Abstract Background Asymptomatic carriers are a potential source of healthcare-associated Clostridioides difficile infection (HA-CDI). Our objective was to investigate the impact of interventions to detect and isolate asymptomatic carriers during their hospital stay on the incidence of HA-CDI.Figure 1Forest plot of the association between screening and isolating C. difficile carriers on admission and HA-CDI (by random-effects meta-analysis) Methods We performed a systematic review and searched the research literature up to March 2023 for interventional studies where asymptomatic adult patients were screened for C. difficile colonization and were isolated if positive. Only studies that allocated interventions to clusters of individuals and measured outcomes at the population level were eligible. HA-CDI incidence rate ratios were pooled through random effects meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane’s tool for non-randomized studies of interventions.Figure 2Forest plot of the association between screening and isolating C. difficile carriers on admission to hospital or to selected units and HA-CDI (by random-effects meta-analysis) Results 5,681 unique references were screened of which six were eligible. All studies were before-after quasi-experimental interventional studies (2/6 included a control group and 4/6 compared incidence rates during the intervention to before) from high-income countries published between 2016 and 2020 that assessed the effects of hospital-wide or unit-wide screening. Two studies only screened patients at high risk of CDI (e.g. hematologic patients receiving chemotherapy). Four studies were considered to have a serious risk of bias. Among the six included studies, 75,870 patients were screened and 4,104 patients were identified as carriers (the proportion of carriers ranged from 3.1 to 15%). Using a random-effects inverse-variance meta-analysis, screening and isolation of carriers was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of HA-CDI (N=6, pooled rate ratio 0.28, 95% CI 0.20-0.39). Subgroup analyses yielded similar point estimates for reduction in HA-CDI rates both when screening was done on hospital admission (N=3, RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.94) and on admission to specific hospital units (N=3, RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.34). Conclusion Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis, screening and isolating C. difficile carriers is associated with a decreased incidence of HA-CDI in adult patients. Due to methodological limitations, robust randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this finding. Disclosures Dominik Mertz, MD, MSc, KCI Inc. USA: Grant/Research Support

New antibiotics active against multidrug resistant bacteria (MDR-B) are licensed by regulatory agencies based on pivotal trials that serve the primary purpose of obtaining marketing-authorization. There is increasing concern that they do not offer guidance on how to best use new antibiotics, in which population, and to what extent they overcome existing resistance. We reviewed the literature for pre-approval studies (phase 2 and 3 randomized controlled trials) and post-approval studies (randomized and non-randomized controlled trials) evaluating efficacy and safety of new antibiotics, classified by WHO as Reserve, approved in the European Union and the US from January 2010 to May 2023. Substantial failures occur in generating evidence to guide routine clinical use: preapproval studies lack representativeness, select outcomes and comparators to chase statistical significance, and often avoid using prespecified analytical methods. Three recommendations are key to enhance the quality and relevance of clinical data underpinning use of last resort molecules on the WHO AWaRe Reserve list active against carbapenem-resistant MDR-B i). separation of pivotal trials from post-approval studies, which should be funded by public programs and de-linked from commercial purposes, ii). development and maintenance of a global infrastructure to conduct post-approval public health focused studies, and iii). development of trial platforms that use efficient, adaptive designs to inform clinical decision making and country level technology appraisal. These solutions will allow clinicians to determine whether recently approved Reserve antibiotics are not only “newer” but also “better” for vulnerable patient populations at particular risk for infections by MDR-B.

Background Self-reported penicillin allergy labels are common and often inaccurate after assessment. These labels can lead to reduced use of first-line beta-lactam antibiotics and worse outcomes. We measured the impact of a previously performed inpatient proactive systematic penicillin allergy de-labelling program on subsequent antibiotic use. This prior program included assessment, risk-stratification, and low risk direct oral amoxicillin challenge. Methods We performed a retrospective comparison of parallel cohorts from two separate tertiary care hospital campuses in Ottawa, Canada across two penicillin de-labelling intervention periods across April 15th to April 30th, 2021, and February 15th to March 8th, 2022. Outcomes, including penicillin allergy labelling and antibiotic use, were collected for the index admission and the subsequent 6-month period. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analyses were performed. Results A total of 368 patients with penicillin allergy label were included across two campuses and study periods. 24 (13.8%) patients in the intervention groups had sustained penicillin allergy label removal at 30 days from admission vs. 3 (1.5%) in the non-intervention group (p < 0.001). In the 6-months following admission, beta-lactams were prescribed more frequently in the intervention groups vs. the non-intervention groups for all patients (28 [16.1%] vs.15 [7.7%], p = 0.04) and were prescribed more frequently amongst those who received at least one antibiotic (28/46 [60.9%] vs.15/40 [37.5%], p = 0.097). In a multivariate regression analysis, the intervention groups were found to be associated with an increased odds of beta-lactam prescribing in all patients (OR 2.49, 95%CI 1.29–5.02) and in those prescribed at least one antibiotic (OR 2.44, 95%CI 1.00–6.15). No drug-related adverse events were reported. Conclusions Proactive penicillin allergy de-labelling for inpatients was associated with a reduction in penicillin allergy labels and increased utilization of beta-lactams in the subsequent 6-months.

•We systematically reviewed the evidence on duration of antibiotic treatment for adults with uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Our conclusions indicate that antibiotic courses of less than 14 days could be considered on a case-by-case basis as this practice was not associated with higher mortality.

The WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) prioritizes medicines that have significant global public health value. The EML can also deliver important messages on appropriate medicine use. Since 2017, in response to the growing challenge of antimicrobial resistance, antibiotics on the EML have been reviewed and categorized into three groups: Access, Watch, and Reserve, leading to a new categorization called AWaRe. These categories were developed taking into account the impact of different antibiotics and classes on antimicrobial resistance and the implications for their appropriate use. The 2023 AWaRe classification provides empirical guidance on 41 essential antibiotics for over 30 clinical infections targeting both the primary health care and hospital facility setting. A further 257 antibiotics not included on the EML have been allocated an AWaRe group for stewardship and monitoring purposes. This article describes the development of AWaRe, focussing on the clinical evidence base that guided the selection of Access, Watch, or Reserve antibiotics as first and second choices for each infection. The overarching objective was to offer a tool for optimizing the quality of global antibiotic prescribing and reduce inappropriate use by encouraging the use of Access antibiotics (or no antibiotics) where appropriate. This clinical evidence evaluation and subsequent EML recommendations are the basis for the AWaRe antibiotic book and related smartphone applications. By providing guidance on antibiotic prioritization, AWaRe aims to facilitate the revision of national lists of essential medicines, update national prescribing guidelines, and supervise antibiotic use. Adherence to AWaRe would extend the effectiveness of current antibiotics while helping countries expand access to these life-saving medicines for the benefit of current and future patients, health professionals, and the environment.

ABSTRACT Background Penicillin allergy labels are common and are often inaccurate. These labels can lead to unnecessary use of second-line non-beta-lactam antibiotics, and worse clinical outcomes. Objectives We measured the impact of the introducing of a standardized proactive penicillin allergy de-labelling program with oral amoxicillin challenge on subsequent antibiotic use. Methods We performed a retrospective comparison of parallel cohorts from two separate tertiary care hospital campuses across two penicillin de-labelling intervention periods. Outcomes included data including penicillin allergy label and antibiotic use, were collected for the index admission and the subsequent 6-month period. Descriptive statistics as well as multivariate regression analyses were performed. Results A total of 368 patients with penicillin allergy label were included across two campuses and study periods. 24 (13.8%) patients in the intervention group sustained penicillin allergy label at 30 days from admission vs. 3 (1.5%) in the non-intervention group (p < 0.001). In the 6-months following admission, beta-lactams were prescribed more frequently in the intervention groups vs. the non-intervention groups for all patients (28 [16.1%] vs 15 [7.7%], p= 0.04) and for only those patients who received antibiotics (28/46 [60.9%] vs. 15/40 [37.5%], p=0.097). In a multivariate analysis, the intervention was found to be associated with an increased odds of beta-lactam prescribing in all patients (OR 2.49, 95% CU 1.29-5.02) and in those prescribed at least one antibiotic (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.00-6.15). There were no differences in overall antibiotic prescribing by intervention and non-intervention group during admission (113 [64.9%] vs. 112 [57.7%]) or within 6-months (46 [26.4%] vs. 40 [20.6%]). No drug related adverse events were reported. Conclusions Proactive penicillin allergy de-labelling for inpatients was associated with a reduced number of penicillin allergy labels and increased utilization of beta-lactam vs. other antibiotics in the subsequent 6-months. Capsule Summary A proactive systematic approach to antibiotic allergy de-labelling for inpatients with penicillin allergy label results in an increased number of patients de-labelled at hospital discharge and increased beta-lactam use in the subsequent 6 months.

BackgroundEnvironmental surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) through wastewater has become a useful tool for population-level surveillance. Built environment sampling may provide a more spatially refined approach for surveillance in congregate living settings. MethodsWe conducted a prospective study in 10 long-term care homes (LTCHs) between September 2021 and November 2022. Floor surfaces were sampled weekly at multiple locations within each building and analyzed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 using quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. The primary outcome was the presence of a coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) outbreak in the week that floor sampling was performed. ResultsOver the 14-month study period, we collected 4895 swabs at 10 LTCHs. During the study period, 23 Covid-19 outbreaks occurred with 119 cumulative weeks under outbreak. During outbreak periods, the proportion of floor swabs that were positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 54.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52 to 56.6), and during non-outbreak periods it was 22.3% (95% CI, 20.9 to 23.8). Using the proportion of floor swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 to predict Covid-19 outbreak status in a given week, the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78 to 0.9). Among 10 LTCHs with an outbreak and swabs performed in the prior week, eight had positive floor swabs exceeding 10% at least 5 days before outbreak identification. For seven of these eight LTCHs, positivity of floor swabs exceeded 10% more than 10 days before the outbreak was identified. ConclusionsDetection of SARS-CoV-2 on floors is strongly associated with Covid-19 outbreaks in LTCHs. These data suggest a potential role for floor sampling in improving early outbreak identification.

Guidance on the appropriate use of antibiotics for common infections is lacking in many settings. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently released The WHO AWaRe (Access, Watch, Reserve) antibiotic book which complements the WHO Model list of essential medicines and WHO Model list of essential medicines for children. The book gives specific guidance on the empiric use of antibiotics in the model lists with a strong emphasis on the AWaRe framework, which is centred around the risk of antimicrobial resistance development associated with the use of different antibiotics. Recommendations in the book cover 34 common infections in primary and hospital care both for children and adults. The book also includes a section on the use of the last-resort Reserve antibiotics, whose use should be restricted to very selected cases when an infection is confirmed or suspected to be caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens. The book highlights the use of first-line Access antibiotics or no antibiotic care if this is the safest approach for the patient. Here we present the background behind the development of the AWaRe book and the evidence behind its recommendations. We also outline how the book could be used in different settings to help reach the WHO target of increasing the proportion of global consumption of Access antibiotics to at least 60% of total consumption. The guidance in the book will also more broadly contribute to improving universal health coverage.

Abstract The aim of this systematic review was to address the question if short antibiotic treatment (SAT; at least 4 but <12 weeks) versus long antibiotic treatment (LAT) affects outcomes in prosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Database research (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane) retrieved 3740 articles, of which 10 studies were included in the analysis. Compared to LAT, 11% lower odds of treatment failure in the SAT group were found, although the difference was not statistically significant (pooled odds ratio, 0.89 [95% confidence interval, .53–1.50]). No difference in treatment failure was found between SAT and LAT once stratified by type of surgery, studies conducted in the United States versus Europe, study design, and follow-up. There is still no conclusive evidence that antibiotic treatment of PJIs for 12 weeks or longer is associated with better outcomes, irrespective of the type of surgical procedure. Most recent, high-quality studies tend to favor longer antibiotic courses, making them preferable in most situations.

The 2022 G7 committed to “define national measurable targets” for human antibiotic use “including both volume and appropriateness when possible”. 1 G7 Health MinistersG7 Health Ministers' Communiqué. https://www.g7germany.de/resource/blob/974430/2042058/5651daa321517b089cdccfaffd1e37a1/2022-05-20-g7-health-ministers-communique-data.pdf?download=1Date: May 20, 2022 Date accessed: June 6, 2022 Google Scholar The WHO 13th General Programme of Work defined a target that at least 60% of human antibiotic use at the country level should be Access antibiotics. 2 WHOThirteenth General Programme of Work 2019–2023. https://www.who.int/about/what-we-do/thirteenth-general-programme-of-work-2019—2023Date: 2022 Date accessed: June 6, 2022 Google Scholar The WHO AWaRe system (Access/Watch/Reserve) provides a simple framework to group antibiotics into categories for stewardship. 3 WHO2021 AWaRe classification. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/2021-aware-classificationDate: 2021 Date accessed: August 29, 2022 Google Scholar The 2021 Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) includes 20 Access, 11 Watch and eight Reserve antibiotics. More than 250 antibiotics used for human treatment globally have now been categorised into Access, Watch, or Reserve groups and these AWaRe categories could also be applied across One Health sectors. Setting a realistic AWaRe target for primary care antibiotic use in LMICsWe welcome the WHO AWaRe (Access/Watch/Reserve) Antibiotic Book, released on Dec 9, 2022. Sharland and colleagues1 proposed two antibiotic use targets that could support its introduction and the evaluation of its effectiveness, as follows: 90% of infections requiring an antibiotic in primary health care can be treated with oral Access antibiotics rather than broad spectrum Watch antibiotics and more than 50% of minor infections can be treated without antibiotics. In low-income and middle-income countries, use of Watch antibiotics has been rapidly increasing,2 yet after careful clinical evaluation, three-quarters of Watch antibiotics could be discontinued or replaced by Access antibiotics. Full-Text PDF

Antibiotics are often prescribed inappropriately, either when they are not necessary or with an unnecessarily broad spectrum of activity. AWaRe (AccessWatchReserve) is a system developed by WHO to classify antibiotics based on their spectrum of activity and potential for favouring the development of antibiotic resistance (Access: narrow spectrum/low potential for resistance; Watch: broader spectrum/higher potential for resistance; Reserve: last resort antibiotics to use very selectively). The WHO target is that by 2023, at least 60% of prescribed antibiotics globally should be from the Access category. The WHO AWaRe Book aims to improve empiric antibiotic prescribing by providing simple guidance for common infections based on the principles of AWaRe in alignment with the Model Lists of Essential Medicines for adults and children.

Abstract Background Environmental surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 via wastewater has become an invaluable tool for population-level surveillance of COVID-19. More highly resolved environmental sampling approaches may also be useful for surveillance. Built environment sampling may provide a spatially refined approach for surveillance of COVID-19 in congregate living settings. Methods We conducted a prospective study of 10 long-term care homes (LTCHs) in both urban and rural settings in Ontario Canada between September 2021 and April 2022. Floor surfaces were sampled weekly at multiple locations within each building and were analyzed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 using qPCR. The exposure variable was detection of SARS-CoV-2 on floors. The primary outcome was the presence of a COVID-19 outbreak. We calculated the test characteristics of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 on floors for detection of COVID-19 outbreaks. Results We followed 10 LTCHs for 214 cumulative weeks, and collected 3,219 swabs from 183 unique locations. Overall, 15 COVID-19 outbreaks occurred with 74.9 cumulative weeks of outbreaks. During time periods when there were outbreaks of COVID-19 the proportion of floor swabs positive for SaRS-CoV-2 was 50.8% (95% CI: 47.7-53.9). During time periods where there were no outbreaks of COVID-19 the proportion of floor swabs positive was 15.8% (95% CI:14.3-17.3). Using the proportion of positive floor swabs for SARS-CoV-2 to predict COVID-19 outbreak status for a given week, the area under the receiver operating curve was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.76-0.92). Using thresholds of ≥10%, ≥30%, and ≥50%, the prevalence of floor swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 yielded positive predictive values for outbreak of 0.52 (0.43-0.61), 0.65 (0.53-0.75), and 0.72 (0.58-0.83) respectively, and negative predictive values of 0.93 (0.86-0.97), 0.85 (0.78-0.91), and 0.80 (0.73-0.86) respectively (Figure 1). 13 outbreaks had floor sampling performed in the week prior to them being identified, and of these 7 (54%) had positive swab proportions exceeding 30% in the week prior to the outbreak. Figure 1.Test characteristics of built environment floor swabs for predicting COVID-19 outbreaks in LTCH. Figure 1. Test characteristics of different thresholds for percentage of floor swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 at a given LTCH for predicting active COVID-19 outbreak in the same building in the same week. NPV = negative predictive value, PPV = positive predictive value, Sens = sensitivity, Spec = specificity. Conclusion Detection of SARS-CoV-2 on floors is strongly associated with COVID-19 outbreaks in LTCHs. These data suggest a potential role for floor sampling in improving early outbreak detection and management. Disclosures Michael Fralick, MD, ProofDx: Advisor/Consultant Doug Manuel, MD, PhD, World Bank: Advisor/Consultant.

ABSTRACT Background Environmental surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 via wastewater has become an invaluable tool for population-level surveillance of COVID-19. Built environment sampling may provide a more spatially refined approach for surveillance of COVID-19 in congregate living settings and other high risk settings (e.g., schools, daycares). Methods We conducted a prospective study in 10 long-term care homes (LTCHs) across three cities in Ontario, Canada between September 2021 and May 2022. Floor surfaces were sampled weekly at multiple locations (range 10 to 24 swabs per building) within each building and analyzed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 using RT-qPCR. The exposure variable was detection of SARS-CoV-2 on floors. The primary outcome was the presence of a COVID-19 outbreak in the week that floor sampling was performed. Results Over the 9-month study period, we collected 3848 swabs at 10 long-term care homes. During the study period, 19 COVID-19 outbreaks occurred with 103 cumulative weeks under outbreak. During outbreak periods, the proportion of floor swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 50% (95% CI: 47-53) with a median quantification cycle of 37.3 (IQR 35.2-38.7). During non-outbreak periods the proportion of floor swabs positive was 18% (95% CI:17-20) with a median quantification cycle of 38.0 (IQR 36.4-39.1). Using the proportion of positive floor swabs for SARS-CoV-2 to predict COVID-19 outbreak status in a given week, the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.78-0.92). Using thresholds of ≥10%, ≥30%, and ≥50% of floor swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 yielded positive predictive values for outbreak of 0.57 (0.49-0.66), 0.73 (0.63-0.81), and 0.73 (0.6-0.83) respectively and negative predictive values of 0.94 (0.87-0.97), 0.85 (0.78-0.9), and 0.75 (0.68-0.81) respectively. Among 8 LTCHs with an outbreak and swabs performed in the antecedent week, 5 had positive floor swabs exceeding 10% at least five days prior to outbreak identification. For 3 of these 5 LTCHs, positivity of floor swabs exceeded 10% more than 10 days before the outbreak being identified. Conclusions Detection of SARS-CoV-2 on floors is strongly associated with COVID-19 outbreaks in LTCHs. These data suggest a potential role for floor sampling in improving early outbreak identification.

BACKGROUND:Nonantiseptic bathing practices among inpatients and residents of nursing homes vary in terms of frequency, bathing type and product. We performed a systematic review to compare the efficacy of different bathing practices in reducing skin colonization, health care-associated infections (HAI) or their impact on skin integrity.METHODS:We searched Medline and Embase up until February 2018 testing a combination of terms for 3 concepts: (1) personal hygiene, (2) inpatients, (3) skin colonization, integrity or HAIs. Studies set in ICUs or including children were excluded. This review was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42018091639.RESULTS:Seven studies were included. No statistically significant impact in terms of reduced skin colonization was described irrespective of bathing product, type or frequency except for a reduced burden of C difficile on the skin of infected patients after showering compared to bathing. One study addressing impact on HAI did not detect a significant difference when a waterless no-rinse product was used. Integrity of the skin was better preserved by no-rinse products.CONCLUSIONS:No study described a statistically significant reduction of bacterial skin colonization or incidence of HAI after bathing hospitalized patients with nonantiseptic products. However, waterless no-rinse products were associated with less skin damage in most studies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs aim to optimize antibiotic use and reduce inappropriate prescriptions through a panel of interventions. The implementation of clinical guidelines is a core strategy of AMS programs. Nevertheless, their dissemination and application remain low. Computerised decision support systems (CDSSs) offer new opportunities for semi-automated dissemination of guidelines. This qualitative study aimed at gaining an in-depth understanding of the determinants of adherence to antimicrobial prescribing guidelines and CDSSs adoption and is part of a larger project, the COMPASS trial, which aims to assess a CDSS for antimicrobial prescription. The final objective of this qualitative study is to 1) provide insights from end-users to assist in the design of the COMPASS CDSS, and to 2) help with the interpretation of the quantitative findings of the randomised controlled trial assessing the COMPASS CDSS, once data will be analysed.METHODS:We conducted semi-structured individual interviews among in-hospital physicians in two hospitals in Switzerland and one hospital in France. Physicians were recruited by convenience sampling and snowballing until data saturation was achieved.RESULTS:Twenty-nine physicians were interviewed. We identified three themes related to the potential barriers to guideline adherence: 1) insufficient clarity, accessibility and applicability of guidelines, 2) need of critical thinking skills to adhere to guidelines and 3) impact of the team prescribing process and peers on physicians in training. As to the perception of CDSSs, we identified four themes that could affect their adoption: 1) CDSSs are perceived as time-consuming, 2) CDSSs could reduce physicians' critical thinking and professional autonomy and raise new medico-legal issues, 3) effective CDSSs would require specific features, such as ease of use and speed, which affect usability and 4) CDSSs could improve physicians' adherence to guidelines and patient care.DISCUSSION:CDSSs have the potential to overcome several barriers for adherence to guidelines by improving accessibility and providing individualised recommendations backed by patient data. When designing CDSSs, mixed clinical and information technology teams should focus on user-friendliness, ergonomics, workflow integration and transparency of the decision-making process.

Background: To address the shortage of N95 respirators in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, some organizations have recommended the decontamination of respirators using vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP) sterilizer for up to 10 times. However, these recommendations are based on studies that did not take into account the extended use of respirators, which can degrade respirator fit. Methods: We investigated the impact of extended use and decontamination with VHP on N95 Respirator Fit. We performed a prospective cohort study to determine the number of times respirators can be decontaminated before respirator fit test failure. The primary outcome was the overall number of cycles required for half of the respirators to fail (either mechanical failure or fit test failure). Results: Thirty-six participants completed 360 hours of respirator usage across 90 cycles. The median number of cycles completed by participants before respirator failure was 2. The overall number of cycles required for half of respirators to fail was 1, 3, 5, and 4 for the 3M 1860(S), 3M 1870+, Moldex 151X and ProGear 88020 respirators, respectively. Conclusions: The combination of prolonged usage and VHP decontamination was associated with early failure. Decontamination and prolonged usage of respirators must be done cautiously. (C) 2020 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The annual incidence rate of community-associated Clostridioides difficile infections in Quebec, Canada, has increased by 33.3%, from 0.51 (2008) to 0.68 (2015) cases/100,000 population, while incidence of healthcare-associated cases remained relatively stable. Possible causes include increased disease severity, increased antimicrobial drug use, emergence of virulent strains, and heightened physician awareness.

Introduction: Selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) results is a potentially interesting tool for antibiotic stewardship. It consists of performing AST according to usual practices, but the results are reported to the prescriber only for a few antibiotics (i.e. first-line agents) or not reported at all when colonization is likely.Areas covered: We retrieved 20 studies exploring the impact of selective reporting. Overall, selective reporting is able to influence antibiotic use, both discouraging prescription in case of colonization, and promoting the selection of narrow-spectrum agents. Most studies concerned urine samples. Evidence on the impact on antibiotic resistance is insufficient. Unintended consequences were not observed, but evidence on this topic is scarce. Selective reporting is well implemented in a few countries, and a huge heterogeneity of practices exists.Expert opinion: Evidence shows that selective reporting can help reducing inappropriate and unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions. Uncomplicated urinary tract infections are probably the best initial target, both in hospital and community settings, but other non-severe infections can be a suitable option. The implementation of selective reporting should be promoted by the scientific community, with detailed practical guidelines, and its impact should be further assessed in large interventional studies.

Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPsA) are a serious cause of healthcare-associated infections, although the evidence for their control remains uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and reanalysis to assess infection prevention and control (IPC) interventions on CRE-CRAB-CRPsA in inpatient healthcare facilities to inform World Health Organization guidelines. Six major databases and conference abstracts were searched. Before-and-after studies were reanalyzed as interrupted time series if possible. Effective practice and organization of care (EPOC) quality criteria were used. Seventy-six studies were identified, of which 17 (22%) were EPOC-compatible and interrupted time series analyses, assessing CRE (n = 11; 65%), CRAB (n = 5; 29%) and CRPsA (n = 3; 18%). IPC measures were often implemented using a multimodal approach (CRE: 10/11; CRAB: 4/5; CRPsA: 3/3). Among all CRE-CRAB-CRPsA EPOC studies, the most frequent intervention components included contact precautions (90%), active surveillance cultures (80%), monitoring, audit and feedback of measures (80%), patient isolation or cohorting (70%), hand hygiene (50%), and environmental cleaning (40%); nearly all studies with these interventions reported a significant reduction in slope and/or level. The quality of EPOC studies was very low to low.