Dataset Information

Failure of outpatient antibiotics among patients hospitalized for acute bacterial skin infections: What is the clinical relevance?

ABSTRACT: Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines recommend that patients hospitalized for acute bacterial skin infections after failure of outpatient antibiotic therapy be managed as "severe" infections; however, the clinical relevance of apparent failure of outpatient therapy is not clear.This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter, retrospective cohort of adults and children hospitalized for cellulitis, abscess, or wound infection. We compared clinical features, laboratory and microbiology findings, antibiotic treatment, and outcomes among patients who received outpatient antibiotics prior to admission and those who did not.Of 533 patients, 179 (34%) received outpatient antibiotics prior to admission. Compared with those who did not, patients who received antibiotics prior to admission less frequently had fever (18% vs 26%, P=.04) and leukocytosis (33% vs 51%, P<.001). In the 202 cases where a microorganism was identified, Staphylococcus aureus was more common among those who received antibiotics prior to admission (75% vs 58%, P=.02), particularly methicillin-resistant S aureus (41% vs 27%, P=.049), whereas aerobic gram-negative bacilli were less common (3% vs 13%, P=.03). After hospitalization, clinical failure occurred with similar frequency between the 2 groups (12% vs 11%, P=.73).Patients hospitalized with skin infections after apparently failing outpatient therapy had clinical features suggestive of less severe infection and similar outcomes compared with patients who did not receive antibiotics prior to admission. Our results suggest that inpatient treatment for patients not responding to outpatient therapy should focus on methicillin-resistant S aureus, not gram-negative pathogens.

SUBMITTER: Jenkins TC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5602597 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Failure of outpatient antibiotics among patients hospitalized for acute bacterial skin infections: What is the clinical relevance?

Jenkins Timothy C TC Knepper Bryan C BC McCollister Bruce D BD Moore S Jason SJ Pawlowski Sean W SW Perlman Daniel M DM Saveli Carla C CC O'Leary Sean T ST Burman William J WJ

The American journal of emergency medicine 20160212 6

<h4>Background</h4>Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines recommend that patients hospitalized for acute bacterial skin infections after failure of outpatient antibiotic therapy be managed as "severe" infections; however, the clinical relevance of apparent failure of outpatient therapy is not clear.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter, retrospective cohort of adults and children hospitalized for cellulitis, abscess, or wound infection. We compared clinical fe ...[more]

PMID: 26947377

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectiveNearly 10% of all US hospital admissions are attributed to acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). While most antibacterials used to treat these infections require multi-day and multi-dose regimens, a single-dose treatment is now available. The objective of this analysis is to estimate the annual budget impact of using single-dose oritavancin in patients with moderate to severe ABSSSIs receiving intravenous methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-active antibacterials from a US hospital perspective.MethodsA decision-analytic model based on current clinical practice was developed to estimate the economic impact of oritavancin. Utilization of antibacterials and rates of hospital admission were derived from the Premier Research Database. Demographic and clinical data were informed by the published literature and 2014 wholesale drug acquisition costs were used. Other costs were based on the published literature and Medicare National Limitation amounts. All costs were inflated to 2014 US dollars. Two base-case scenarios were considered: one for hospitals with ambulatory services and one for hospitals without ambulatory services.ResultsFor a US hospital with ambulatory services with 1000 ABSSSI patients receiving intravenous MRSA antibiotics annually, use of oritavancin in 26% of patients is estimated to reduce the total annual budget by 12.9% (US$1.23 million), or approximately US$1234.67 per patient. Total inpatient costs will be reduced by 22.3% (US$1.40 million) and outpatient costs will increase slightly by 1.7% (US$55,310). Pharmaceutical cost increases are offset by savings in the inpatient setting from fewer hospital admissions. Hospitals without ambulatory services are estimated to receive overall cost savings of 9.3% (US$0.63 million).ConclusionUse of single-dose oritavancin in select ABSSSI patients with suspected or confirmed MRSA involvement is estimated to save US hospitals approximately 9.3-12.9% per year by reducing hospital admissions and lowering drug administration burden.

Project description:BackgroundOmadacycline is an oral and intravenous (IV) once-daily aminomethylcycline antibiotic that was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). In 2 phase 3 clinical trials, IV-to-oral switch and oral-only administration of omadacycline achieved the primary end points of noninferiority compared with linezolid in treating patients with ABSSSI.ObjectiveTo estimate the potential cost-savings with bioequivalent IV-to-oral antibiotics, such as omadacycline, compared with the standard of care with IV vancomycin by avoiding hospitalizations and reducing hospital stays in patients presenting from the emergency department for ABSSSI treatment.MethodsWe used hospital avoidance models to examine the potential cost-savings of managing patients with ABSSSI and no or limited comorbidities and without life-threatening conditions by using omadacycline in the outpatient setting compared with the current standard of care. Early hospital discharge models were used to evaluate the hospital stay reduction that would be required to be achieved with omadacycline treatment relative to IV vancomycin to confer cost-savings compared with standard of care among patients with ABSSSI and ?2 comorbidities but no life-threatening conditions.ResultsIn the hospital stay avoidance models, cost-savings may be realized by using therapeutically bioequivalent IV-to-oral antibiotics, such as omadacycline, compared with inpatient treatment with IV vancomycin. Based on a sensitivity analysis, further savings could be possible with outpatient administration of omadacycline, even if 20% of omadacycline outpatients were subsequently admitted and incurred the full inpatient cost, with no reimbursement penalties. Of more than 300 patients, only 1 was admitted to the hospital after a full course of omadacycline in the oral-only clinical trial. In the early hospital discharge models, the maximum cost-minimizing daily expense of omadacycline varied from $173 to $936, depending on the presence of active comorbidities or systemic symptoms, hospital stay reduction, and model perspective.ConclusionThese results suggest that the targeted use of antibiotics with bioequivalent IV-to-oral formulations, such as omadacycline, for select patients with ABSSSI may lead to cost-savings compared with inpatient IV vancomycin treatment by shifting care to the outpatient setting or by facilitating earlier hospital discharge among hospitalized patients.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:This NMA compared the efficacy and safety between IV antibiotics that are used in the current standard of care for managing adult patients (≥18 years of age) with ABSSSI. METHODS:Comparators were chosen on the basis that both direct and indirect comparisons between the interventions of interest could be performed. Outcomes of the analysis were selected on the basis that they are frequently measured and reported in trials involving ABSSSI patients, and only published randomised control trials of any size and duration and with any blinding status were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. The NMA was performed using both a fixed-effect and random-effect model. Efficacy-related endpoints were (1) clinical treatment success and (2) microbiological success at TOC visit. Safety-related endpoints were (1) number of discontinuations due to AEs/SAEs, (2) patients experiencing AEs, (3) patients experiencing SAEs and (4) all-cause mortality. RESULTS:Study interventions included daptomycin, dalbavancin, linezolid and tigecycline. Vancomycin was the comparator in all studies, except in two where it was linezolid and teicoplanin. The NMA showed that irrespective of patient subgroup, the likelihood of clinical and microbiological success with dalbavancin was statistically similar to the comparators studied. No statistically significant differences were observed between dalbavancin and any of the comparators in the discontinuation rate due to AEs/SAEs. In contrast, dalbavancin was associated with a significantly lower likelihood of experiencing an AE than linezolid, a significantly lower likelihood of experiencing a SAE than vancomycin and daptomycin, and a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality than vancomycin, linezolid and tigecycline. CONCLUSION:Dalbavancin affords a promising, new alternative IV antimicrobial agent which is as effective as traditional therapies, but with the added benefit of enabling clinicians to treat patients with ABSSSI in different organisational settings. Notwithstanding, any introduction of an effective treatment with a differential mode of administration into healthcare systems must be followed by a change in clinical practice and patient management in order to fully achieve desirable economic outcomes.

Dataset Information

Failure of outpatient antibiotics among patients hospitalized for acute bacterial skin infections: What is the clinical relevance?

Publications

Failure of outpatient antibiotics among patients hospitalized for acute bacterial skin infections: What is the clinical relevance?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets