No abstract

Background: Penicillin allergy is commonly reported and has clinical and financial consequences for patients and hospitals. A penicillin evaluation program can safely delabel patients and optimize antibiotic therapy. Pharmacists who perform this task have focused on a detailed interview or penicillin skin testing (PST). Antibiotic graded challenge after PST requires more resources and is more costly than going directly to a two-step challenge. Objective: To determine whether a pharmacist-driven penicillin allergy evaluation and a testing protocol that primarily uses direct oral challenges can safely delabel patients. Methods: Adult patients (ages >18 years) with a penicillin allergy in their electronic medical record (EMR) who were admitted between September 2019 and June 2020 were eligible. Although all patients with penicillin allergy were eligible, priority was given to patients who required antibiotics. Patients were interviewed, and, if indicated, based on an institutional protocol, were tested by using PST and/or two-step oral challenge. If the patient passed the challenge, then the penicillin allergy label was removed in the EMR and the patient counseled. Demographic information, allergy questionnaire results, testing results, and changes in antimicrobial therapy were collected. Results: Fifty patients were evaluated from September 2019 to June 2020. Ninety-six percent of the patients were delabeled, and antibiotic therapy changed for 54%. Twenty patients were delabeled with an interview alone, and 30 patients underwent oral two-step challenge. Only one patient required PST. Conclusion: A pharmacist-driven penicillin allergy evaluation program focused on direct oral graded challenges and bypassing PST can effectively delabel admitted patients. However, more safety data are needed before implementation of similar programs to optimize antibiotic treatment.

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is a well‐established mechanism to facilitate patient discharge, lower inpatient admission cost, and decrease the risk of health care–acquired infections. Although there are numerous benefits to patients and health care institutions, OPAT is complex and not without risks. Patients may be discharged on long courses of oral antimicrobials, known as complex outpatient antimicrobial therapy (COpAT), which also requires careful monitoring and oversight. This, coupled with the need for antimicrobial stewardship across the continuum of care, positions pharmacists with infectious diseases (ID) training as crucial leaders in the field of OPAT. The development, implementation, and maintenance of these services requires the careful attention of health care personnel in discharge antimicrobial selection, continuity of care at key care transitions, implementation of optimal care bundles, provision of thorough patient education throughout the OPAT process, coordination with a multidisciplinary team including home infusion and nursing, and monitoring of program metrics to determine successes and opportunities for improvement. Ongoing support for optimal delivery of patient care will be required as OPAT practice, and health care delivery at large, continues to evolve. This involves continued advocacy for collaborative practice development, optimizing payment for nondispensatory OPAT services, and integration of effective telehealth programs. This article summarizes the need for practice expansion of ID pharmacist specialists in OPAT/COpAT management across the care continuum and best practices for establishment of these services.

This study aimed to assess understanding of antibiotic resistance and evaluate antibiotic use themes among the general public. In March 2018, respondents that were ≥21 years old and residing in the United States were recruited from ResearchMatch.org and surveyed to collect data on respondent expectations, knowledge, and opinions regarding prescribing antibiotics and antibiotic resistance. Content analysis was used to code open-ended definitions of antibiotic resistance into central themes. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences between the definitions of antibiotic resistance and antibiotic use. Among the 657 respondents, nearly all (99%) had taken an antibiotic previously. When asked to define antibiotic resistance, the definitions provided were inductively coded into six central themes: 35% bacteria adaptation, 22% misuse/overuse, 22% resistant bacteria, 10% antibiotic ineffectiveness, 7% body immunity, and 3% provided an incorrect definition with no consistent theme. Themes that were identified in respondent definitions of resistance significantly differed between those who reported having shared an antibiotic versus those who had not (p = 0.03). Public health campaigns remain a central component in the fight to combat antibiotic resistance. Future campaigns should address the public’s understanding of antibiotic resistance and modifiable behaviors that may contribute to resistance.