9/17/2018
1
Antimicrobial Stewardship and the Microbiology Lab: Opportunities for Collaboration in Optimizing Choice of
Antibiotic Therapy when Treating InfectionsJennifer Pisano, MD
Medical Director, Antimicrobial Stewardship ProgramUniversity of Chicago Medicine
Objectives
• Explain the importance of microbiology lab and antimicrobial stewardship program collaboration
• Identify key timepoints in patient care when the microbiology lab and stewardship team can focus interventions
• Describe opportunities for both systems‐based and behavioral interventions to guide prescribing
THE COMMUNITY
HOSPITALS
AGRICULTURE/AQUACULTURE
THE ENVIRONMENT
Development and Spread of Antibiotic
Resistance
Adapted from: Francesca Prestinaci, Patrizio Pezzotti& Annalisa Pantosti (2015)Antimicrobial resistance: a global multifaceted phenomenon, Pathogens and Global Health, 109:7, 309-318, DOI: 10.1179/2047773215Y.0000000030
9/17/2018
2
Why is resistance important?
Making drugs for diseases that can be cured is not as profitable as drugs for chronic diseases
Overuse of antibiotics• Antimicrobial Resistance• Collateral damage
• Microbiome disruption • Antibiotic toxicities• Clostridium difficile
55% of patients received at least 1 dose of antibiotics during their hospital visit
9/17/2018
3
What is Antimicrobial Stewardship?Coordinated strategies implemented by a multidisciplinary team to optimize
the use of antimicrobials
Patient outcomes
Toxicity, Clostridium difficile, Antibiotic resistance
What is Antimicrobial Stewardship?
Gerding DN. The search for good antimicrobial stewardship. Qual Improv. 2001;27(8):403-404.Joseph J. The role of carbapenems in the treatment of severe nocsocomial respiratory tract
infections. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2008:9(4):561-575.
Antibiotic effects on the microbiome
Jernberg C et al. Long-term impacts of antibiotic exposure on the human intestinal microbiota. Microbiollogy (2010), 156, 3216-3223
Effects of antibiotic therapy on the microbiome are long-lasting and support the colonization and spread of resistant bacteria
9/17/2018
4
Culture of Empiricism
• Pathogen‐specificdrugs
• Manipulating the immune response
• Further development of rapid diagnostics
• Antimicrobial Stewardshipo Optimize use of current therapieso Shorten antibiotic courses
• Identify combinations that reduce emergence of resistance
• Culture‐>rapid diagnostics
How can we make it easier to do the right thing?
9/17/2018
5
Making decisions regarding antimicrobial therapy is hard.
Clinical exam
Labs
Imaging
Culture results
Patient History
Molecular Diagnostics
Biomarkers
Collaboration is key
Nurses
Patients
Pharmacists
Physicians
Clinicians
Information technologists
Nursing assistants
Microbiologists
Laboratory technologists
9/17/2018
6
Diagnostic stewardshipJust because you can, doesn’t mean you should…
• Earlier, more targeted therapies• Decrease the use of empiric
antibiotics and collateral damageo Clostridium difficileo Toxicitieso Development of resistanceo Affects on the microbiome
Messacar K et al. Implementation of Rapid Molecular Infectious Disease Diagnostics: the role of diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship. J ClinMicrobiol 55:715‐723. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02264‐16.
DiagnosticsAntimicrobials
Stewardship
9/17/2018
7
Timepoints to consider interventions
Evaluating the patient
Ordering diagnostics
Collecting specimens
Performing diagnostic testing
Reporting results
Interpreting Results
Antibiotic choice‐
Treatment PlanFollowing up
Timepoints to consider interventions
• Relies on provider to assess pretest probability of diagnosis to guide testingEvaluating the patient
• Education, clinical pathways/EMR decision support, prior authorization, indication‐based ordering; decreasing treatment of FALSE POSITIVE testsOrdering diagnostics
• Timely ordering by provider, collection by staff in appropriate container and timing of transport to lab for processingCollecting specimens
• Transparent in processes, reflex testing, rapid diagnostics, TATPerforming diagnostic testing
• Timely, with guidance embedded in reports or direct communication to impact prescribingReporting results
• ASP direct communication, added comments or links to guidelinesInterpreting Results
• ASP recommendations and post‐prescription review, dose, duration, combination therapyAntibiotic choice‐Treatment Plan
• Post‐prescriptive review, feedbackFollowing up
Antibiotic Stewardship = optimization of therapy. This can also mean broader, more costly or more toxic coverage.
Morgan DJ et al. Diagnostic Stewardship—Leveraging the Laboratory to Improve Antimicrobial Use. 2017;318(7):607-608. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.8531
9/17/2018
8
Timepoints to consider interventions
Evaluating the patient
Ordering diagnostics
Collecting specimens
Performing diagnostic testing
Reporting results
Interpreting Results
Antibiotic choice‐
Treatment PlanFollowing up
MICROBIOLOGY LAB/ANTIMICROBIAL STEWARDSHIP COLLABORATION IS KEY
Timepoints to consider interventions
Evaluating the patient
Ordering diagnostics
Collecting specimens
Performing diagnostic testing
Reporting results
Interpreting Results
Modify antimicrobial chemotherapy
Following up
MICROBIOLOGY LAB/ANTIMICROBIAL STEWARDSHIP COLLABORATION IS KEY
Will the clinician understand the test result?
Will the clinician act on the test result promptly to modify the
treatment plan?
Will the clinician know the result is available?
Did the intervention have the
intended effect? PPR/Feedback?
Approaches to affect prescribing
• Selective reportingoHiding resultso Suppression based on intrinsic resistanceoGrouping species into more familiar nomenclature
• Cascade reporting• Embedding educational/interpretive comments
o Links to guidelines, pathways, antibiograms• Antimicrobial stewardship as the messenger • Post‐prescriptive review and feedback
Often requires a combination of approaches
9/17/2018
9
Selective reporting
Pulcini et al. Selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility test results in European countries‐an ESCMID cross‐sectional survey. Int J of Antimicrobial Agents 49 (2017) 162‐166
Selective reporting based on resistance mechanism ‐ AmpC beta‐lactamases
“Cefepime is usually effective therapy for infections caused by this pathogen”
Cascade reporting• Algorithm‐based susceptibility reporting • Provides limited groups of susceptibility results based on
o Epidemiologic data o Formulary availability o Toxicityo Spectrum of activity and risk of development of resistanceo Cost
• Secondary antibiotic therapy (more broad‐spectrum, costly, toxic, higher impact of resistance) is only reported if an organism is resistant to the first cascade
• Susceptibilities are reported from at least 2 classes of antibiotics for cases of allergy
Morency‐Potvin et al. Antimicrobial Stewardship: how the microbiology laboratory can right the ship. Clinical Microbiology Reviews Vol 30 issue 1, Jan 2017. https://www.publichealthontario.ca/en/BrowseByTopic/InfectiousDiseases/AntimicrobialStewardshipProgram/Documents/ASP_Strategy_Cascading_Microbiology_Reporting.pdf
9/17/2018
10
Cascade reportingAdvantages
• Decreases use of more toxic, unnecessarily broad‐spectrum therapy
o Encourages use of narrow‐spectrum, cost‐effective therapy
• Potential to improve susceptibility to suppressed agents
• If system can be automated, will require minimal intervention
Disadvantages• Reporting algorithms may become complicated
o Investment in creation, oBuy in from key stakeholders
• Depends on provider’s interpretation of the reports
oMay assume not reported agents are resistant and prescribe redundant therapy
Morency‐Potvin et al. Antimicrobial Stewardship: how the microbiology laboratory can right the ship. Clinical Microbiology Reviews Vol 30 issue 1, Jan 2017. https://www.publichealthontario.ca/en/BrowseByTopic/InfectiousDiseases/AntimicrobialStewardshipProgram/Documents/ASP_Strategy_Cascading_Microbiology_Reporting.pdf
Johnson LS et al. Impact of microbiology cascade reporting on antibiotic de‐escalation in cefazolin‐susceptibile gram‐negative bacteremia. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis (2016) 35:1151‐1157.
• 6 month pre/post study at 2 teaching hospitals in Atlanta
• E. coli was most common organism in each group
• Most common source of bacteremia was the urinary tract
• Rate of de‐escalation was higher in the post CR period (71% vs. 48%, p=0.043)
• Decrease in anti‐pseudomonal beta‐lactam use, increase in ceftriaxone therapy
• No differences in safety outcomes, LOS
Cascade reporting
Intervention:Ciprofloxacin susceptibility to
Enterobacteriaceae was suppressed when there was a lack of resistance to the antibiotics
on the gram‐negative panel
• Ciprofloxacin utilization decreased from 87 (95% CI, 83.7 to 91.2) to 39 (95% CI, 35.0 to 44.0) DDD per 1000 patient days post intervention and maintained up to 24m post.
• Increase use of amoxicillin‐clavulanate • E. Coli S to ciprofloxacin was higher than expected post intervention p
9/17/2018
11
Use of comments in microbiology reports to guide therapy• Clear and concise messaging added to result reporting to guide therapy
• May include links to clinical pathways/decision support• Automated messages preferred
oManually entered comments may be forgotten• CLSI recommends few therapy‐related comments
“commensal respiratory flora only: No S. aureus/MRSA or P. aeruginosa”
“commensal respiratory flora” • 210 patients• De‐escalation/discontinuation more likely in intervention group (39%
vs. 73%, p
9/17/2018
12
CLSI‐recommended comments
Comments regarding: • inferred susceptibility, • choice of antimicrobial,
• dose depending on diagnosis combination therapy
Adapted from: Morency‐Potvin P et al. Antimicrobial Stewardship: how the microbiology lab can right the ship. 2017. Clin Microbiol Rev 30:381‐407.
Other Therapy‐related comments
Diagnosis Issues Positive urine cultures should prompt targeted antimicrobial therapy only if the patient 1. has symptoms of cystitis or pyelonephritis, 2. is pregnant, or 3. will soon undergo and invasive urologic procedure; apart from these clinical indications, patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria do not benefit from antibiotic therapy
Duration of therapy S. aureus bacteremia usually requires a minimum of 14 days of therapy; longer therapy is often needed to treat or prevent complicated infections; expert consultation is advised.
Reference to documentation Refer to local guidelines for treatment recommendations of respiratory tract infections (ADD A HYPERLINK!)
Suggestions for alternatives In our institution, clindamycin is the preferred agent used to treat this pathogen in patients with IgE‐medicated allergy to penicillin
Selective or cascade susceptibility reporting
Only first‐line recommended antimicrobials appear in this report; contact the laboratory for additional susceptibility testing if alternate agents are needed, e.g., due to allergy
Reference to antimicrobial stewardship program services
Contact the antimicrobial stewardship team to choose the best agent to treat this infection (e.g., for unusual or MDRO pathogens)
Indicate preferred agents Bold or highlight preferred agents based on cost, epidemiologic data
Adapted from: Morency‐Potvin P et al. Antimicrobial Stewardship: how the microbiology lab can right the ship. 2017. Clin Microbiol Rev 30:381‐407.
9/17/2018
13
Comments and selective reporting based on resistance mechanism identified ‐ CRE
Instructions for ID consultation embedded in the comment
Reflexive change in SIR reporting based on resistance mechanism
Comments and selective reporting based on resistance mechanism ‐ ESBLs
Cefepime and ceftriaxone are reported as resistant even though MIC is in S‐SDD range
Timbrook TT et al. Current and future opportunities for rapid diagnostics in antimicrobial stewardship. Med Clin N Am 102 (2018) 899–911
Rapid diagnostics
Very sensitiveTimely
May pick up false positive results
Difficult to interpret when multiple positives
9/17/2018
14
Rapid diagnostics without ASP intervention does not affect time to optimal antibiotic prescribing
Goff DA et al. Using Rapid diagnostic tests to optimize antimicrobial selection in antimicrobial stewardship programs. Pharmacotherapy 2012;32(8):677‐687; Frye et al, Clinical impact of a rel‐time PCR assay for rapid identification of staphylococcal bacteremia. J Clin Micro , 2012 Jan;50(1):127‐33. Cosgrove et al Use of PNA FISH for blood cultures growing gram‐positive cocci in chains without a concomitant antibiotic stewardship intervention does not improve time to appropriate antibiotic therapy. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2016;86(1):86‐92. Buehler SS, Madison B, Snyder SR, Derzon JH, Cornish NE, Saubolle MA, Weissfeld AS, Weinstein MP, Liebow EB, Wolk DM. 2016. Effectiveness of practices to increase timeliness of providing targeted therapy for inpatients with bloodstream infections: a laboratory medicine best practices systematic reviewand meta‐analysis. Clin Microbiol Rev 29:59–103. doi:10.1128/CMR.00053‐14.
• 2012: Frye et al, reported that with the use of rtPCR to differentiate Staph spp. and MSSA/MRSA
o Time to identification was significantly reduced (10.5 v 15.9h, p
9/17/2018
15
RDT + ASP Review
• Cairns et al, 2016oPatients were more likely to be on active and appropriate antimicrobial therapy at 72h when stewardship review was performed in addition to testing with MALDI‐TOF in patients with positive blood cultures.
• Nagle et al, 2014oMALDI‐TOF + AST review in CoNS bacteremiaoReal‐time ASP pages 6a‐11:30p and 24h emailsoBacteremic patients started on optimal therapy sooner in the AST group (58.7 vs 34.4 h, p=0.030) and had decreased mortality (21.7% v 3.1%, p=0.023)
oDecreased duration of unnecessary therapy (1.31 v 3.89 days, p=0.032)oDecreased vancomycin assays 2 v 0.9 (p
9/17/2018
16
Multiplex PCRs from non‐sterile sites
Do I treat them all?!?!
GI mPCR panel: Does finding more bugs lead to inappropriate drugs?• 760 of 3066 GI mPCR tests performed were positive (25%).
• 108 (14%) of positive test results identified multiple pathogens (2 to 5)
• Immunocompetent adults with a positive GI mPCR were significantly more likely to receive antibiotics compared to all hospitalized patients (75% vs. 40%, p
9/17/2018
17
GI mPCR possible commentsOrganism CommentCampylobacter Illness generally mild and self‐limited. Consider treatment for severe infections and in elderly,
pregnant or immunocompromised hosts.C. difficile toxin A/B Up to 15% of people are asymptomatic carriers of Clostridium difficile. For guidance in
treatment of infections due to C. diff, please refer to clinical pathway on the ASP websiteSalmonella Prolonged periods of asymptomatic shedding have occurred after infection with Salmonella
species Enteroaggregative E. coli (EAEC)Enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC)
Enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC) and Enteroaggragative E. coli (EAEC) have been detected in stools of both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. Infection with only certain strains leads to symptomatic diarrheal illness .
Norovirus GI/GII Asymptomatic shedding of virus has been reported, prolonged periods of shedding have been seen post‐infection in immunocompromised hosts
Benefit from post‐result review?
Respiratory mPCR
• Clinicians will act on influenza negative results and stop oseltamivir stopped if influenza negative
• Empiric antibiotic therapy was discontinued in only 25% of patients with a positive result indicating viral infection
o 70% of patient + for influenza treated with antibiotics
Yee et al. AJIC Nov 2016. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2016.04.221
Adenovirus Coronavirus HKU1/NL63/229E/OC43
Human Rhinovirus/enterovirus
Parainfluenza 1/2/3/4
RSV Human Metapneumovirus
Influenza A Influenza B Bordetella pertussis
Chlamydophila pneumoniae
Mycoplasma pneumonia
Respiratory mPCREmbedding
epidemiologic data may make providers more comfortable stopping antibiotics if the Respiratory
mPCR result correlates with “What’s going
around”
9/17/2018
18
Respiratory mPCR possible comments
Organism CommentInfluenza Patients may benefit from oseltamivir treatment in the first 48h of symptom onset.
For treatment recommendations for immunocompomised hosts, consider discussing with ID provider.
General With positive respiratory viral panel result, consider discontinuing empiric antibacterial therapy as unnecessary antibiotic therapy may lead to untintended consequences including C. diff, development of resistant bacteria and antibiotic toxicities.
Following‐up
• Talk to your primary prescribers• Consider surveys or focus groups after modifications are made• Actively seek out feedback regarding the accuracy, timeliness, impact and acceptability of the change
• Identify super‐users/key stakeholders to providing education and offer support in their specific clinical area
Summary
• Collaboration between the microbiology lab and antimicrobial stewardship program is necessary to identify opportunities to affect antibiotic prescribing
• Reporting results, interpreting results, modifying antimicrobial chemotherapy are 3 important time points to optimize antimicrobial prescribing.
• Interventions may be systems based (i.e., algorithms to guide selective reporting) or behavioral based (i.e., nudges in the form of comments in reports)
• ASP‐provider communication is paramount in building trust, offering education and ensuring appropriate modifications in therapy are performed
9/17/2018
19
Follow us on Facebook & Twitter!www.facebook.com/UCMASP@chicagoabx
Thank [email protected]