Evidence Hub

Antimicrobial resistance patterns and empiric antibiotic selections for patients admitted from post-acute care facilities

Vijapurapu S, Maguire C, Binkley A, Binkley S, Lamore R

American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, 2024

167 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: To characterize the susceptibilities of positive bacterial cultures and the appropriateness of empiric antimicrobial regimens for patients admitted from post-acute care facilities (PACFs).

METHODS: This was a retrospective quality improvement study. The study included patients admitted from a PACF to one of 2 tertiary care teaching hospitals within the University of Pennsylvania Health System, located in Philadelphia, PA, from August 2020 to December 2021. Patients were included if they had at least one positive culture within 72 hours of admission.

RESULTS: A total of 167 patients and 230 isolates from the study period were evaluated. The majority of positive cultures were from a urinary source (114 of 230, 49.6%). Nineteen patients (11.4%) had a history of multidrug-resistant organisms. The most common empiric antibiotics used were vancomycin (61.7%) and cefepime (59.3%). Sixty-one patients (36.5%) received inappropriate empiric therapy based on the culture results. When comparing our hospitals' general antibiogram to that of only PACF patients, Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae had at least a 20% difference in susceptibility to levofloxacin, ceftriaxone, and cefepime. Extended-spectrum β-lactamase resistance was also higher in the PACF cohort (odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-3.1).

CONCLUSION: Clinically significant differences in antimicrobial susceptibility were found among patients admitted from PACFs compared to our health system's…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 167 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free