 patients (19%), and selecting an alternative COVID-19 therapy due to drug–drug interactions in 108 patients (17%). COVID-19 therapeutic agents were changed upon ASAP intervention to be in compliance with the National Institute of Health COVID-19 treatment guidelines in 37 patients (6%). Conclusions: Pharmacist review of oral antiviral prescriptions for COVID-19 through a public health–supported initiative identified and prevented potential patient safety issues in LTCF residents. Future studies should analyze the impact of similar interventions on patient outcomes.

Disclosures: None

Background: Antibiotics are frequently prescribed in patients with COVID-19 infections to treat secondary bacterial pneumonia. The pneumonia panel (PNP) is a molecular diagnostic tool that rapidly detects 33 bacterial and viral targets. The utility of this panel in COVID-19 patients and how it may direct antibiotic use is unknown. We sought to understand the utilization of PNP in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia over time by comparing clinical parameters, microbiologic results, and antibiotic use between May–December 2020 and January–July 2022. Methods: We implemented the PNP in May 2020 with antimicrobial stewardship guidance, provider education, and order restriction to critical care and infectious disease clinicians. From February–July 2021 prescribers received regular structured antimicrobial stewardship feedback regarding PNP results; from August 2021 to January 2022, no antimicrobial stewardship feedback was provided; from February to July 2022, intermittent feedback was provided. We compared PNP and culture results from sputum or bronchoalveolar lavage samples and antibiotic use and modification within 24 hours of PNP result from patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia between May–December 2020 and January–July 2022. Clinical data and antibiotic use were abstracted through chart review. We excluded patients who died within 72 hours of PNP, those who had concurrent nonpulmonary infections, and those whose COVID-19 test was >30 days prior. Results: We included 114 patients in 2020 and 71 patients in 2022. The overall median age was 61 years, 71% were male, and 66% were mechanically ventilated without statistical differences between the cohorts, including their comorbidities. Acute or worsening hypoxia remained the predominant indication for PNP (77% in 2020 vs 75% in 2022, NS). The median number of days between admission and PNP was 4 (IQR, 1–8) in 2020 versus 3 (IQR, 1–7), and the difference was not significant. PNP and culture results in Table 1 show that Staphylococcus aureus and Hemophilus influenzae were the pathogens most commonly identified. Table 2 describes empiric prescribing and modifications for commonly prescribed antibiotics. Prescribers used empiric cefepime and ceftriaxone more in 2020 and vancomycin more in the 2022 group; however, these were not statistically significant. Cefepime de-escalation was more common in 2022 (53% vs 28%; P = .03). Antibiotic modifications within 24 hours of PNP remained similar in 2020 vs 2022. Although vancomycin cessation was more common in 2020 (78%) versus 2022 (57%), the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: With ASP guidance, PNP may be a useful tool to stop or target antibiotics for secondary bacterial pneumonia in COVID-19 pneumonia. Early vancomycin cessation (prior to culture results) may be an enduring consequence of PNP implementation.

Disclosures: None

Background: Critical-access hospitals (CAHs) are required to meet the CDC 7 Core Elements of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs). CAHs have lower adherence to the core elements than larger acute-care hospitals, and literature defining which core-element deficiencies exist within CAHs as well as barriers to adherence is lacking. Methods: We evaluated 21 CAH ASPs (5 in Nebraska and 15 in Iowa) that self-identified as potentially deficient in the Core Elements, via self-assessment followed by in-depth interviews with local ASP team members to assess adherence to the CDC Core Elements for ASPs. Core-element compliance was rated as either full (1 point), partial (0.5), or deficient (0), with a maximum score of 7 per ASP. High-priority recommendations to ensure core-element compliance were provided to facilities as written feedback. Self-reported barriers to implementation were thematically categorized. Results: Among the 21 CAH ASPs, none fully met all 7 core elements (range, 2.5–6.5), with a median of 5 full core elements met (Fig. 1). Only 6 ASPs (28.6%) had at least partial adherence to each of the 7 core elements. Action (21 of 21, 100%) and leadership commitment (16 of 21, 76.2%) were the core elements with the highest adherence, and accountability (4 of 21, 19%) and education (9 of 21, 42.9%) were the lowest. The most frequent high-priority recommendations were to provide physician and pharmacist leader ASP training (19 of 21, 90.5%), to track antimicrobial stewardship interventions (12 of 21, 57.1%), and to provide or track educational activities (12 of 21, 57.1%) (Fig. 2). One-third of programs were recommended to establish a physician leader. The most commonly self-identified barriers to establishing and maintaining an ASP were a lack of dedicated resources such as time of personnel (15 of 20, 75%), lack of infectious diseases expertise and training (8 of 20, 40%), and electronic medical record limitations (5 of 20, 25%) (Fig. 3). Conclusions: CAH ASPs demonstrate several critical gaps in achieving adherence to the CDC Core Elements, primarily in training for physician and pharmacist leaders and providing stewardship-focused education. Further resources and training customized to the issues present in CAH ASPs should be developed.

Disclosures: None

Background: Asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) is a widespread problem in hospitalized patients in which only a small subset of patients benefit from treatment. Other patient populations with ASB are harmed by treatment. In 2014, our institution implemented a urinalysis (UA)-driven reflex culture protocol which evaluated patient symptoms, risk factors, and the UA to determine whether bacterial culture was performed (Fig. 1). The goal of this process was to ensure that urine cultures were only performed in those patients who had symptoms of UTI and an abnormal urinalysis while allowing for exceptions in populations where treatment of ASB may be appropriate (ie, pregnancy, aged <3 years, impending urologic surgery, kidney transplant) or where the urinalysis may not be useful in determining whether infection is present (ie, neutropenia). An “other” indication with free-text documentation required was included to allow for unique situations. We evaluated the free-text option to determine whether additional indications were needed and whether data entered were medically appropriate. Methods: This retrospective review at a Midwestern, tertiary-care, academic medical center included inpatient UA with UTI evaluation order sets between July 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022. Descriptive statistics analyzed order-set utilization. Results: In total, 35,469 “urinalysis to reflex culture” order sets were submitted, of which 9,493 resulted in culture. Of these, 839 (8.8%) were ordered with an indication of “other.” “Other” was the most cited indication for special population override contributing to 40% (n = 839 of 2,085) of these indications, followed by kidney or pancreas transplant (29%) and neutropenia (13%). The write-in options fell into 1 of 11 themes (Fig. 2). The 3 most common reasons a urine culture was obtained using the free-text option were nonurologic surgical intervention (n = 223 of 839), immunosuppression not otherwise defined (n = 195 of 839), and symptom presence (n = 146 of 839). Based on current literature, 97% of other indications were inappropriate (n = 816 of 839). If the UTI protocol had been strictly followed, 696 of 839 (83%) cultures ordered with an indication of “other” would not have been obtained, due either to lack of symptoms or, if symptomatic, lack of pyuria. Conclusions: Most cultures obtained by selecting the “other” special population option on the algorithm were obtained in situations in which a urine culture was unnecessary. Removing the “other” indication from the algorithm may improve appropriateness of urine culturing with a possible decrease in CA-UTI and treatment of ASB. Although most write in rationales were inappropriate, adding an additional category for deceased donor-organ evaluation would be reasonable.

Disclosures: None

Background: Cefazolin is the preferred antimicrobial for prevention of surgical-site infections in most procedures at our institution. Our first alternative is vancomycin which is associated with higher adverse events and infection rates. The presence of penicillin allergies can influence prescribing of vancomycin despite a low risk of cross-reactivity between penicillin and cephalosporins. Nebraska Medicine implemented a systemwide change in April 2022 that suppressed alerts for non–IgE-mediated penicillin allergies in the electronic medical record (EMR, Epic Systems) upon cephalosporin prescribing. We evaluated changes in perioperative antimicrobial surgical infection prophylaxis after this change. Methods: We conducted a quasi-experimental study of all patients undergoing procedures for which cefazolin is considered preferred per institutional guidance. Preintervention data were from April 1, 2021, to March 31, 2022, and postintervention data included patients from April 11, 2022, to October 31, 2022, after guidance was distributed to surgeons, operating room staff, and pharmacists. Patients were excluded if they were aged <19 years, had a hospital length of stay <24 hours, underwent procedures after their first throughout the time frame, or received both vancomycin and cefazolin. Statistical significance was set at P < .05, determined using the Fisher exact test. Results: The study included 6,676 patients: 4,147 in the preintervention group and 2,529 in the postintervention group. We identified 15 procedure categories, with no significant differences between periods (Table 1). The average age was 61 years. Penicillin allergy was reported in 508 patients (12.3%) in the preintervention group and in 319 patients (12.6%) in the postintervention group. In individuals with penicillin allergy, cefazolin prescribing increased from 49.6% to 74.3% (P < .01) and vancomycin prescribing decreased from 50.4% to 25.7% (P < .01). The largest changes occurred in patients undergoing cardiac, spinal, neurological, and vascular procedures. For patients without penicillin allergy, prescribing remained unchanged. Overall, cefazolin prescribing increased from 92.0% to 95.0% (P < .01), and the rate of vancomycin prescribing decreased from 8.0% to 5.0% (P < .01) in procedures for which cefazolin was preferred. Conclusions: Following the suppression of EMR alerts for non–IgE-mediated allergies when ordering cephalosporins, penicillin prescribing rates of cefazolin for surgical infection prophylaxis improved significantly in procedures for which it was the preferred agent. Further research on infection rates and adverse events with these and other alternative agents are needed.

Disclosures: None

In 21 antimicrobial stewardship programs in critical-access hospitals in Nebraska and Iowa that self-reported nonadherence to a CDC Core Element or Elements, in-depth program assessment and feedback revealed that accountability and education most needed improvement. Recommendations included providing physician and pharmacist training, tracking interventions, and providing education. Program barriers included lack of time and/or personnel and antimicrobial stewardship and/or infectious diseases expertise.

A survey of academic medical-center hospital epidemiologists indicated substantial deviation from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance regarding healthcare providers (HCPs) recovering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) returning to work. Many hospitals continue to operate under contingency status and have HCPs return to work earlier than recommended.