Objectives Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is associated with high hospital readmission rates. A 30 day unplanned readmission risk prediction model for OPAT patients has been developed in the UK. Given significant differences in patient mix and methods of OPAT delivery, we explored the model for its utility in Duke University Health System (DUHS) patients receiving OPAT. Methods We analysed OPAT episodes of adult patients from two hospitals between 1 July 2019 and 1 February 2020. The discriminative ability of the model to predict 30 day unplanned all-cause and OPAT-related admission was examined. An updated model was created by logistic regression with the UK risk factors and additional risk factors, OPAT delivery in a skilled nursing facility, vancomycin use and IV drug abuse. Results Compared with patients of the UK cohort, our study patients were of higher acuity, treated for more invasive infections, and received OPAT through different modes. The 30 day unplanned readmission rate in our cohort was 20% (94/470), with 59.5% (56/94) of those being OPAT-related. The original model was unable to discriminate for all-cause readmission with a C-statistic of 0.52 (95% CI 0.46–0.59) and for OPAT-related readmission with a C-statistic of 0.55 (95% CI 0.47–0.64). The updated model with additional risk factors did not have improved performance, with a C-statistic of 0.55 (95% CI 0.49–0.62). Conclusions The UK 30 day unplanned hospital readmission model performed poorly in predicting readmission for the OPAT population at a US academic medical centre.

Objectives:The opioid overdose epidemic is escalating. Increasing access to medications for opioid use disorder in primary care is crucial. The impact of the US Department of Health and Human Services' policy change removing the buprenorphine waiver training requirement on primary care buprenorphine prescribing remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the impact of the policy change on primary care providers' likelihood of applying for a waiver and the current attitudes, practices, and barriers to buprenorphine prescribing in primary care.Methods: We used a cross-sectional survey with embedded educational resources disseminated to primary care providers in a southern US academic health system. We used descriptive statistics to aggregate survey data, logistic regression models to evaluate whether buprenorphine interest and familiarity correlate with clinical characteristics, and a χ 2 test to evaluate the effect of the educational intervention on screening.Results: Of the 54 respondents, 70.4% reported seeing patients with opioid use disorder, but only 11.1% had a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. Few nonwaivered providers were interested in prescribing, but perceiving buprenorphine to be beneficial to the patient population was associated with interest (adjusted odds ratio 34.7, P < 0.001). Two-thirds of nonwaivered respondents reported the policy change having no impact on their decision to obtain a waiver; however, among interested providers, it increased their likelihood of obtaining a waiver. Barriers to buprenorphine prescribing included lack of clinical experience, clinical capacity, and referral resources. Screening for opioid use disorder did not increase significantly after the survey.Conclusions: Although most primary care providers reported seeing patients with opioid use disorder, interest in prescribing buprenorphine was low and structural barriers remained the dominant obstacles. Providers with a preexisting interest in buprenorphine prescribing reported that removing the training requirement was helpful.

No abstract