English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate antimicrobial consumption metrics as a means for differentiating patient populations and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) opportunities. Methods This single-center, retrospective, descriptive study included all patients from January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2018 that received ≥1 day of therapy (DOT) of any antimicrobial included in the National Healthcare Safety Network Antimicrobial Use and Resistance (NHSN AUR) module. The cohort was then grouped into 4 quartiles based on DOT (Q1 lowest; Q4 highest). The primary outcome was a Lorenz Curve of DOT per patient over the study period. Secondary outcomes included a comparison of patient characteristics and number/type of AMS-related opportunities present (using a randomized convenience sample of 25 patients per quartile). AMS opportunities were defined as any unnecessary, inappropriate, or suboptimal antimicrobial use with pharmacist intervention or potential for intervention occurring 24 hours after the antimicrobial initiation. Results During the 6 month study period, 24,743 patients accounted for 163,859 days present, and 13,039 (52%) received ≥ 1 DOT. After dividing the population into quartiles of antimicrobial use, median (range) DOT were as follows: Q1 [2 (1–2)], Q2 [4 (3–4)], Q3 [7 (5–10)], Q4 [20 (11–636)] (Figure 1). The top 24% of patients according to antimicrobial use accounted for 74% of total antimicrobial DOT. Patient-level DOT data are displayed by SAAR grouping in Figure 2. In the cohort of 100 patients, differences between quartiles included Infectious diseases consultation in 76% of patients in Q4 compared with 4–24% in other quartiles, ICU admission during hospitalization in 68% in Q4 compared with 28–40% in other quartiles, and any surgical procedure in 88% in Q1 compared with 48–60% in Q2–4. The number of AMS opportunities present were 4 (0.5/1000 DOT) in Q1, 13 (1.6/1000 DOT) in Q2, 28 (1.4/1000 DOT) in Q3, and 86 (0.8/1000 DOT) in Q4. The most common type of AMS opportunity differed by quartile: inappropriate prophylaxis for Q1-3, and de-escalation in Q4. Conclusion Evaluating antimicrobial consumption from a patient-level perspective at a large academic medical center reveals heterogeneity and variable AMS opportunities across quartiles Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

2098. Applying Antimicrobial Consumption Metrics to Characterize Inpatient Stewardship Opportunities