683 A Quality Improvement Project (QIP) To Increase Compliance with Peri-Operative Antibiotic Guidelines in Colorectal Surgery (CS)

Introduction In CS, the correct use of antibiotics is important in order to reduce the risk of surgical site and intra-abdominal infections, whilst balancing risks from overuse of antibiotics. The Commissioning for Quality and Improvement (CQUIN) of 2019/20 identified that antibiotic prophylaxis guideline compliance could be enhanced in CS. This QIP aimed to improve local CS antibiotic prophylaxis and extension guideline compliance. Method In December 2019, an educational session was held to highlight the details of the local guideline and prescribing discrepancies. A3 posters of the guideline were created for accessible reference in operating theatres. Perioperative antibiotic prescription data from all colorectal elective cases in January 2020 were extracted and analysed using descriptive methods. Results Out of 93 cases in the sample, 70 (75.3%) were compliant with the prophylaxis guideline. However, metronidazole was commonly used in perianal surgery, which is not recommended. 13 cases required extension of the antibiotic course, of which seven were compliant (53.8%). The main issues included: use of agents and course durations which were not indicated; and a lack of antibiotic switch after a pause in therapy. Conclusions To further improve compliance with antibiotic guidelines, targeting historic practice, increasing awareness, and making systemic change is required for the next cycle.

Current Status of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in São Paulo Hospitals

Background: Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) consist of coordinated interventions designed to improve and measure appropriate antimicrobial use. Understanding the current structure of ASPs hospitals will support interventions for improvement or implementation of these programs. Objective: We aimed to describe the current status of ASP in hospitals in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey regarding ASP of hospitals in São Paulo state, Brazil, from March to July 2018. Through interviews by telephone or e-mail, we asked participants which components of IDSA/SHEA and CDC guidelines had been implemented. Results: The response rate was 30% (28 of 93 hospitals) and 26 of the hospitals (85%) reported having a formal ASP. Policies, practices, and strategies of surveyed ASP are detailed in Table 1. The most frequently implemented strategies were (1) antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis guideline (100%), (2) empiric sepsis guideline (93%), and (3) presence of ASP team member during bedside rounds (96%). The least commonly implemented strategies included prior authorization for all antimicrobials (11%), pharmacokinetic monitoring and adjustment program for patients on IV aminoglycosides (3%). Regarding metrics of the ASP, the most common indicator was the rates of antimicrobial resistance (77%). Overall, 18 hospitals (19%) used defined daily dose and only 29% used days of therapy. Moreover, 61% of hospitals reported their results to hospital the administration and 39% of hospitals reported their results to the prescribers. Conclusions: Most hospitals have a formal ASP, but there are opportunities for improvement. Future efforts should prioritize tracking and reporting ASP metrics.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

2413. Assessment of compliance with Clostridioides difficile prophylaxis guideline and its efficacy on secondary prophylaxis and reducing hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile infections.

Background One of the complications of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is the risk of recurrence, particularly in high-risk patients who are exposed to broad-spectrum antibiotics (BSA). Antimicrobial stewardship program at our institution developed Clostridium difficile prophylaxis (CDP) guidelines. Purpose of this study was to evaluate the compliance to this guideline and evaluate the efficacy of it preventing recurrent CDI. Methods This was an IRB approved retrospective study performed at a 607-bed community health system between 2014–2016. Patients were included if they were ≥18 years old and admitted for > 24 hours on BSA with history of CDI in last 6 months. CDI prophylaxis was provided with oral vancomycin 125 PO BID. Patients were excluded if they had active CDI receiving metronidazole or treatment doses of oral vancomycin. Patients were compared in two cohorts: Study group which was patients in CDP group which were matched to control group. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the compliance of CDP guidelines and incidence of hospital-onset CDI (HO-CDI) between CDP group and control group. The secondary objective focused on all-cause inpatient mortality and 30-day readmission between two groups. Results There were total of 72 patients reviewed and 47 patients met the inclusion criteria for CDP group which were matched with control group. Most common type of infection and BSA were pnuemonia (26%) and broad-spectrum cephalosporins (31%), respectively. CDP guidelines compliance was measured at 65%. The incidence of HO-CDI/10000 patient-days during the admission was lower in CDP group compared with control group (2.02 vs 5.4 per 10,000 PD, P = 0.03). No differences were seen in all-cause inpatient mortality and 30-day readmission between two groups. Forty-five percent of patients suffered from CDI < 3 months prior to admission. The most common dose of oral vancomycin was 125 mg PO BID. Conclusion Patients in CDP group had a lower incidence of developing HO-CDI compared with control group. Overall compliance with CDP guidelines was higher than expected. No difference was seen in all-cause inpatient mortality and 30-day readmission between two groups. Oral vancomycin 125 mg PO BID shows promising results as a secondary prophylaxis in patients receiving BSA. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Awareness among the Dental students and Dental Interns of Kantipur Dental College and Hospital regarding Antibiotics Prophylaxis for Infective Endocarditis

Background: Infective Endocarditis is relatively a rare disease and is believed to be caused by the vegetative growth on the previously damaged or congenitally malformed cardiac valves or endocardium. Several factors determines that the dentist practicing prophylaxis measures, the foremost important one is the knowledge which is taught to them during dental school, which is the main reason to conduct this study to test the awareness among the dental students of Kantipur Dental College and Hospital, Kathmandu regarding the prophylaxis guideline awareness. Methods: BDS Third, Fourth, Fifth year students and Dental Interns of Kantipur Dental College and Hospital were asked to fill the self-answered questionnaires. The questions were divided into two parts each part containing ten questions each. The first part was to access the knowledge of participants regarding the cardiac conditions that require antibiotics prophylaxis, the second part was to access the knowledge of participants regarding the dental procedures that requires antibiotics prophylaxis. Results: Thirty two percentage of our participants responded that forceps extraction does not require antibiotics prophylaxis which is not true as per AHA guideline, so the participants should be taught regarding the risk of forceps extraction leading to infective endocarditis if the prophylaxis is not administered. We postulated that majority of the Dental Students and Interns have heard about AHA 2007 guideline and will follow it when necessary. Conclusions: The participants who are the Dental Students and Dental Interns in a Dental School at Kathmandu, Nepal will be practicing Dentistry in near future, the knowledge they acquire during their learning period will help them to prevent the Infective endocarditis among the risk population whom they will be treating in near future. Measures should be taken to prevent the incidence of Infective Endocarditis with dental origin.

What the HEC? Physician variation and attainable compliance targets in antiemetic prophylaxis.

74 Background: U.S. National Antiemetic Guidelines recommend upfront triple prophylaxis (NK1 receptor antagonist (RA) + 5HT3 RA + dexamethasone) for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), including carboplatin AUC ≥ 4 per 2017 guidelines. While existing data show gaps in guideline compliance, variation between individual physicians is less studied, and a realistic target compliance rate remains unknown. Methods: In a large electronic health record database (IBM Explorys), we identified HEC courses of therapy initiated from 2012 to 2017. Guideline compliance was defined as triple prophylaxis at chemotherapy initiation. Patient courses for ≥ 7 day cycles of cisplatin or anthracycline + cyclophosphamide (AC), or carboplatin (≥ 14 day cycles as a proxy for AUC ≥ 4) were ascribed to oncologists based on encounter frequency. We then ranked physicians treating ≥ 5 HEC courses and evaluated guideline compliance and individual physician variation. Results: In total, 10,074 HEC courses were identified and attributed to 451 unique physicians. Overall antiemetic guideline compliance with cisplatin and AC averaged 68% and 81% respectively. When ranked by compliance, the top 20% of physicians were 2.5 - 1.5 times as compliant as the bottom 20% (cisplatin 100% vs 40%; AC 100% vs 67%). For cisplatin, 32% of physicians had > 90% compliance; the remaining 68% were evenly distributed from 0 - 90%. For AC, 56% of physicians had > 90% compliance, and another 14% had 80 - 90%; the remaining 30% were evenly distributed. For carboplatin, 62% of physicians had ≤ 10% compliance, and another 17% had 11 - 20%; however, the majority of these data preceded guideline inclusion of carboplatin AUC ≥ 4 as HEC. Rates were independent of course volume per physician. Conclusions: Considerable physician-level variation exists in triple antiemetic prophylaxis guideline adherence for HEC. Hundreds of physicians had > 90% compliance with guidelines, suggesting 90% is a realistic target. However, the majority exhibited substantial gaps in NK1 RA use in HEC, placing patients unnecessarily at risk for CINV. Interventions are needed to bolster triple antiemetic prophylaxis in HEC, perhaps especially for carboplatin.

Rheumatic Heart Disease Prophylaxis in Older Patients: A Register-Based Audit of Adherence to Guidelines

Background Prevention of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) remains challenging in high-burden settings globally. After acute rheumatic fever (ARF), secondary antibiotic prophylaxis is required to prevent RHD. International guidelines on recommended durations of secondary prophylaxis differ, with scope for clinician discretion. Because ARF risk decreases with age, ongoing prophylaxis is generally considered unnecessary beyond approximately the third decade. Concordance with guidelines on timely cessation of prophylaxis is unknown. Methods We undertook a register-based audit to determine the appropriateness of antibiotic prophylaxis among clients aged ≥35 years in Australia’s Northern Territory. Data on demographics, ARF episode(s), RHD severity, prophylaxis type, and relevant clinical notes were extracted. The determination of guideline concordance was based on whether (1) national guidelines were followed; (2) a reason for departure from guidelines was documented; (3) lifelong continuation was considered appropriate in all cases of severe RHD. Results We identified 343 clients aged ≥35 years prescribed secondary prophylaxis. Guideline concordance was 39% according to national guidelines, 68% when documented reasons for departures from guidelines were included and 82% if patients with severe RHD were deemed to need lifelong prophylaxis. Shorter times since last echocardiogram or cardiologist review were associated with greater likelihood of guideline concordance (P &lt; .001). The median time since last ARF was 5.9 years in the guideline-concordant group and 24.0 years in the nonconcordant group (P &lt; .001). Thirty-two people had an ARF episode after age 40 years. Conclusions In this setting, appropriate discontinuation of RHD prophylaxis could be improved through timely specialist review to reduce unnecessary burden on clients and health systems.

Impact of a Perioperative Prophylaxis Guideline on Post–Cardiothoracic Surgery Atrial Fibrillation

Background: National practice guidelines do not provide clear recommendations on combination pharmacological regimens to reduce cardiothoracic surgery (CTS) postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF). Objective: This study examines if there is a reduction in POAF rates after implementing a perioperative prophylaxis guideline that includes amiodarone, β-blockers, and high-intensity statins. Methods: Data were retrospectively collected on 400 adults (200 patients pre–guideline implementation and 200 patients post–guideline implementation) with a CHA2DS2-VASc (Congestive Heart Failure, Hypertension, Age, Diabetes Mellitus, and Vascular Disease) score of at least 3 points after CTS. Data were collected on the incidence of POAF lasting more than 5 minutes and secondary outcomes, including the length of hospitalization, guideline adherence rate, adverse events, and timeliness of POAF treatment. Results: Guideline implementation increased prophylactic amiodarone ( P < 0.0001), statin ( P = 0.029), and high-intensity statin ( P = 0.002) use without changing β-blocker use (64.5% vs 67.0%, P = 0.673) and reduced POAF (39.5% vs 52.0%, P = 0.016) and ventricular tachycardia (15.5% vs 24.5%, P = 0.034) compared with preguideline rates. Length of hospitalization and other postoperative adverse events, including stroke and mortality, were not statistically different. Subgroup analyses of patients who were adherent to both the amiodarone and β-blocker recommendations (28% of the total) or to all 3 recommended therapies (24% of the total) had significant decreases in POAF ( P = 0.001; P < 0.001), length of hospitalization ( P = 0.023; P = 0.049), length of intensive care unit stay ( P = 0.045; P = 0.040), and ventricular tachycardia ( P = 0.008; P = 0.017) compared with preguideline patients, respectively. Conclusions: A perioperative guideline of amiodarone, β-blockers, and high-intensity statins reduced POAF, but better benefits may result from enhanced adherence.