No abstract

No abstract

Background The objective of this study was to confirm the validity of institution specific treatment recommendations targeting organisms identified by GenMark Dx® ePlex® blood cultures identification (BCID) Gram-negative panel prior to susceptibility results. Methods We developed and implemented institution specific guidelines for empiric antibiotic therapy for Gram-negative organisms targeted by GenMark Dx® ePlex® BCID. We utilized blood culture antibiograms, existing evidence for the most optimal agent for each pathogen, probable resistance mechanisms and patient clinical status to create these guidelines. From December 16, 2019 through May 31, 2020, infectious diseases pharmacists reviewed all positive blood cultures; assessed compliance with guidelines and intervened as needed. The primary objective was to determine how frequently guideline recommend agents would be ineffective against targeted pathogens based on susceptibilities. Secondary objectives were compliance with guidelines and frequency of therapy escalation or de-escalation. Results GenMark® testing was completed on 222 cultures positive for Gram-negative rods with target organisms identification in 195 (88%) blood cultures. Two hundred and five organisms were identified; most commonly E. coli (40%) and K. pneumoniae (21%).Resistance markers were detected in 30 aerobic blood cultures; 28 CTX-M, and 2 KPC. Our institutional guideline provided appropriate empiric coverage in 93% of bacteremia episodes. The most common reason for ineffective therapy was the presence of resistance mechanisms not detected by GenMark® test (e.g. non-CTX-M extended spectrum beta-lactamases). The compliance rate with the guidelines was 55%; the most common reason for non-compliance was the use of an anti-pseudmonal beta-lactams in neutropenic patients.. The system failed to identify panel organisms in only 5 (2%) of blood cultures. Conclusion The institution-specific guidelines providing empiric coverage for each organism identified by rapid diagnostic tests can aid antimicrobial stewardship efforts to de-escalate therapy while still providing effective coverage in >90% of cases. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

Background Recent literature suggests no difference in clinical outcomes between short (7 days) and prolonged course (14 days) antibiotic therapy for the treatment of uncomplicated Gram-negative bacteremia (GNB). Methods The objectives of the study were to develop and implement a treatment algorithm that identifies patients who are eligible for 7-day therapy for uncomplicated GNB and evaluate its impact on patient outcomes at The Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) in Baltimore. The algorithm was developed and implemented at JHH on 11/11/2019. From 11/11/2019 to 3/31/2020, the Infectious Diseases (ID) Pharmacy Resident and ID pharmacists reviewed cases of GNB on weekdays and contacted teams to provide algorithm-compliant treatment recommendations. To quantify the impact of the intervention on clinical outcomes, data from the same time period during the previous year (baseline) were collected and compared to those collected during the intervention. The primary outcome was duration of antibiotic therapy for GNB. Secondary outcomes included: duration of intravenous (IV) antibiotics, length of hospital stay (LOS), and recurrent bacteremia. Results A total of 345 patients with GNB were identified (142 baseline; 203 intervention) of which 59 and 55 patients met criteria for 7-day therapy, respectively. The Pitt bacteremia score (median 1), bacteremia source [urinary (43%), abdominal (23%)], and organisms [E. coli (48%) and Klebsiella spp. (33%)] were similar between the periods. More patients in the intervention period were treated for ≤8 days (60.0% vs. 37.3%; p=0.015), and the median duration of therapy was 2 days shorter (8 vs. 10 days; p=0.04). Median duration of IV antibiotic therapy (4 vs. 7 days; p=0.004) and median LOS (4 vs. 7 days; p=0.029) were also shorter in the intervention period. There were no differences in the rate of 30-day recurrent bacteremia between the periods (3.4% baseline vs. 1.8% intervention; p=0.60). Conclusion Our pharmacist-led intervention successfully shortened the duration of therapy, increased conversion from IV to PO therapy, and reduced LOS, without negatively impacting the number of patients with recurrent GNB. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

No abstract