P-1753. Impact of a Microbiology Reporting Change on Treatment Selection and Clinical Outcomes for Organisms at Low-Risk for Significant AmpC Production

Abstract Background AmpC β-lactamase production can be induced after exposure to beta lactam antimicrobials, most notably ceftriaxone (CRO), leading to development of resistance on therapy. New guidance from IDSA indicates that the risk of AmpC enzyme production is not equal among all Enterobacterales and those deemed low-risk may be treated with CRO. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a microbiology reporting change made in collaboration with our antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) to guide antibiotic selection for low-risk AmpC organisms. Methods This was a pre-test, post-test quasi-experimental study with data collected by chart review. A microbiology comment warning against the potential for inducible resistance on therapy with CRO was present pre-test and was removed in the post-test period. A didactic education session was given by ASP to medicine services. The study enrolled hospitalized patients ≥1 month old treated for infection with a low-risk AmpC organism (Serratia marcescens, Morganella morganii, Proteus vulgaris, and Providencia spp.) pre- (3/21-2/22) and post-intervention (8/22-7/23). Further inclusion and exclusion criteria are in table 1. The primary outcome was rate of carbapenem-sparing definitive treatment. Secondary outcomes were rate of CRO definitive therapy along with 30-day readmission, retreatment, mortality, and development of CRO resistance. Results 73 patients were included: 36 (49%) pre- and 37 (51%) post-intervention. Patient, infection, and treatment characteristics are described in table 2.Serratia marcescens was the most common organism isolated with the most frequent sources being respiratory and urinary. There was no significant difference in the rate of carbapenem-sparing therapy between the pre- (83%) and post-(81%) intervention, p=0.59. No difference was found in CRO as definitive therapy in either group (25% vs. 33%, p=0.49) as well. No difference was seen in secondary clinical outcomes (table 3). For those with repeat positive cultures within 30 days, none developed CRO resistance. Conclusion The combination of changing microbiology reporting and a single ASP education session did not change antibiotic selection for low-risk AmpC producing organisms. Despite updated guidance the uptake in practice is slow. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Published
2025-01-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofae631.1916
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

P-1753. Impact of a Microbiology Reporting Change on Treatment Selection and Clinical Outcomes for Organisms at Low-Risk for Significant AmpC Production

Sarah Auerbach, Patrick Kinn, Bradley Ford, Amy M. J. O’Shea et al.
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

P-1753. Impact of a Microbiology Reporting Change on Treatment Selection and Clinical Outcomes for Organisms at Low-Risk for Significant AmpC Production

Sarah Auerbach, Patrick Kinn, Bradley Ford, Amy M. J. O’Shea, Lukasz Weiner, Dilek İnce, Elizabeth Hodapp
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background AmpC β-lactamase production can be induced after exposure to beta lactam antimicrobials, most notably ceftriaxone (CRO), leading to development of resistance on therapy. New guidance from IDSA indicates that the risk of AmpC enzyme production is not equal among all Enterobacterales and those deemed low-risk may be treated with CRO. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a microbiology reporting change made in collaboration with our antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) to guide antibiotic selection for low-risk AmpC organisms. Methods This was a pre-test, post-test quasi-experimental study with data collected by chart review. A microbiology comment warning against the potential for inducible resistance on therapy with CRO was present pre-test and was removed in the post-test period. A didactic education session was given by ASP to medicine services. The study enrolled hospitalized patients ≥1 month old treated for infection with a low-risk AmpC organism (Serratia marcescens, Morganella morganii, Proteus vulgaris, and Providencia spp.) pre- (3/21-2/22) and post-intervention (8/22-7/23). Further inclusion and exclusion criteria are in table 1. The primary outcome was rate of carbapenem-sparing definitive treatment. Secondary outcomes were rate of CRO definitive therapy along with 30-day readmission, retreatment, mortality, and development of CRO resistance. Results 73 patients were included: 36 (49%) pre- and 37 (51%) post-intervention. Patient, infection, and treatment characteristics are described in table 2.Serratia marcescens was the most common organism isolated with the most frequent sources being respiratory and urinary. There was no significant difference in the rate of carbapenem-sparing therapy between the pre- (83%) and post-(81%) intervention, p=0.59. No difference was found in CRO as definitive therapy in either group (25% vs. 33%, p=0.49) as well. No difference was seen in secondary clinical outcomes (table 3). For those with repeat positive cultures within 30 days, none developed CRO resistance. Conclusion The combination of changing microbiology reporting and a single ASP education session did not change antibiotic selection for low-risk AmpC producing organisms. Despite updated guidance the uptake in practice is slow. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Open Forum Infectious DiseasesVol. 12(Supplement_1)
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (US), University of Iowa Health Care (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 98%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.