Evidence Hub

Stewardship in Action: An Evaluation of Antibiotic De-Escalation Prescribing After Positive Pneumococcal Urinary Antigen Testing in a Safety Net Health System

Mehak Bhatia, Katherine Davanzo, Paul Kim, J. Inampudi, Mazhar Shapoo, Marco Scipione, S. Dhar, Lea M. Monday

LabMed, 2025

268 participants

Abstract

The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) recommend pneumococcal urinary antigen testing (UAT) for a subset of inpatients admitted with pneumonia. Despite this, UAT testing is frequently performed on inpatients who do not meet the official IDSA criteria, and current evidence regarding antibiotic de-escalation in UAT-positive cases remains inconclusive. To explore this further, we conducted a retrospective cohort study examining antibiotic de-escalation patterns among hospitalized CAP patients who underwent UAT over a 60-day period during peak respiratory illness season (November and December, 2023). Patients with positive UAT results were compared to those who had negative UAT; the primary outcome was whether a positive UAT impacted antibiotic de-escalation prescribing. A total of 268 patients were analyzed—235 UAT-negative and 33 UAT-positive. Both groups were comparable in terms of disease severity, underlying health conditions, and readmission rates. Empiric therapy targeting Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was used in 40% of patients (36% in the UAT-positive group and 46% of the UAG-negative group). The use of atypical coverage, MRSA coverage, or anti-pseudomonal β-lactams was frequently de-escalated in both cohorts (p < 0.05); however, the UAT-positive group had significantly shorter durations of anti-pseudomonal therapy (p = 0.03) and anti-MRSA…

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: 268 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