Is hospital-in-the-home (HITH) treatment of bacterial endocarditis safe and effective?

Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy for Infective Endocarditis-Model of Care

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a serious infectious disease with significant mortality and morbidity placing a burden on healthcare systems. Outpatient antimicrobial therapy in selected patients has been shown to be safe and beneficial to both patients and the healthcare system. In this article, we review the literature on the model of care for outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy in infective endocarditis and propose that systems of care be developed based on local resources and all patients admitted with infective endocarditis be screened appropriately for outpatient antimicrobial therapy.

Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Treatment (OPAT) vs. Hospitalization for Infective Endocarditis: Validation of the OPAT-GAMES criteria

Background

Outpatient parenteral antibiotic treatment (OPAT) programs are increasingly used to manage infective endocarditis (IE), but current criteria for indicating OPAT are markedly conservative. We aimed to investigate whether more liberal criteria for indicating OPAT in IE can be safely used.

Methods

Prospective multi-center nationwide cohort study (2008-2018). Rates of readmission, significant sequelae, recurrences, and 1-year mortality were compared between hospital-based antibiotic treatment (HBAT) and OPAT. Risk factors for readmission and mortality in OPAT patients were investigated by logistic regression. Patients did not fulfill OPAT-GAMES (Grupos de Apoyo al Manejo de la Endocarditis en ESpaña) criteria if any of the following: cirrhosis, severe CNS emboli, undrained abscesses, severe conditions requiring cardiac surgery in non-operable patients, severe post-surgical complications, highly-difficult-to-treat microorganisms, and intravenous drug use.

Results

2279 HBAT patients and 1268 OPAT patients were included. Among OPAT patients, 307 (24.2%) did not fulfill OPAT-GAMES criteria. Overall, OPAT patients presented higher rates of readmissions than HBAT patients (18.2% vs.14.4%; P = 0.004), but no significant differences were found in the propensity analysis. Patients not fulfilling OPAT-GAMES criteria presented significantly higher rates of readmission than HBAT and OPAT-GAMES (23.8%, 14.4%, 16.4%; P < 0.001), whereas no significant differences were found in mortality (5.9%, 8%, 7.4%; P = 0.103) and recurrences (3.9%, 3.1%, 2.5%; P = 0.546). Not fulfilling OPAT-GAMES criteria was associated with higher risk of readmission (OR 1.43, 95%CI 1.03-1.97; P = 0.03), whereas cardiac surgery was associated to lower risk (OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.53-0.98; P = 0.03).

Conclusions

OPAT-GAMES criteria allow identifying IE patients at higher risk of long-term complications to whom OPAT cannot be safely adminitered.

Clinical predictors of outcome in patients with infective endocarditis receiving outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT)

OBJECTIVES

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is increasingly used to treat infective endocarditis (IE) with documented success. This study aims to identify risk factors for treatment failure and poor outcomes in patients with IE treated through OPAT.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of all episodes of IE treated over 13 years (September 2006 - September 2019) at a large teaching hospital in Sheffield, UK. We defined OPAT failure as unplanned readmission or death within 30 days of discharge from the OPAT service. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as a composite of IE-related death, cardiac surgery, and recurrence of IE within the first year of completion of OPAT.

RESULTS

Overall, 168 episodes of IE were reviewed. OPAT failure and MACE occurred in 44 episodes (26.2%) and 29 episodes (17.3%) respectively. On multivariable analysis, pre-existing renal failure (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-8.30; P = 0.034) and Charlson comorbidity score (aOR, 1.29 per unit increase; 95% CI, 1.06-1.57; P = 0.011) were associated with increased risk of failure. Previous endocarditis (aOR, 3.60; 95% CI, 1.49-8.70; P = 0.004) and cardiac complications (aOR, 3.85; 95% CI, 1.49-9.93; P = 0.005) were risk factors for MACE, whereas cardiac surgery during the initial hospitalisation for IE (aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.12-0.22; P < 0.001) was a protective factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that OPAT is safe and effective for completing antibiotic treatment for IE, including cases deemed to be at increased risk of complications. However, careful patient selection and monitoring of patients with pre-existing comorbidities and cardiac complications are recommended to optimise clinical outcomes.

Infective Endocarditis in a Hospital-at-Home Setting: A Retrospective Analysis in a Peripheral Spanish Hospital

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a severe condition with high morbidity and mortality, and it requires long-term suppressive antibiotic therapy. Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) has been used for a range of infectious diseases for more than 30 years, and in Spain it is used in hospital-at-home (HaH) settings. Our objectives were to describe and characterize the demographic, clinical, and microbiological features of patients admitted to an HaH setting and to assess the safety and effectiveness of OPAT. We conducted a retrospective study that included patients diagnosed with IE over a period of 8 years (2011-2018). We collected demographic and clinical features, length of hospital stay, antimicrobial treatment, microbiological profiles, and outcomes. We included 26 patients during the observation period. Their mean age was 66.5 years, and 88.5% were male. The mean hospital stay was 10.5 days, and the mean stay in the HaH setting was 31 days. A total of 6 patients required readmission due to deterioration, of whom 3 had severe mitral insufficiency. The 8 patients had symptoms of heart failure, but they were treated at home and did not require readmission. Ultimately, 12 patients recovered and were referred to a surgical unit for valvular repair and replacement on a scheduled basis. OPAT is a useful and effective tool for the management of patients diagnosed with IE in HaH settings.

Outpatient Antimicrobial Therapy for Infective Endocarditis is Safe

Infective endocarditis (IE) is common and is associated with significant mortality, morbidity and health care burden. Outpatient antimicrobial therapy in carefully selected patients, supported by a multidisciplinary team is safe and beneficial for both the patient and the health care system. In this article, we review current literature of outpatient antimicrobial therapy in infective endocarditis and propose that most patients with IE should be considered and appropriate pathways developed to facilitate this.

Retrospective analysis of endocarditis patients to investigate the eligibility for oral antibiotic treatment in routine daily practice

Background

According to the current guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology, patients with left-sided infective endocarditis are treated with intravenous antibiotics for 4–6 weeks, leading to extensive hospital stay and high costs. Recently, the Partial Oral Treatment of Endocarditis (POET) trial suggested that partial oral treatment is effective and safe in selected patients. Here, we investigated if such patients are seen in our daily clinical practice.

Methods

We enrolled 119 adult patients diagnosed with left-sided infective endocarditis in a retrospective, observational study. We identified those that would be eligible for switching to partial oral antibiotic treatment as defined in the POET trial (e.g. stable clinical condition without signs of infection). Secondary objectives were to provide insight into the time until each patient was eligible for partial oral treatment, and to determine parameters of longer hospital stay and/or need for extended intravenous antibiotic treatment.

Results

Applying the POET selection criteria, the condition of 38 patients (32%) was stable enough to switch them to partial oral treatment, of which 18 (47.3%), 8 (21.1%), 9 (23.7%) and 3 patients (7.9%) were eligible for switching after 10, 14, 21 days or 28 days of intravenous treatment, respectively.

Conclusion

One-third of patients who presented with left-sided endocarditis in routine clinical practice were possible candidates for switching to partial oral treatment. This could have major implications for both the patient’s quality of life and healthcare costs. These results offer an interesting perspective for implementation of such a strategy, which should be accompanied by a prospective cost-effectiveness analysis.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-020-01490-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Treatment for Infective Endocarditis: A Prospective Cohort Study From the GAMES Cohort

BACKGROUND

Outpatient parenteral antibiotic treatment (OPAT) has proven efficacious for treating infective endocarditis (IE). However, the 2001 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) criteria for OPAT in IE are very restrictive. We aimed to compare the outcomes of OPAT with those of hospital-based antibiotic treatment (HBAT).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of data from a multicenter, prospective cohort study of 2000 consecutive IE patients in 25 Spanish hospitals (2008-2012) was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 429 patients (21.5%) received OPAT, and only 21.7% fulfilled IDSA criteria. Males accounted for 70.5%, median age was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR], 56-76), and 57% had native-valve IE. The most frequent causal microorganisms were viridans group streptococci (18.6%), Staphylococcus aureus (15.6%), and coagulase-negative staphylococci (14.5%). Median length of antibiotic treatment was 42 days (IQR, 32-54), and 44% of patients underwent cardiac surgery. One-year mortality was 8% (42% for HBAT; P < .001), 1.4% of patients relapsed, and 10.9% were readmitted during the first 3 months after discharge (no significant differences compared with HBAT). Charlson score (odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.42; P = .01) and cardiac surgery (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, .09-.63; P = .04) were associated with 1-year mortality, whereas aortic valve involvement (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, .22-.98; P = .007) was the only predictor of 1-year readmission. Failing to fulfill IDSA criteria was not a risk factor for mortality or readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

OPAT provided excellent results despite the use of broader criteria than those recommended by IDSA. OPAT criteria should therefore be expanded.

Benefit of Echocardiography in Patients With Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia at Low Risk of Endocarditis

Background

The risk of endocarditis among patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia is not uniform, and a number of different scores have been developed to identify patients whose risk is less than 5%. The optimal echocardiography strategy for these patients is uncertain.

Methods

We used decision analysis and Monte Carlo simulation using input parameters taken from the existing literature. The model examined patients with S aureus bacteremia whose risk of endocarditis is less than 5%, generally those with nosocomial or healthcare-acquired bacteremia, no intracardiac prosthetic devices, and a brief duration of bacteremia. We examined 6 echocardiography strategies, including the use of transesophageal echocardiography, transthoracic echocardiography, both modalities, and neither. The outcome of the model was 90-day survival.

Results

The optimal echocardiography strategy varied with the risk of endocarditis and the procedural mortality associated with transesophageal echocardiography. No echocardiography strategy offered an absolute benefit in 90-day survival of more than 0.5% compared with the strategy of not performing echocardiography and treating with short-course therapy. Strategies using transesophageal echocardiography were never preferred if the mortality of this procedure was greater than 0.5%.

Conclusions

In patients identified to be at low risk of endocarditis, the choice of echocardiography strategy appears to exert a very small influence on 90-day survival. This finding may render test-treatment trials unfeasible and should prompt clinicians to focus on other, more important, management considerations in these patients.

OPAT: proof of concept in a peripheral Belgian hospital after review of the literature

Since its introduction in the 1970s in the United States, outpatient parenteral antibiotic/antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) has been adopted internationally for long-term intravenous (IV) treatment of stable infectious diseases. The aim is to provide a safe and successful completion of IV antimicrobial treatment at the ambulatory care center or at home without complications and costs associated with hospitalization. OPAT implementation has been accelerated by progress in vascular access devices, newly available antibiotics, the emphasis on cost-savings, as well as an improved patient comfort and a reduced incidence of health care associated infections with a similar outcome. OPAT utilization is supported by an extensive published experience and guidelines of the British Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy and the Infectious Diseases Society of America for adults as well as for children. Despite these recommendations and its widespread adoption, in Belgium OPAT is only fully reimbursed and established for cystic fibrosis patients. Possible explanations for this unpopularity include physician unfamiliarity and a lack of uniform funding arrangements with higher costs for the patient. This article aims to briefly review benefits, risks, indications, financial impact for supporting OPAT in a non-university hospital as standard of care. Our experience with OPAT at the ambulatory care center of our hospital and its subsequent recent introduction in the home setting is discussed.

Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy in a suburban tertiary referral centre in Australia over 10 years

PURPOSE

Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) is a widely accepted and safe therapeutic option for carefully selected patients. This study reviewed the practice of an OPAT service in a large Australian tertiary teaching hospital in Western Sydney over a 10-year period.

METHOD

Data were retrieved from a prospectively maintained electronic database which included information on patient demographics, clinical diagnosis, microbiological identity, antimicrobial therapy, complications and readmissions. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

There were 3435 referrals made to the service between January 2004 and June 2014, amounting to 25,289 antibiotic days. The most frequent referral was for Skin and Soft Tissue Infections (SSTIs), 61.28%, followed by Bone and Joint Infections (BJIs), 15.30%. The most common organism identified was methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. Readmission was uncommon (5.15%), with the highest rate of readmission noted for Cardiovascular System Infections (16.67%) followed by BJIs (10.31%). Line infection, aseptic thrombophlebitis and drug hypersensitivity or reaction were the cause of 68.55% of all complications. There was a decline in line-related complications throughout the study period.

CONCLUSION

OPAT service is in increasing demand in Australia, providing a significant relief in in-hospital days. Growth in referrals was seen not only with SSTIs and BJIs, but also a diverse range of other infective entities with limited literature in its treatment in an OPAT setting. This study highlights the need to improve data collection, develop risk stratification strategies and standardisation of OPAT services in Australia.

Efficiency of a self-administered outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (s-opat) for infective endocarditis within the context of a shortened hospital admission based on hospital at home program

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of treatment of infectious endocarditis (IE) via Self-administered Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy (S-OPAT) supported by a shortening hospital admission program in a hospitalization-at-home unit (HAH), including a short review of the literature.

METHODS

Ambispective cohort study of 57 episodes of IE in 54 patients treated in an HAH unit between 1988 and 2014 who receive S-OPAT after prior intra-hospital clinical stabilization. Characteristics of each episode of IE, safety and efficiency of the care model, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-three (76%) patients were males with a median age of 61 years (SD = 16.5). A total of 37 (65%) episodes affected the native valve (42% the aortic valve). In 75%, a micro-organism was isolated, of which 88% were Gram-positive bacteria. No deaths occurred during HAH program, clinical complications appeared in 30% of episodes, only 6 patients were re-admitted to hospital although no patient died. In the 12 months' follow-up 3 cases had a recurrence. The average cost of a day stay in HAH was €174 while in traditional cardiology hospitalization was €1100. The total average cost of treatment of each episode of IE managed entirely in hospital was calculated as €54,723. Application of the S-OPAT model based on HAH meant a cost reduction of 32.72%.

CONCLUSIONS

In suitably selected patients, treatment of IE based on S-OPAT supported by a shortening hospital admission care program by means of referral to a HAH unit is a safe and efficient care model which entails a significant cost saving for the public healthcare system.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness, safety and acceptability of community intravenous antibiotic service models: CIVAS systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate evidence of the efficacy, safety, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) models.

DESIGN

A systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database (EED), Research Papers in Economics (RePEc), Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry, Health Business Elite, Health Information Management Consortium (HMIC), Web of Science Proceedings, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy website. Searches were undertaken from 1993 to 2015.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies, except case reports, considering adult patients or practitioners involved in the delivery of OPAT were included. Studies combining outcomes for adults and children or non-intravenous (IV) and IV antibiotic groups were excluded, as were those focused on process of delivery or clinical effectiveness of 1 antibiotic over another. Titles/abstracts were screened by 1 reviewer (20% verified). 2 authors independently screened studies for inclusion.

RESULTS

128 studies involving >60 000 OPAT episodes were included. 22 studies (17%) did not indicate the OPAT model used; only 29 involved a comparator (23%). There was little difference in duration of OPAT treatment compared with inpatient therapy, and overall OPAT appeared to produce superior cure/improvement rates. However, when models were considered individually, outpatient delivery appeared to be less effective, and self-administration and specialist nurse delivery more effective. Drug side effects, deaths and hospital readmissions were similar to those for inpatient treatment, but there were more line-related complications. Patient satisfaction was high, with advantages seen in being able to resume daily activities and having greater freedom and control. However, most professionals perceived challenges in providing OPAT.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no systematic differences related to the impact of OPAT on treatment duration or adverse events. However, evidence of its clinical benefit compared with traditional inpatient treatment is lacking, primarily due to the dearth of good quality comparative studies. There was high patient satisfaction with OPAT use but the few studies considering practitioner acceptability highlighted organisational and logistic barriers to its delivery.

The Community IntraVenous Antibiotic Study (CIVAS): a mixed-methods evaluation of patient preferences for and cost-effectiveness of different service models for delivering outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy

Background

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is widely used in most developed countries, providing considerable opportunities for improved cost savings. However, it is implemented only partially in the UK, using a variety of service models.

Objectives

The aims of this research were to (1) establish the extent of OPAT service models in England and identify their development; (2) evaluate patients’ preferences for different OPAT service delivery models; (3) assess the cost-effectiveness of different OPAT service delivery models; and (4) convene a consensus panel to consider our evidence and make recommendations.

Methods

This mixed-methods study included seven centres providing OPAT using four main service models: (1) hospital outpatient (HO) attendance; (2) specialist nurse (SN) visiting at home; (3) general nurse (GN) visiting at home; and (4) self-administration (SA) or carer administration. Health-care providers were surveyed and interviewed to explore the implementation of OPAT services in England. OPAT patients were interviewed to determine key service attributes to develop a discrete choice experiment (DCE). This was used to perform a quantitative analysis of their preferences and attitudes. Anonymised OPAT case data were used to model cost-effectiveness with both Markov and simulation modelling methods. An expert panel reviewed the evidence and made recommendations for future service provision and further research.

Results

The systematic review revealed limited robust literature but suggested that HO is least effective and SN is most effective. Qualitative study participants felt that different models of care were suited to different types of patient and they also identified key service attributes. The DCE indicated that type of service was the most important factor, with SN being strongly preferred to HO and SA. Preferences were influenced by attitudes to health care. The results from both Markov and simulation models suggest that a SN model is the optimal service for short treatment courses (up to 7 days). Net monetary benefit (NMB) values for HO, GN and SN services were £2493, £2547 and £2655, respectively. For longer treatment, SA appears to be optimal, although SNs provide slightly higher benefits at increased cost. NMB values for HO, GN, SN and SA services were £8240, £9550, £10,388 and £10,644, respectively. The simulation model provided useful information for planning OPAT services. The expert panel requested more guidance for service providers and commissioners. Overall, they agreed that mixed service models were preferable.

Limitations

Recruitment to the qualitative study was suboptimal in the very elderly and ethnic minorities, so the preferences of patients from these groups might not be represented. The study recruited from Yorkshire, so the findings may not be applicable nationally.

Conclusions

The quantitative preference analysis and economic modelling favoured a SN model, although there are differences between sociodemographic groups. SA provides cost savings for long-term treatment but is not appropriate for all.

Future work

Further research is necessary to replicate our results in other regions and populations and to evaluate mixed service models. The simulation modelling and DCE methods used here may be applicable in other health-care settings.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Service and Delivery Research programme.

Self-administered outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (S-OPAT) for infective endocarditis: a safe and effective model

The safety and efficacy of treatment of infectious endocarditis (IE) was evaluated within a program of hospital-in-home (HIH) based on self-administered outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (S-OPAT). IE episodes (n=48 in 45 patients; 71% middle-aged males) were recruited into the HIH program between 1998 and 2012. Following treatment stabilization at the hospital they returned home for HIH in which a physician and/or a nurse supervised the S-OPAT. Safety and efficacy were evaluated as mortality, re-occurrence, and unexpected re-admission to hospital. Of the episodes of IE, 83.3% had comorbidities with a mean score of 2.3 on the Charlson index and 1.5 on the Profund index; 60.4% had pre-existing valve disease (58.6% having had surgical intervention); 8.3% of patients had suffered a previous IE episode; 62.5% of all episodes affected a native valve; 45.8% being mitral; 70.8% of infection derived from the community. In 75% of the episodes there was micro-organism growth, of which 83.3% were Gram positive. Overall duration of antibiotic treatment was 4.8 weeks; 60.4% of this time corresponding to HIH. Re-admission occurred in 12.5% of episodes of which 33.3% returned to HIH to complete the S-OPAT. No deaths occurred during HIH. One year after discharge, 2 patients had recurrence and 5 patients died, in 2 of whom previous IE as cause-of-death could not be excluded. In conclusion, the S-OPAT schedule of hospital-in-home is safe and efficacious in selected patients with IE.

A national survey of infectious disease practitioners on their use of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT)

BACKGROUND

The use of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is standard medical practice; however, significant heterogeneity in practice exists. We hypothesized that formal OPAT programs are associated with increased physician participation in patient safety activities.

METHODS

United States Infectious Disease (ID) physicians were contacted and asked to participate in an electronic survey from April through June 2012. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.

RESULTS

In all, 3718 physicians were contacted and 316 (8.5%) responded. Respondents practice in 47 states; the majority (79%) practice adult ID, 11% pediatric ID, 10% a combination of the two. Sixty percent reported that ID consultation was not mandatory before OPAT, and 75% of these respondents thought it should be compulsory. The most common indications were osteomyelitis, prosthetic joint infections, and endocarditis, and the most common antibiotics were vancomycin, ceftriaxone, and ertapenem. Most respondents (59%) discharge patients with OPAT weekly, and have a median number of 11 OPAT patients (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.5-13.4). Half of respondents have a formal OPAT program. Fifty-two percent report no systematic method of communication between inpatient and outpatient physicians when patients are discharged with OPAT, 49% have no systematic method of lab tracking, and 34% have no method of ensuring patient adherence to clinic visits. All of these patient safety measures were more likely to be present in practice sites with formal OPAT programs (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Opportunities exist for improving OPAT monitoring and patient safety. Formal OPAT programs provide the framework for safe and effective care and are to be encouraged.

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy for infective endocarditis: a cost-effective strategy

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the benefit/risk ratio of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) in infective endocarditis (IE).

METHOD

We performed an observational retrospective study of definite IE (Duke criteria) treated in an infectious diseases unit in 2012. We compared patients having completed the treatment in hospital (H), and those deemed sufficiently stable, and with adequate home environment, for OPAT. The costs were estimated through hospital bills, and, for OPAT, through the costs of drugs and their administration (material, staff), transportation, and outpatient visits.

RESULTS

Eighteen out of 39 consecutive patients presenting with IE received OPAT, with a mean hospital stay of 23.5days (vs 34.7days for H group, P=0.014). No severe adverse event related to OPAT was reported. The global saving was estimated at 267,307euros, or 14,850euros per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

OPAT in selected patients presenting with IE seems effective, safe, and reduces costs by approximately 15,000euros per patient.

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) in the Republic of Ireland: results of a national survey

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) services are not well developed in the Republic of Ireland. A national programme is being instituted to standardise care. This survey aims to assess the current use of outpatient intravenous antibiotics and to quantify the needs that physicians identify in the development of a national programme. General medical consultant physicians and clinical microbiology consultants were contacted through the Royal College of Physicians of Ireland (RCPI) from April to June 2012. Data were analysed using SPSS version 20. A total of 512 physicians were contacted, of which 55 (10.7 %) responded. The majority, 38/55 (69 %), practice general internal medicine in combination with a medical specialty, 2 (4 %) general internal medicine alone, 8 (15 %) clinical microbiology and 7 (13 %) a medical specialty alone. Of those practising a medical specialty, 12 (27 %) practice infectious diseases. Seventy-four percent reported having discharged patients with intravenous antibiotics; however, 47 % did not have a designated service available. Of those with no service, 100 % identified a need for these resources. Of those responsible for an OPAT service, 56 % had not audited their service. The most common indications were skin and soft tissue infections, osteomyelitis and respiratory tract infection. Flucloxacillin was the most commonly reported antibiotic. Eleven percent responded that they never monitor laboratory studies for patients discharged with intravenous antibiotics. While OPAT services in Ireland are not well developed, patients are being discharged with intravenous antibiotics. This survey underscores the need to develop the national programme to standardise care and ensure patients receive safe and efficient therapy.

Are we ready for an outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy bundle? A critical appraisal of the evidence

Healthcare "bundles" have been developed to help providers improve the reliability and delivery of essential healthcare processes. Bundles have been shown to be effective in reducing healthcare-associated infection rates and are increasingly used to ensure the quality of patient care. Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is now standard medical practice in the treatment of a wide variety of infections. We review 6 components that we believe comprise an OPAT bundle and the evidence supporting each: patient selection, infectious disease consultation, patient/caregiver education, discharge planning, outpatient monitoring/tracking, and OPAT program review. To ensure that patients are receiving optimal care, further program development and outcomes research should target these bundle components to bring the evidence base up to date with current medical practices.

Efficacy and safety of outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy for infective endocarditis: a ten-year prospective study

BACKGROUND

The length of treatment of infective endocarditis (IE) with parenteral antibiotics varies from 2 to 6 weeks. Although several studies indicate that outpatient parenteral antibiotic treatment (OPAT) could be safe for uncomplicated viridans-group streptococci (VGS) IE, the experience in Spain is limited and data on other types of endocarditis and OPAT are scarce worldwide.

METHODS

Prospective single center study of a cohort including all patients with IE admitted to the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona OPAT program from January 1997 to December 2006.

RESULTS

During the study period, 392 consecutive episodes of IE in non-drug abusers were attended to. Of these, 73 episodes (42 native-valve, 23 prosthetic-valve, and 8 pacemaker-lead) were admitted to the OPAT program (19%). The percentage of inclusion was higher for viridans group streptococci (VGS) or Streptococcus bovis (S. bovis) IE (32% of all VGS or S. bovis IE episodes diagnosed vs. 14% of the remaining etiologies, P<.001). Twelve patients (16%) were readmitted due to complications, of which 3 died (4%). Glycopeptides use was the only predictor factor of hospital readmission (OR 4.5, 95% confidence interval 1.2; 16.8, P=.026). No differences in OPAT outcome were found between VGS plus S. bovis IE and Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) plus coagulase-negative staphylococci IE. Patients spent a median of 17 day on OPAT (interquartile range 11-26.5), which enabled 1,466 days of hospital stay to be saved.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that OPAT for IE may be a safe and effective therapeutic approach in the treatment of selected patients with types of endocarditis other than uncomplicated VGS or S. bovis endocarditis, although patients taking glycopeptides need close clinical OPAT monitoring.