Clinical pharmacological considerations in an early intravenous to oral antibiotic switch: are barriers real or simply perceived?

"Once more, with feeling": no difference in outcomes between patients discharged on oral versus intravenous antibiotics for orthopedic infections in a propensity score matched cohort at a US medical center

Objective

To compare outcomes between patients discharged on intravenous (IV) versus oral (PO) antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections, after creation of an IV-to-PO guideline, at a single academic medical center in the United States.

Methods

This was a retrospective, propensity score matched, cohort study of adult patients hospitalized for orthopedic infections from September 30, 2020, to April 30, 2022. Patients discharged on PO antibiotics were matched to patients discharged on IV antibiotics. The primary outcome was one-year treatment failure following discharge. Secondary outcomes were incidence of 60-day treatment failure, adverse drug events (ADE), readmissions, infectious disease clinic "no-show" rates, and emergency department (ED) encounters.

Results

Ninety PO-treated patients were matched to 90 IV-treated patients. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups after matching. There was no significant difference in the proportions of patients on PO versus IV antibiotics experiencing treatment failure at one year (26% vs 31%, P = .47). There were no significant differences for any secondary outcomes: treatment failure within 60 days (13% vs 14%, P = 1.00), ADE (13% vs 11%, P = .82), unplanned readmission (17% vs 21%, P = .57), or ED encounters (9% vs 18%, P = .54). Survival analyses identified no significant differences in time-to-event between PO and IV treatment for any of the outcomes assessed.

Conclusions

There were no appreciable differences in outcomes between patients discharged on PO compared to IV regimens. Antimicrobial stewardship interventions to increase prescribing of PO antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections should be encouraged.

Switch to oral antibiotics in Gram-negative bacteraemia: a randomized, open-label, clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of switching from intravenous (IV) to oral antimicrobial therapy in patients with Enterobacterales bacteraemia, after completion of 3-5 days of microbiologically active IV therapy.

METHODS

A multicentre, open-label, randomized trial of adults with monomicrobial Enterobacterales bacteraemia caused by a strain susceptible to ≥1 oral beta-lactam, quinolone, or trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. Inclusion criteria included completion of 3-5 days of microbiologically active IV therapy, being afebrile and haemodynamically stable for ≥48 hours, and absence of an uncontrolled source of infection. Pregnancy, endocarditis, and neurological infections were exclusion criteria. Randomization, stratified by urinary source of bacteraemia, was to continue IV (IV Group) or to switch to oral therapy (Oral Group). Agents and duration of therapy were determined by the treating physicians. The primary endpoint was treatment failure, defined as death, need for additional antimicrobial therapy, microbiological relapse, or infection-related re-admission within 90 days. Non-inferiority threshold was set at 10% in the 95% CI for the difference in the proportion with treatment failure between the Oral and IV Groups in the modified intention-to-treat population. The protocol was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04146922).

RESULTS

In the modified intention-to-treat population, treatment failure occurred in 21 of 82 (25.6%) in the IV Group, and 18 of 83 (21.7%) in the Oral Group (risk difference -3.7%, 95% CI -16.6% to 9.2%). The proportions of subjects with any adverse events (AE), serious AE, or AE leading to treatment discontinuation were comparable.

DISCUSSION

In patients with Enterobacterales bacteraemia, oral switch, after initial IV antimicrobial therapy, clinical stability, and source control, is non-inferior to continuing IV therapy.

The Bioavailability of Drugs-The Current State of Knowledge

Drug bioavailability is a crucial aspect of pharmacology, affecting the effectiveness of drug therapy. Understanding how drugs are absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated in patients' bodies is essential to ensure proper and safe treatment. This publication aims to highlight the relevance of drug bioavailability research and its importance in therapy. In addition to biochemical activity, bioavailability also plays a critical role in achieving the desired therapeutic effects. This may seem obvious, but it is worth noting that a drug can only produce the expected effect if the proper level of concentration can be achieved at the desired point in a patient's body. Given the differences between patients, drug dosages, and administration forms, understanding and controlling bioavailability has become a priority in pharmacology. This publication discusses the basic concepts of bioavailability and the factors affecting it. We also looked at various methods of assessing bioavailability, both in the laboratory and in the clinic. Notably, the introduction of new technologies and tools in this field is vital to achieve advances in drug bioavailability research. This publication also discusses cases of drugs with poorly described bioavailability, providing a deeper understanding of the complex challenges they pose to medical researchers and practitioners. Simultaneously, the article focuses on the perspectives and trends that may shape the future of research regarding bioavailability, which is crucial to the development of modern pharmacology and drug therapy. In this context, the publication offers an essential, meaningful contribution toward understanding and highlighting bioavailability's role in reliable patient treatment. The text also identifies areas that require further research and exploration.

Antibiotic Guideline Adherence at the Emergency Department: A Descriptive Study from a Country with a Restrictive Antibiotic Policy

BACKGROUND

Denmark has a low level of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Patients hospitalized with suspected infection often present with unspecific symptoms. This challenges the physician between using narrow-spectrum antibiotics in accordance with guidelines or broad-spectrum antibiotics to compensate for diagnostic uncertainty. The aim of this study was to investigate adherence to a restrictive antibiotic guideline for the most common infection in emergency departments (EDs), namely community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).

METHOD

This multicenter descriptive cross-sectional study included adults admitted to Danish EDs with a suspected infection. Data were collected prospectively from medical records.

RESULTS

We included 954 patients in the analysis. The most prescribed antibiotics were penicillin with beta-lactamase inhibitor at 4 h (307 (32.2%)), 48 h (289 (30.3%)), and day 5 after admission (218 (22.9%)). The empirical antibiotic treatment guidelines for CAP were followed for 126 (31.3%) of the CAP patients. At 4 h, antibiotics were administered intravenously to 244 (60.7%) of the CAP patients. At day 5, 218 (54.4%) received oral antibiotics.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to CAP guidelines was poor. In a country with a restrictive antibiotic policy, infections are commonly treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics against recommendations.

Early switch from intravenous to oral antibiotic treatment in bone and joint infections

OBJECTIVES

The timing of the switch from intravenous (i.v.) to oral antibiotic therapy for orthopaedic bone and joint infections (BJIs) is debated. In this narrative article, we discuss the evidence for and against an early switch in BJIs.

DATA SOURCES

We performed a PubMed and internet search investigating the association between the duration of i.v. treatment for BJI and remission of infection among adult orthopaedic patients.

CONTENT

Among eight randomized controlled trials and multiple retrospective studies, we failed to find any minimal duration of postsurgical i.v. therapy associated with clinical outcomes. We did not find scientific data to support the prolonged use of i.v. therapy or to inform a minimal duration of i.v.

THERAPY

Growing evidence supports the safety of an early switch to oral medications once the patient is clinically stable.

IMPLICATIONS

After surgery for BJI, a switch to oral antibiotics within a few days is reasonable in most cases. We recommend making the decision on the time point based on clinical criteria and in an interdisciplinary team at the bedside.