Impact of an Educational and Laboratory Stewardship Intervention on Inpatient COVID-19 Therapeutics at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center
Background: Accurate and timely prescriptions of COVID-19 therapeutics, laboratory testing, and antimicrobial stewardship have been a challenge throughout the pandemic as new evidence emerges. While universal consultation with infectious disease specialists on patients admitted with COVID-19 is desirable, it is not always feasible due to limited resources.
Observations: In this single-center study, we implemented a combined educational and laboratory stewardship intervention geared toward hospitalist practitioners resulting in improved accuracy of remdesivir and dexamethasone prescriptions, reduced laboratory use of blood cultures, interleukin 6 assay, and Legionella sputum cultures, and a decrease in antibiotic use for patients with mild-to-moderate oxygen requirements over 6 months. These improvements were seen in tandem with decreased reliance on infectious disease consultation.
Conclusions: These efforts support proof of the principle of combined educational and laboratory stewardship interventions to improve the care of COVID-19 patients, especially where infectious disease consultation may not be available or is accessed remotely.
DISCUSSION
As the COVID-19 pandemic has evolved, the ability to enact up-to-date guidance is crucial to streamlining patient care, improving time to COVID-19–specific therapies, and minimizing the burden on subspecialty consultation services. At DVAMC, we initiated a targeted and deliberate educational effort directed toward hospitalist and ED groups combined with a laboratory stewardship effort over 6 months to improve the implementation of COVID-19 therapeutics, reduce empiric antibiotic use without reliance on ID consultation services, and reduce the number of unnecessary laboratory orders for admitted patients with COVID-19. During this time, we observed modest but statistically significant improvements in the accuracy of dexamethasone and remdesivir prescribing. In addition, we observed statistically significant improvement in the average LOT per patient regarding antibiotic use and overall decreased LOS. These improvements were seen in parallel with decreasing requests for ID consultation, suggesting that they were attributable in part to increasing self-confidence and efficacy in COVID-19 practices by the hospitalist group. Modification of the COVID-19 admission order set for our facility resulted in substantial decreases in orders for blood cultures, IL-6 levels, and sputum cultures for Legionella.
ID consultation, either in person or remotely, has been instrumental in assisting physicians in COVID-19 management and has been shown to reduce morbidity, mortality, and patient LOS in other infections.11,12 However, in scenarios where ID consultation is not available or in limited supply, accessibility, familiarity, and confidence of primary practitioners to use therapeutic guidance material are integral. Frequent and accessible guidance for the management of COVID-19 has been provided by the National Institutes of Health and the Infectious Diseases Society of America.13,14 Other mechanisms of assisting physicians in both test ordering and therapeutics include clinical decision support tools built into the EHR and the use of a smartphone digital application.15 Guidance needs to be adapted to the context of the facility, including available resources and specific restrictions and/or prohibitions on therapeutics (eg, mandatory ID consultation or approval). In our facility, while COVID-19 therapeutic living guidance documents were maintained and accessible through the intranet, proactive dissemination and redirection were important steps in enabling the use of these documents.
Limitations
We acknowledge several limitations to this study. Most important, the correlations we observed do not represent causation. Our analysis was not designed to ascertain the direct impact of any single or combined educational and laboratory stewardship intervention from this study, and we acknowledge that the improvements in part could be related to increased experience and confidence with COVID-19 management that occurred over time independent of our programs. Furthermore, we acknowledge that several areas of COVID-19 management did not improve over time (such as overall empiric antibiotic use from the ED) or had very modest improvements (hospitalist-initiated remdesivir use). These results underscore the complex dynamics and contextual barriers to rapidly implementing guideline-based care at VANTHCS. Potential factors include insufficient reach to all physicians, variable learner motivation, and therapeutic momentum of antibiotic use carried forward from the ED.16,17 These factors should be considered as grounds for further study. Another limitation was the inability to track viewership and engagement of our COVID-19 guidance document. Without the use metrics, it is difficult to know the individual impact of the document regarding the changing trends in COVID-19 management we observed during the study period.
