Factors Influencing the Implementation of Antimicrobial Stewardship in Primary Care: A Narrative Review

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is directly driven by inappropriate use of antibiotics. Although the majority of antibiotics (an estimated 80%) are consumed in primary care settings, antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) activities in primary care remain underdeveloped and factors influencing their implementation are poorly understood. This can result in promising stewardship activities having little-to-no real-world impact. With this narrative review, we aim to identify and summarize peer-reviewed literature reporting on (1) the nature and impact of AMS interventions in primary care and (2) the individual and contextual factors influencing their implementation. Reported activities included AMS at different contextual levels (individual, collective and policy). AMS activities being often combined, it is difficult to evaluate them as stand-alone interventions. While some important individual and contextual factors were reported (difficulty to reach physicians leading to a low uptake of interventions, tight workflow of physicians requiring implementation of flexible and brief interventions and AMS as a unique opportunity to strengthen physician-patients relationship), this review identified a paucity of information in the literature about the factors that support or hinder implementation of AMS in primary care settings. In conclusion, identifying multilevel barriers and facilitators for AMS uptake is an essential step to explore before implementing primary care AMS interventions.

Post‑COVID‑19 Syndrome in Outpatients: a Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

After mild COVID-19, some outpatients experience persistent symptoms. However, data are scarce and prospective studies are urgently needed.

OBJECTIVES

To characterize the post-COVID-19 syndrome after mild COVID-19 and identify predictors.

PARTICIPANTS

Outpatients with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 with (1) PCR-confirmed COVID-19 (COVID-positive) or (2) SARS-CoV-2 negative PCR (COVID-negative).

DESIGN

Monocentric cohort study with prospective phone interview between more than 3 months to 10 months after initial visit to the emergency department and outpatient clinics.

MAIN MEASURES

Data of the initial visits were extracted from the electronic medical file. Predefined persistent symptoms were assessed through a structured phone interview. Associations between long-term symptoms and PCR results, as well as predictors of persistent symptoms among COVID-positive, were evaluated by multivariate logistic regression adjusted for age, gender, smoking, comorbidities, and timing of the survey.

KEY RESULTS

The study population consisted of 418 COVID-positive and 89 COVID-negative patients, mostly young adults (median age of 41 versus 36 years in COVID-positive and COVID-negative, respectively; p = 0.020) and healthcare workers (67% versus 82%; p = 0.006). Median time between the initial visit and the phone survey was 150 days in COVID-positive and 242 days in COVID-negative patients. Persistent symptoms were reported by 223 (53%) COVID-positive and 33 (37%) COVID-negative patients (p = 0.006) and proportions were stable among the periods of the phone interviews. Overall, 21% COVID-positive and 15% COVID-negative patients (p = 0.182) attended care for this purpose. Four surveyed symptoms were independently associated with COVID-19: fatigue (adjusted odds ratio 2.14, 95% CI 1.04-4.41), smell/taste disorder (26.5, 3.46-202), dyspnea (2.81, 1.10-7.16), and memory impairment (5.71, 1.53-21.3). Among COVID-positive, female gender (1.67, 1.09-2.56) and overweight/obesity (1.67, 1.10-2.56) were predictors of persistent symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of COVID-positive outpatients report persistent symptoms up to 10 months after a mild disease. Only 4 of 14 symptoms were associated with COVID-19 status. The symptoms and predictors of the post-COVID-19 syndrome need further characterization as this condition places a significant burden on society.

OUP accepted manuscript

Objectives

To describe the therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of cefepime in non-critically ill adults and compare four different ways of dosing: conventional table-based; empirically adjusted following TDM; individualized based on a population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model without TDM; and TDM-adjusted with a Bayesian approach integrating TDM and PopPK.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study in a tertiary centre to examine the current practice of TDM and to evaluate the potential for improvement by PopPK-based software individualization. The prediction of trough concentrations and the total daily doses (TDD) prescribed according to each approach were compared by calculating the mean logarithmic bias and the root mean squared error, complemented by linear regression and variance analysis.

Results

Among 168 trough concentrations in 119 patients (median: 12 mg/L), 38.6% of measurements exceeded 15 mg/L, the reported threshold for neurotoxicity. Nine patients developed neurotoxicity. The prediction performance of PopPK alone for trough concentrations was moderate, but clearly improved after integration of TDM. Accordingly, TDD were significantly lower for a priori PopPK-based dosage (mean: 2907 mg/24 h) compared with actual table-based dosage (4625 mg/24 h, P < 0.001). They were also lower for a posteriori dosage based on PopPK and TDM (3377 mg/24 h) compared with actual dosage after empirical TDM (4233 mg/24 h, P < 0.001), as model-based adjustment privileged more frequent administrations.

Conclusions

Our observations support routine TDM of cefepime to prevent overdosing and subsequent toxicity in the non-critically ill. Software-based individualization seems promising to optimize the benefits of TDM, but has little potential to replace it.

Septic arthritis of the shoulder due to Ureaplasma urealyticum after emergency caesarean section: a case report

Background

Ureaplasma urealyticum is an intra-cellular bacterium frequently found colonizing the genital tract. Known complications include localized infections, which can result in premature deliveries. Septic arthritis due to U. urealyticum in healthy patients is exceptionally rare, although opportunistic septic arthritis in agammaglobulinemic patients have been reported. However, there are no reports of septic arthritis due to U. urealyticum following caesarean section or in the post-partum period.

Case presentation

A 38-year-old immunocompetent woman presented with severe right shoulder pain, 1 month following emergency caesarean section at 26 weeks of gestation for pre-eclampsia and spontaneous placental disruption with an uncomplicated post-operative recovery.

Our suspicion of septic arthritis was confirmed with abundant pus following arthrotomy by a delto-pectoral approach. Awaiting culture results, empirical antibiotic treatment with intravenous amoxicilline and clavulanic acid was initiated. In spite of sterile cultures, clinical evolution was unfavorable with persistent pain, inflammation and purulent drainage, requiring two additional surgical débridement and lavage procedures.

The 16S ribosomal RNA PCR of the purulent liquid was positive for U. urealyticum at 2.95 × 10⁶ copies/ml, specific cultures inoculated a posteriori were positive for U. urealyticum. Levofloxacin and azithromycine antibiotherapy was initiated. Susceptibility testing showed an intermediate sensibility to ciprofloxacin and clarithromycin. The strain was susceptible to doxycycline. Following cessation of breastfeeding, we started antibiotic treatment with doxycycline for 4 weeks. The subsequent course was favorable with an excellent functional and biological outcome.

Conclusions

We report the first case of septic arthritis due to U. urealyticum after caesarean section. We hypothesize that the breach of the genital mucosal barrier during the caesarean section led to hematogenous spread resulting in purulent septic arthritis. The initial beta-lactam based antibiotic treatment, initiated for a purulent arthritis, did not provide coverage for cell wall deficient organisms. Detection of 16S rRNA allowed for a correct microbiological diagnosis in a patient with an unexpected clinical course.