Medicolegal Issues

In This Edition

Literature At A Glance

A guide to this month’s studies

1. Hospitalist views on readmission prevention
2. Characteristics of hospital ICU readmission
3. Effect of clopidogrel on bleeding outcomes in vascular surgery
4. Time-versus tissue-based diagnosis of TIA
5. ETT versus ETT with imaging for the diagnosis of CAD in women
6. Effect of high urine output with adequate hydration on contrast-induced nephropathy
7. Stroke rate in CABG patients with severe carotid artery stenosis
8. Effect of cardiac arrest on long-term cognition

Hospitalists View Readmissions as Potentially Preventable by Team-Based Care

Clinical question: How do front-line hospitalists perceive the preventability of early hospital readmissions?

Background: Hospital readmission has received national attention as an indicator of poor healthcare quality and unnecessary costs. While some studies suggest that some readmissions are preventable, the exact number is unknown. Understanding preventability and the views of front-line clinicians might help hospitalists balance multifactorial compromise between throughput and length of stay.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Two community tertiary-care hospitals and two suburban hospitals staffed by a single hospitalist group in Portland, Ore.

Synopsis: A group of 17 hospitalists analyzed the inpatient and outpatient charts of 300 consecutive patients readmitted within 21 days of discharge using a structured data collection tool to record patient characteristics, process measures, and perceived preventability of the readmission. Patients were either discharged by internal-medicine hospitalists or had an internal-medicine consultation during their initial stay.

Characteristics of readmitted patients and initial hospital stays were similar to those previously reported in other studies. More than 60% of readmissions were deemed preventable (15%) or possibly preventable (46%). As prevention strategies for these readmissions, hospitalists most frequently suggested interventions under their control, such as longer initial hospital stay (23%). Other potential interventions focused on system approaches, including outpatient appointments, case management, palliative care, and home health.

In most cases (96%), the reviewer was not the discharging hospitalist. Only six hospitalists performed 83% of the reviews, and inter-reviewer reliability was not assessed. Other limitations included confounding biases, such as timing of review, source hospital reviewed, reviewer optimism, and previous primary-care experience of reviewer.

Bottom line: Prevention of hospital readmissions will require a balance between increased length of stay and system-based team approaches beyond the direct control of hospitalists.

Citation: Koekkoek D, Bayley KB, Brown A, Rustvold DL. Hospitalists assess the causes of early hospital readmissions. J Hosp Med. 2011;6:383-388.

Patients with Complex, Severe Illnesses and Persistent Physiologic Abnormalities Have Higher Risk of Intensive-Care-Unit Readmission

Clinical question: Which patient characteristics increase the risk for intensive-care-unit (ICU) readmission?

Background: Patients are often discharged from the ICU based on subjective criteria, workload, and bed demand, making ICU readmission a tempting quality indicator. Studies have examined institutional characteristics leading to ICU readmission, but few have shown how patient case mix affects longer lengths of ICU and hospital stays and higher in-hospital mortality.

Study design: Retrospective observational cohort study using a large, multi-institutional U.S. database.

Setting: Computerized data collection and analysis system from 97 intensive- and cardiac-care units at 35 hospitals in the United States.

Synopsis: Patient-level characteristics and outcomes of 229,375 initial ICU admissions from 2001 to 2009 were compared for patients with and without ICU readmission using the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV database (Cerner Corporation, Kansas City, Mo.). Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified potential characteristics increasing the risk for ICU readmission. Case-mix adjusted outcomes for mortality and length of stay were calculated.

A total of 13,980 (6.1%) patients were readmitted to the ICUs. Characteristics associated with ICU readmission were similar to those previously reported. In addition to illness severity at initial admission, readmission was associated with complications, poor response to therapy, or persistent physiologic abnormalities at ICU discharge. Patients who were readmitted to the ICU had a risk-adjusted, fourfold greater probability of in-hospital mortality and a 2.5-fold increase in length of hospital stay.

Data were obtained solely from hospitals with an APACHE system, and included only one hospital from the Northeast. Not all ICUs from a single-study hospital were included. DNR orders were not available in the database for analysis.

Bottom line: Persistent physiologic derangements at ICU discharge are as influential on ICU readmission and poor outcomes as other known risk factors, potentially warranting slightly longer ICU stays for these specific patients.

Citation: Kramer AA, Higgins TL, Zimmerman JE. Intensive care unit readmissions in U.S. hospitals: patient characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:3-10.

Clopidogrel Might Not Worsen Bleeding Complications During Surgery

Clinical question: Does clopidogrel cause bleeding complications during vascular surgery?

Background: There is no consensus and few large trials to decide if preoperative clopidogrel use causes bleeding complications in vascular surgeries.

Study design: Prospective.

Setting: New England academic and community centers.

Synopsis: The authors enrolled 10,406 patients from 15 academic and community centers in New England. These patients underwent carotid endarterectomy, lower-extremity bypass, and abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Ruptured aortic aneurysms were excluded. The use of aspirin, clopidogrel, both, or no anti-platelet therapy within 48 hours before surgery was recorded. The outcomes measured were postoperative bleeding requiring reoperation and the need for packed red blood cell transfusions.

Clopidogrel therapy (n=229) compared with no anti-platelet therapy (n=2,010) did well when measured by reoperation (clopidogrel 0.9%, none 1.5%, P=0.74), incidence of transfusion (clopidogrel 0%, none 18%, P=0.1), and volume of transfusion (clopidogrel 0 units, none 0.7 units, P=0.1). However, the significance, especially for reoperation, is not impressive.

The power of the study could be improved with more clopidogrel users. Another limitation is that the aspirin and clopidogrel platelet effect lasts longer than the 48-hour cutoff. As there were more bleeding complications in the no-anti-platelet group, there is a concern for bias in how the patients were selected and treated.

Bottom line: Clopidogrel might be safe to continue in vascular surgeries, but larger and more valid studies are needed.

Citation: Stone DH, Goodney PP, Schanzer A, et al. Clopidogrel is not associated with major bleeding complications during peripheral arterial surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:779-784.

Tissue-Defined TIAs Have Better Prognostic Benefits Than Time-Defined TIAs

Citation: Is risk stratification for recurrent stroke better when brain imaging is performed after a transient ischemic attack (TIA)?

Background: The presence of a TIA is a known risk factor for recurrent stroke. There is debate in changing the definition of TIA from time-based to tissue-based. However, it is not known if this will improve management.

Study design: Multicenter observation cohort.

Setting: Twelve independent international research centers.

Synopsis: The current definition of a TIA is a neurological deficit that resolves within 24 hours. To determine the urgency of an admission and work-up, the ABCD2 score (age, blood pressure, clinical symptoms, duration, and diabetes) is often used as a prognostic tool for recurrent stroke. The authors enrolled 4,574 patients with the traditional diagnosis of TIA. In addition to calculating their ABCD2 score, they were then classified as tissue-positive (infarction) or tissue-negative per MRI or CT. At both seven and 90 days after TIA, both imaging modalities when combined with ABCD2 were able to identify risk for recurrent stroke better than if they were used alone.

Limitations included the images being interpreted by their individual healthcare centers and that the stroke centers had lower recurrent rates of stroke compared with community centers. If only a CT can be used, it should be noted that the sensitivity is lower when compared with an MRI in this study.

Bottom line: This categorization of tissue- or non-tissue-positive TIAs improved the prognostic information provided by the ABCD2 score and might improve management decisions.

Citation: Giles MF, Albers GW, Amarenco P, et al. Early stroke risk and ABCD2 score performance in tissue- vs time-defined TIA: a multicenter study. Neurology. 2011;77:1222-1228.

ETT Comparable to MPI as Initial Diagnostic Test for Women Suspected of CAD

Clinical question: Is the exercise treadmill test (ETT) equivalent to myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) as an initial diagnostic test for low-risk women capable of exercising with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD)?

Background: To date, the evidence base for diagnostic testing in women with suspected CAD has been limited, with no randomized trials to guide appropriate clinical decision-making in the choice of noninvasive testing strategies. The aim of this trial was to provide comparative-effectiveness data for women capable of performing exercise testing with regard to whether the addition of imaging to standard ETT provided incremental clinical benefit over index ETT alone.

Study design: Prospective randomized.

Settings: Forty-three cardiology practices across the U.S.

Synopsis: A total of 824 women 40 years of age or older with intermediate pretest CAD likelihood were randomized to ETT or MPI. All the women included in the study were symptomatic with suspected CAD, had an interpretable ECG, and were >5 on DASI (Duke Activity Status Index). A total of 17 primary end points were confirmed, including three nonfatal myocardial infarctions, one heart failure hospitalization, 12 acute coronary syndrome hospitalizations, and only one sudden cardiac death reported in 772 women.

At two years, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)-free survival was identical (98%) for women randomized to the ETT or exercise MPI arm (P=0.59). The observed two-year MACE rate was 1.7% for ETT and 2.3% for exercise MPI. For secondary end points, the overall rate of hospitalization for chest pain was 3%. By randomization, the two-year rate of hospitalization for chest pain symptoms was 3% for women in the ETT arm and 4% for those in the exercise MPI arm (P=0.39). An additional six women died from non-cardiac causes (ETT arm, 0.5%; exercise MPI arm, 1%; P=0.39).

Bottom line: ETT is of comparable diagnostic efficacy to MPI as an initial diagnostic test for women suspected of CAD, capable of exercising, based on two-year outcome of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or hospital admission for acute coronary syndrome or heart failure.

Citation: Shaw LJ, Mieres JH, Hendel RH, et al. Comparative effectiveness of exercise electrocardiography with or without myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography in women with suspected coronary artery disease: results from the What Is the Optimal Method for Ischemia Evaluation in Women (WOMEN) trial. Circulation. 2011;124:1239-1249.

Controlled Forced Diuresis Is More Effective in High-Risk Patients for CI-AKI Prevention

Clinical question: Is a system of hydration that creates high urine output while maintaining fluid balance better than routine hydration in high-risk patients for preventing contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI)?

Background: Hydration with sodium bicarbonate solution and administration of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) help prevent CI-AKI in low- to medium-risk patients. A recent study (PRINCE) suggests that increasing the urine flow rate (≥150 mL/hr) reduces the toxic effect of contrast, but this regimen requires forced diuresis with high doses of furosemide that may result in further renal damage due to negative fluid balance. The RenalGuard system (PLC Medical Systems Inc., Franklin, Mass.) can simultaneously achieve high urine output and maintain fluid balance.

Study design: Randomized, investigator-driven, open-label study comparing two different hydration strategies.

Setting: Multicenter trial in Italy involving patients with chronic kidney disease scheduled for angiography who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for high risk of developing CI-AKI.

Synopsis: The study included 292 patients randomized to receive sodium bicarbonate solution (control group) versus hydration with saline controlled by the RenalGuard system with furosemide. Both groups received NAC, though at different doses and routes of administration. CI-AKI occurred in 20.5% (30 of 146) in the control group versus 11% (16 of 146) in the RenalGuard group.

Bottom line: Controlled forced diuresis to achieve high urine flow rate is more effective than conventional hydration with sodium bicarbonate solution in high-risk patients for preventing CI-AKI. Larger studies are needed to confirm and define the role of the RenalGuard system.

Citation: Briguori C, Visconti G, Focaccio A, et al. Renal insufficiency after contrast media administration trial II (REMEDIAL II). Circulation. 2011;124:1260-1269.

Severe Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis Does Not Increase Stroke or Mortality Risks after CAB Surgery

Clinical question: What is the risk for stroke in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (CAS) who are undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)?

Background: Stroke occurs as a complication of CABG in approximately 2% of patients. The vast majority occur within the first 24 hours of surgery and are associated with a high mortality rate.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Setting: A single institution in Washington, D.C.

Synopsis: Data were collected on 878 consecutive patients who had undergone carotid ultrasound before CABG over a six-year period. Patients with severe CAS of >75% (n=117) were compared with those with <75% stenosis (n=761) to assess the rates of in-hospital stroke and mortality.

Patients with severe CAS had similar rates of stroke compared with those without severe CAS (3.4% vs. 3.6%). Additionally, there was no difference in the incidence of in-hospital complications or mortality between the two groups.

Bottom line: The cause of stroke after CABG is complex and multifactorial, but severe CAS alone appears to not be the biggest risk factor for stroke in patients undergoing CABG.

Citation: Mahmoudi M, Hill PC, Xue Z, et al. Patients with severe asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis do not have a higher risk of stroke and mortality after coronary artery bypass surgery. Stroke. 2011;42:2801-2805.

Cardiac Arrest Survivors Have Long-Term Memory Deficits

Clinical question: Are there any lasting cognitive deficits in patients surviving out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) from ventricular fibrillation (VF)?

Background: Although advances have been made in the rapid intervention of OHCAs, there are no population-based, age-adjusted studies of the cognitive and neurologic outcomes of long-term survivors when the “chain of survival” is used (rapid emergency services, bystander CPR, early defibrillation, and advanced care).

Study design: Prospective population-based, age-adjusted study.

Setting: Single hospital in Olmsted County, Minn.

Synopsis: Of 332 OHCA patients, 47 survivors were enrolled for neurologic and neuropsychological testing at least six months after a near-death experience (median time since arrest, 7.8 years). Neurologic examination did not reveal any focal deficits related to the event, but long-term survivors had lower scores on measures of long-term memory and learning efficiency (P=0.001). Nearly all survivors were functionally independent at the time of testing. Interestingly, there was no correlation between prolonged call-to-shock time and cognitive ability, suggesting that there is a possibility of positive neurologic outcomes with a call-to-shock time as late as 10 minutes in OHCA. Older age was also not identified as a negative prognostic factor.

A limitation of the study was the small sample size, though larger populations of survivors are difficult to find. The precise meaning of “cognitive impairment” was also controversial and should be better defined for any future studies.

Bottom line: Long-term survivors of OHCA from VF have long-term memory impairment compared with the normal population at the same age and education level.

Citation: Mateen FJ, Josephs KA, Trenerry MR, et al. Long-term cognitive outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Neurology. 2011;77:1438-1445.

In This Edition

Literature At A Glance

A guide to this month’s studies

1. Hospitalist views on readmission prevention
2. Characteristics of hospital ICU readmission
3. Effect of clopidogrel on bleeding outcomes in vascular surgery
4. Time-versus tissue-based diagnosis of TIA
5. ETT versus ETT with imaging for the diagnosis of CAD in women
6. Effect of high urine output with adequate hydration on contrast-induced nephropathy
7. Stroke rate in CABG patients with severe carotid artery stenosis
8. Effect of cardiac arrest on long-term cognition

Hospitalists View Readmissions as Potentially Preventable by Team-Based Care

Clinical question: How do front-line hospitalists perceive the preventability of early hospital readmissions?

Background: Hospital readmission has received national attention as an indicator of poor healthcare quality and unnecessary costs. While some studies suggest that some readmissions are preventable, the exact number is unknown. Understanding preventability and the views of front-line clinicians might help hospitalists balance multifactorial compromise between throughput and length of stay.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Two community tertiary-care hospitals and two suburban hospitals staffed by a single hospitalist group in Portland, Ore.

Synopsis: A group of 17 hospitalists analyzed the inpatient and outpatient charts of 300 consecutive patients readmitted within 21 days of discharge using a structured data collection tool to record patient characteristics, process measures, and perceived preventability of the readmission. Patients were either discharged by internal-medicine hospitalists or had an internal-medicine consultation during their initial stay.

Characteristics of readmitted patients and initial hospital stays were similar to those previously reported in other studies. More than 60% of readmissions were deemed preventable (15%) or possibly preventable (46%). As prevention strategies for these readmissions, hospitalists most frequently suggested interventions under their control, such as longer initial hospital stay (23%). Other potential interventions focused on system approaches, including outpatient appointments, case management, palliative care, and home health.

In most cases (96%), the reviewer was not the discharging hospitalist. Only six hospitalists performed 83% of the reviews, and inter-reviewer reliability was not assessed. Other limitations included confounding biases, such as timing of review, source hospital reviewed, reviewer optimism, and previous primary-care experience of reviewer.

Bottom line: Prevention of hospital readmissions will require a balance between increased length of stay and system-based team approaches beyond the direct control of hospitalists.

Citation: Koekkoek D, Bayley KB, Brown A, Rustvold DL. Hospitalists assess the causes of early hospital readmissions. J Hosp Med. 2011;6:383-388.

Patients with Complex, Severe Illnesses and Persistent Physiologic Abnormalities Have Higher Risk of Intensive-Care-Unit Readmission

Clinical question: Which patient characteristics increase the risk for intensive-care-unit (ICU) readmission?

Background: Patients are often discharged from the ICU based on subjective criteria, workload, and bed demand, making ICU readmission a tempting quality indicator. Studies have examined institutional characteristics leading to ICU readmission, but few have shown how patient case mix affects longer lengths of ICU and hospital stays and higher in-hospital mortality.

Study design: Retrospective observational cohort study using a large, multi-institutional U.S. database.

Setting: Computerized data collection and analysis system from 97 intensive- and cardiac-care units at 35 hospitals in the United States.

Synopsis: Patient-level characteristics and outcomes of 229,375 initial ICU admissions from 2001 to 2009 were compared for patients with and without ICU readmission using the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV database (Cerner Corporation, Kansas City, Mo.). Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified potential characteristics increasing the risk for ICU readmission. Case-mix adjusted outcomes for mortality and length of stay were calculated.

A total of 13,980 (6.1%) patients were readmitted to the ICUs. Characteristics associated with ICU readmission were similar to those previously reported. In addition to illness severity at initial admission, readmission was associated with complications, poor response to therapy, or persistent physiologic abnormalities at ICU discharge. Patients who were readmitted to the ICU had a risk-adjusted, fourfold greater probability of in-hospital mortality and a 2.5-fold increase in length of hospital stay.

Data were obtained solely from hospitals with an APACHE system, and included only one hospital from the Northeast. Not all ICUs from a single-study hospital were included. DNR orders were not available in the database for analysis.

Bottom line: Persistent physiologic derangements at ICU discharge are as influential on ICU readmission and poor outcomes as other known risk factors, potentially warranting slightly longer ICU stays for these specific patients.

Citation: Kramer AA, Higgins TL, Zimmerman JE. Intensive care unit readmissions in U.S. hospitals: patient characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:3-10.

Clopidogrel Might Not Worsen Bleeding Complications During Surgery

Clinical question: Does clopidogrel cause bleeding complications during vascular surgery?

Background: There is no consensus and few large trials to decide if preoperative clopidogrel use causes bleeding complications in vascular surgeries.

Study design: Prospective.

Setting: New England academic and community centers.

Synopsis: The authors enrolled 10,406 patients from 15 academic and community centers in New England. These patients underwent carotid endarterectomy, lower-extremity bypass, and abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Ruptured aortic aneurysms were excluded. The use of aspirin, clopidogrel, both, or no anti-platelet therapy within 48 hours before surgery was recorded. The outcomes measured were postoperative bleeding requiring reoperation and the need for packed red blood cell transfusions.

Clopidogrel therapy (n=229) compared with no anti-platelet therapy (n=2,010) did well when measured by reoperation (clopidogrel 0.9%, none 1.5%, P=0.74), incidence of transfusion (clopidogrel 0%, none 18%, P=0.1), and volume of transfusion (clopidogrel 0 units, none 0.7 units, P=0.1). However, the significance, especially for reoperation, is not impressive.

The power of the study could be improved with more clopidogrel users. Another limitation is that the aspirin and clopidogrel platelet effect lasts longer than the 48-hour cutoff. As there were more bleeding complications in the no-anti-platelet group, there is a concern for bias in how the patients were selected and treated.

Bottom line: Clopidogrel might be safe to continue in vascular surgeries, but larger and more valid studies are needed.

Citation: Stone DH, Goodney PP, Schanzer A, et al. Clopidogrel is not associated with major bleeding complications during peripheral arterial surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:779-784.

Tissue-Defined TIAs Have Better Prognostic Benefits Than Time-Defined TIAs

Citation: Is risk stratification for recurrent stroke better when brain imaging is performed after a transient ischemic attack (TIA)?

Background: The presence of a TIA is a known risk factor for recurrent stroke. There is debate in changing the definition of TIA from time-based to tissue-based. However, it is not known if this will improve management.

Study design: Multicenter observation cohort.

Setting: Twelve independent international research centers.

Synopsis: The current definition of a TIA is a neurological deficit that resolves within 24 hours. To determine the urgency of an admission and work-up, the ABCD2 score (age, blood pressure, clinical symptoms, duration, and diabetes) is often used as a prognostic tool for recurrent stroke. The authors enrolled 4,574 patients with the traditional diagnosis of TIA. In addition to calculating their ABCD2 score, they were then classified as tissue-positive (infarction) or tissue-negative per MRI or CT. At both seven and 90 days after TIA, both imaging modalities when combined with ABCD2 were able to identify risk for recurrent stroke better than if they were used alone.

Limitations included the images being interpreted by their individual healthcare centers and that the stroke centers had lower recurrent rates of stroke compared with community centers. If only a CT can be used, it should be noted that the sensitivity is lower when compared with an MRI in this study.

Bottom line: This categorization of tissue- or non-tissue-positive TIAs improved the prognostic information provided by the ABCD2 score and might improve management decisions.

Citation: Giles MF, Albers GW, Amarenco P, et al. Early stroke risk and ABCD2 score performance in tissue- vs time-defined TIA: a multicenter study. Neurology. 2011;77:1222-1228.

ETT Comparable to MPI as Initial Diagnostic Test for Women Suspected of CAD

Clinical question: Is the exercise treadmill test (ETT) equivalent to myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) as an initial diagnostic test for low-risk women capable of exercising with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD)?

Background: To date, the evidence base for diagnostic testing in women with suspected CAD has been limited, with no randomized trials to guide appropriate clinical decision-making in the choice of noninvasive testing strategies. The aim of this trial was to provide comparative-effectiveness data for women capable of performing exercise testing with regard to whether the addition of imaging to standard ETT provided incremental clinical benefit over index ETT alone.

Study design: Prospective randomized.

Settings: Forty-three cardiology practices across the U.S.

Synopsis: A total of 824 women 40 years of age or older with intermediate pretest CAD likelihood were randomized to ETT or MPI. All the women included in the study were symptomatic with suspected CAD, had an interpretable ECG, and were >5 on DASI (Duke Activity Status Index). A total of 17 primary end points were confirmed, including three nonfatal myocardial infarctions, one heart failure hospitalization, 12 acute coronary syndrome hospitalizations, and only one sudden cardiac death reported in 772 women.

At two years, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)-free survival was identical (98%) for women randomized to the ETT or exercise MPI arm (P=0.59). The observed two-year MACE rate was 1.7% for ETT and 2.3% for exercise MPI. For secondary end points, the overall rate of hospitalization for chest pain was 3%. By randomization, the two-year rate of hospitalization for chest pain symptoms was 3% for women in the ETT arm and 4% for those in the exercise MPI arm (P=0.39). An additional six women died from non-cardiac causes (ETT arm, 0.5%; exercise MPI arm, 1%; P=0.39).

Bottom line: ETT is of comparable diagnostic efficacy to MPI as an initial diagnostic test for women suspected of CAD, capable of exercising, based on two-year outcome of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or hospital admission for acute coronary syndrome or heart failure.

Citation: Shaw LJ, Mieres JH, Hendel RH, et al. Comparative effectiveness of exercise electrocardiography with or without myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography in women with suspected coronary artery disease: results from the What Is the Optimal Method for Ischemia Evaluation in Women (WOMEN) trial. Circulation. 2011;124:1239-1249.

Controlled Forced Diuresis Is More Effective in High-Risk Patients for CI-AKI Prevention

Clinical question: Is a system of hydration that creates high urine output while maintaining fluid balance better than routine hydration in high-risk patients for preventing contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI)?

Background: Hydration with sodium bicarbonate solution and administration of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) help prevent CI-AKI in low- to medium-risk patients. A recent study (PRINCE) suggests that increasing the urine flow rate (≥150 mL/hr) reduces the toxic effect of contrast, but this regimen requires forced diuresis with high doses of furosemide that may result in further renal damage due to negative fluid balance. The RenalGuard system (PLC Medical Systems Inc., Franklin, Mass.) can simultaneously achieve high urine output and maintain fluid balance.

Study design: Randomized, investigator-driven, open-label study comparing two different hydration strategies.

Setting: Multicenter trial in Italy involving patients with chronic kidney disease scheduled for angiography who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for high risk of developing CI-AKI.

Synopsis: The study included 292 patients randomized to receive sodium bicarbonate solution (control group) versus hydration with saline controlled by the RenalGuard system with furosemide. Both groups received NAC, though at different doses and routes of administration. CI-AKI occurred in 20.5% (30 of 146) in the control group versus 11% (16 of 146) in the RenalGuard group.

Bottom line: Controlled forced diuresis to achieve high urine flow rate is more effective than conventional hydration with sodium bicarbonate solution in high-risk patients for preventing CI-AKI. Larger studies are needed to confirm and define the role of the RenalGuard system.

Citation: Briguori C, Visconti G, Focaccio A, et al. Renal insufficiency after contrast media administration trial II (REMEDIAL II). Circulation. 2011;124:1260-1269.

Severe Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis Does Not Increase Stroke or Mortality Risks after CAB Surgery

Clinical question: What is the risk for stroke in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (CAS) who are undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)?

Background: Stroke occurs as a complication of CABG in approximately 2% of patients. The vast majority occur within the first 24 hours of surgery and are associated with a high mortality rate.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Setting: A single institution in Washington, D.C.

Synopsis: Data were collected on 878 consecutive patients who had undergone carotid ultrasound before CABG over a six-year period. Patients with severe CAS of >75% (n=117) were compared with those with <75% stenosis (n=761) to assess the rates of in-hospital stroke and mortality.

Patients with severe CAS had similar rates of stroke compared with those without severe CAS (3.4% vs. 3.6%). Additionally, there was no difference in the incidence of in-hospital complications or mortality between the two groups.

Bottom line: The cause of stroke after CABG is complex and multifactorial, but severe CAS alone appears to not be the biggest risk factor for stroke in patients undergoing CABG.

Citation: Mahmoudi M, Hill PC, Xue Z, et al. Patients with severe asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis do not have a higher risk of stroke and mortality after coronary artery bypass surgery. Stroke. 2011;42:2801-2805.

Cardiac Arrest Survivors Have Long-Term Memory Deficits

Clinical question: Are there any lasting cognitive deficits in patients surviving out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) from ventricular fibrillation (VF)?

Background: Although advances have been made in the rapid intervention of OHCAs, there are no population-based, age-adjusted studies of the cognitive and neurologic outcomes of long-term survivors when the “chain of survival” is used (rapid emergency services, bystander CPR, early defibrillation, and advanced care).

Study design: Prospective population-based, age-adjusted study.

Setting: Single hospital in Olmsted County, Minn.

Synopsis: Of 332 OHCA patients, 47 survivors were enrolled for neurologic and neuropsychological testing at least six months after a near-death experience (median time since arrest, 7.8 years). Neurologic examination did not reveal any focal deficits related to the event, but long-term survivors had lower scores on measures of long-term memory and learning efficiency (P=0.001). Nearly all survivors were functionally independent at the time of testing. Interestingly, there was no correlation between prolonged call-to-shock time and cognitive ability, suggesting that there is a possibility of positive neurologic outcomes with a call-to-shock time as late as 10 minutes in OHCA. Older age was also not identified as a negative prognostic factor.

A limitation of the study was the small sample size, though larger populations of survivors are difficult to find. The precise meaning of “cognitive impairment” was also controversial and should be better defined for any future studies.

Bottom line: Long-term survivors of OHCA from VF have long-term memory impairment compared with the normal population at the same age and education level.

Citation: Mateen FJ, Josephs KA, Trenerry MR, et al. Long-term cognitive outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Neurology. 2011;77:1438-1445.

In This Edition

Literature At A Glance

A guide to this month’s studies

1. Hospitalist views on readmission prevention
2. Characteristics of hospital ICU readmission
3. Effect of clopidogrel on bleeding outcomes in vascular surgery
4. Time-versus tissue-based diagnosis of TIA
5. ETT versus ETT with imaging for the diagnosis of CAD in women
6. Effect of high urine output with adequate hydration on contrast-induced nephropathy
7. Stroke rate in CABG patients with severe carotid artery stenosis
8. Effect of cardiac arrest on long-term cognition

Hospitalists View Readmissions as Potentially Preventable by Team-Based Care

Clinical question: How do front-line hospitalists perceive the preventability of early hospital readmissions?

Background: Hospital readmission has received national attention as an indicator of poor healthcare quality and unnecessary costs. While some studies suggest that some readmissions are preventable, the exact number is unknown. Understanding preventability and the views of front-line clinicians might help hospitalists balance multifactorial compromise between throughput and length of stay.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Two community tertiary-care hospitals and two suburban hospitals staffed by a single hospitalist group in Portland, Ore.

Synopsis: A group of 17 hospitalists analyzed the inpatient and outpatient charts of 300 consecutive patients readmitted within 21 days of discharge using a structured data collection tool to record patient characteristics, process measures, and perceived preventability of the readmission. Patients were either discharged by internal-medicine hospitalists or had an internal-medicine consultation during their initial stay.

Characteristics of readmitted patients and initial hospital stays were similar to those previously reported in other studies. More than 60% of readmissions were deemed preventable (15%) or possibly preventable (46%). As prevention strategies for these readmissions, hospitalists most frequently suggested interventions under their control, such as longer initial hospital stay (23%). Other potential interventions focused on system approaches, including outpatient appointments, case management, palliative care, and home health.

In most cases (96%), the reviewer was not the discharging hospitalist. Only six hospitalists performed 83% of the reviews, and inter-reviewer reliability was not assessed. Other limitations included confounding biases, such as timing of review, source hospital reviewed, reviewer optimism, and previous primary-care experience of reviewer.

Bottom line: Prevention of hospital readmissions will require a balance between increased length of stay and system-based team approaches beyond the direct control of hospitalists.

Citation: Koekkoek D, Bayley KB, Brown A, Rustvold DL. Hospitalists assess the causes of early hospital readmissions. J Hosp Med. 2011;6:383-388.

Patients with Complex, Severe Illnesses and Persistent Physiologic Abnormalities Have Higher Risk of Intensive-Care-Unit Readmission

Clinical question: Which patient characteristics increase the risk for intensive-care-unit (ICU) readmission?

Background: Patients are often discharged from the ICU based on subjective criteria, workload, and bed demand, making ICU readmission a tempting quality indicator. Studies have examined institutional characteristics leading to ICU readmission, but few have shown how patient case mix affects longer lengths of ICU and hospital stays and higher in-hospital mortality.

Study design: Retrospective observational cohort study using a large, multi-institutional U.S. database.

Setting: Computerized data collection and analysis system from 97 intensive- and cardiac-care units at 35 hospitals in the United States.

Synopsis: Patient-level characteristics and outcomes of 229,375 initial ICU admissions from 2001 to 2009 were compared for patients with and without ICU readmission using the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV database (Cerner Corporation, Kansas City, Mo.). Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified potential characteristics increasing the risk for ICU readmission. Case-mix adjusted outcomes for mortality and length of stay were calculated.

A total of 13,980 (6.1%) patients were readmitted to the ICUs. Characteristics associated with ICU readmission were similar to those previously reported. In addition to illness severity at initial admission, readmission was associated with complications, poor response to therapy, or persistent physiologic abnormalities at ICU discharge. Patients who were readmitted to the ICU had a risk-adjusted, fourfold greater probability of in-hospital mortality and a 2.5-fold increase in length of hospital stay.

Data were obtained solely from hospitals with an APACHE system, and included only one hospital from the Northeast. Not all ICUs from a single-study hospital were included. DNR orders were not available in the database for analysis.

Bottom line: Persistent physiologic derangements at ICU discharge are as influential on ICU readmission and poor outcomes as other known risk factors, potentially warranting slightly longer ICU stays for these specific patients.

Citation: Kramer AA, Higgins TL, Zimmerman JE. Intensive care unit readmissions in U.S. hospitals: patient characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:3-10.

Clopidogrel Might Not Worsen Bleeding Complications During Surgery

Clinical question: Does clopidogrel cause bleeding complications during vascular surgery?

Background: There is no consensus and few large trials to decide if preoperative clopidogrel use causes bleeding complications in vascular surgeries.

Study design: Prospective.

Setting: New England academic and community centers.

Synopsis: The authors enrolled 10,406 patients from 15 academic and community centers in New England. These patients underwent carotid endarterectomy, lower-extremity bypass, and abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Ruptured aortic aneurysms were excluded. The use of aspirin, clopidogrel, both, or no anti-platelet therapy within 48 hours before surgery was recorded. The outcomes measured were postoperative bleeding requiring reoperation and the need for packed red blood cell transfusions.

Clopidogrel therapy (n=229) compared with no anti-platelet therapy (n=2,010) did well when measured by reoperation (clopidogrel 0.9%, none 1.5%, P=0.74), incidence of transfusion (clopidogrel 0%, none 18%, P=0.1), and volume of transfusion (clopidogrel 0 units, none 0.7 units, P=0.1). However, the significance, especially for reoperation, is not impressive.

The power of the study could be improved with more clopidogrel users. Another limitation is that the aspirin and clopidogrel platelet effect lasts longer than the 48-hour cutoff. As there were more bleeding complications in the no-anti-platelet group, there is a concern for bias in how the patients were selected and treated.

Bottom line: Clopidogrel might be safe to continue in vascular surgeries, but larger and more valid studies are needed.

Citation: Stone DH, Goodney PP, Schanzer A, et al. Clopidogrel is not associated with major bleeding complications during peripheral arterial surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:779-784.

Tissue-Defined TIAs Have Better Prognostic Benefits Than Time-Defined TIAs

Citation: Is risk stratification for recurrent stroke better when brain imaging is performed after a transient ischemic attack (TIA)?

Background: The presence of a TIA is a known risk factor for recurrent stroke. There is debate in changing the definition of TIA from time-based to tissue-based. However, it is not known if this will improve management.

Study design: Multicenter observation cohort.

Setting: Twelve independent international research centers.

Synopsis: The current definition of a TIA is a neurological deficit that resolves within 24 hours. To determine the urgency of an admission and work-up, the ABCD2 score (age, blood pressure, clinical symptoms, duration, and diabetes) is often used as a prognostic tool for recurrent stroke. The authors enrolled 4,574 patients with the traditional diagnosis of TIA. In addition to calculating their ABCD2 score, they were then classified as tissue-positive (infarction) or tissue-negative per MRI or CT. At both seven and 90 days after TIA, both imaging modalities when combined with ABCD2 were able to identify risk for recurrent stroke better than if they were used alone.

Limitations included the images being interpreted by their individual healthcare centers and that the stroke centers had lower recurrent rates of stroke compared with community centers. If only a CT can be used, it should be noted that the sensitivity is lower when compared with an MRI in this study.

Bottom line: This categorization of tissue- or non-tissue-positive TIAs improved the prognostic information provided by the ABCD2 score and might improve management decisions.

Citation: Giles MF, Albers GW, Amarenco P, et al. Early stroke risk and ABCD2 score performance in tissue- vs time-defined TIA: a multicenter study. Neurology. 2011;77:1222-1228.

ETT Comparable to MPI as Initial Diagnostic Test for Women Suspected of CAD

Clinical question: Is the exercise treadmill test (ETT) equivalent to myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) as an initial diagnostic test for low-risk women capable of exercising with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD)?

Background: To date, the evidence base for diagnostic testing in women with suspected CAD has been limited, with no randomized trials to guide appropriate clinical decision-making in the choice of noninvasive testing strategies. The aim of this trial was to provide comparative-effectiveness data for women capable of performing exercise testing with regard to whether the addition of imaging to standard ETT provided incremental clinical benefit over index ETT alone.

Study design: Prospective randomized.

Settings: Forty-three cardiology practices across the U.S.

Synopsis: A total of 824 women 40 years of age or older with intermediate pretest CAD likelihood were randomized to ETT or MPI. All the women included in the study were symptomatic with suspected CAD, had an interpretable ECG, and were >5 on DASI (Duke Activity Status Index). A total of 17 primary end points were confirmed, including three nonfatal myocardial infarctions, one heart failure hospitalization, 12 acute coronary syndrome hospitalizations, and only one sudden cardiac death reported in 772 women.

At two years, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)-free survival was identical (98%) for women randomized to the ETT or exercise MPI arm (P=0.59). The observed two-year MACE rate was 1.7% for ETT and 2.3% for exercise MPI. For secondary end points, the overall rate of hospitalization for chest pain was 3%. By randomization, the two-year rate of hospitalization for chest pain symptoms was 3% for women in the ETT arm and 4% for those in the exercise MPI arm (P=0.39). An additional six women died from non-cardiac causes (ETT arm, 0.5%; exercise MPI arm, 1%; P=0.39).

Bottom line: ETT is of comparable diagnostic efficacy to MPI as an initial diagnostic test for women suspected of CAD, capable of exercising, based on two-year outcome of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or hospital admission for acute coronary syndrome or heart failure.

Citation: Shaw LJ, Mieres JH, Hendel RH, et al. Comparative effectiveness of exercise electrocardiography with or without myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography in women with suspected coronary artery disease: results from the What Is the Optimal Method for Ischemia Evaluation in Women (WOMEN) trial. Circulation. 2011;124:1239-1249.

Controlled Forced Diuresis Is More Effective in High-Risk Patients for CI-AKI Prevention

Clinical question: Is a system of hydration that creates high urine output while maintaining fluid balance better than routine hydration in high-risk patients for preventing contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI)?

Background: Hydration with sodium bicarbonate solution and administration of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) help prevent CI-AKI in low- to medium-risk patients. A recent study (PRINCE) suggests that increasing the urine flow rate (≥150 mL/hr) reduces the toxic effect of contrast, but this regimen requires forced diuresis with high doses of furosemide that may result in further renal damage due to negative fluid balance. The RenalGuard system (PLC Medical Systems Inc., Franklin, Mass.) can simultaneously achieve high urine output and maintain fluid balance.

Study design: Randomized, investigator-driven, open-label study comparing two different hydration strategies.

Setting: Multicenter trial in Italy involving patients with chronic kidney disease scheduled for angiography who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for high risk of developing CI-AKI.

Synopsis: The study included 292 patients randomized to receive sodium bicarbonate solution (control group) versus hydration with saline controlled by the RenalGuard system with furosemide. Both groups received NAC, though at different doses and routes of administration. CI-AKI occurred in 20.5% (30 of 146) in the control group versus 11% (16 of 146) in the RenalGuard group.

Bottom line: Controlled forced diuresis to achieve high urine flow rate is more effective than conventional hydration with sodium bicarbonate solution in high-risk patients for preventing CI-AKI. Larger studies are needed to confirm and define the role of the RenalGuard system.

Citation: Briguori C, Visconti G, Focaccio A, et al. Renal insufficiency after contrast media administration trial II (REMEDIAL II). Circulation. 2011;124:1260-1269.

Severe Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis Does Not Increase Stroke or Mortality Risks after CAB Surgery

Clinical question: What is the risk for stroke in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (CAS) who are undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)?

Background: Stroke occurs as a complication of CABG in approximately 2% of patients. The vast majority occur within the first 24 hours of surgery and are associated with a high mortality rate.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Setting: A single institution in Washington, D.C.

Synopsis: Data were collected on 878 consecutive patients who had undergone carotid ultrasound before CABG over a six-year period. Patients with severe CAS of >75% (n=117) were compared with those with <75% stenosis (n=761) to assess the rates of in-hospital stroke and mortality.

Patients with severe CAS had similar rates of stroke compared with those without severe CAS (3.4% vs. 3.6%). Additionally, there was no difference in the incidence of in-hospital complications or mortality between the two groups.

Bottom line: The cause of stroke after CABG is complex and multifactorial, but severe CAS alone appears to not be the biggest risk factor for stroke in patients undergoing CABG.

Citation: Mahmoudi M, Hill PC, Xue Z, et al. Patients with severe asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis do not have a higher risk of stroke and mortality after coronary artery bypass surgery. Stroke. 2011;42:2801-2805.

Cardiac Arrest Survivors Have Long-Term Memory Deficits

Clinical question: Are there any lasting cognitive deficits in patients surviving out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) from ventricular fibrillation (VF)?

Background: Although advances have been made in the rapid intervention of OHCAs, there are no population-based, age-adjusted studies of the cognitive and neurologic outcomes of long-term survivors when the “chain of survival” is used (rapid emergency services, bystander CPR, early defibrillation, and advanced care).

Study design: Prospective population-based, age-adjusted study.

Setting: Single hospital in Olmsted County, Minn.

Synopsis: Of 332 OHCA patients, 47 survivors were enrolled for neurologic and neuropsychological testing at least six months after a near-death experience (median time since arrest, 7.8 years). Neurologic examination did not reveal any focal deficits related to the event, but long-term survivors had lower scores on measures of long-term memory and learning efficiency (P=0.001). Nearly all survivors were functionally independent at the time of testing. Interestingly, there was no correlation between prolonged call-to-shock time and cognitive ability, suggesting that there is a possibility of positive neurologic outcomes with a call-to-shock time as late as 10 minutes in OHCA. Older age was also not identified as a negative prognostic factor.

A limitation of the study was the small sample size, though larger populations of survivors are difficult to find. The precise meaning of “cognitive impairment” was also controversial and should be better defined for any future studies.

Bottom line: Long-term survivors of OHCA from VF have long-term memory impairment compared with the normal population at the same age and education level.

Citation: Mateen FJ, Josephs KA, Trenerry MR, et al. Long-term cognitive outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Neurology. 2011;77:1438-1445.

Dr. Conway

Dr. Ornstein

Dr. Wachter

Dr. Glasheen

SHM’s annual meeting will bring some of the top thinkers in healthcare and HM to San Diego in April to present the ideas hospitalists will be talking about for the next year. In fact, with their experience in healthcare policy, this year’s presenters will frame the conversations that hospitalists will have at HM13, outside of Washington, D.C.

HM12’s featured speakers include:

Patrick H. Conway, MD, MSc, FAAP, SFHM, chief medical officer and director of the Office of Clinical Standards and Quality for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS);

Norman J. Ornstein, PhD, MA, resident scholar, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research; and

Robert M. Wachter, MD, MHM, professor and associate chairman of medicine, University of California at San Francisco.

“The featured speakers at HM12 in San Diego are guaranteed to provoke conversation among hospitalists, other caregivers, and policymakers throughout the year and beyond,” says HM12 course director Jeff Glasheen, MD, SFHM. “This year’s lineup brings some of the best hospitalists, nonhospitalists, and perennial favorites to the podium. The breadth of their experience and their insight into providing the best care possible in the hospital will resonate with all of the hospitalists who come to the meeting—and will give them fresh new ideas to take back to their hospitals.”

Dr. Conway and Dr. Ornstein will present starting at 8:15 a.m. Monday, April 2 (visit www.hospitalmedicine2012.org for a complete schedule). Dr. Conway will address the implementation of the Affordable Care Act and how hospitalists can help lead the transformation of the healthcare system. Dr. Ornstein will immediately follow Dr. Conway with his featured address, “Making Health Policy in an Age of Dysfunctional Politics.”

As in years past, Dr. Wachter’s featured presentation will be one of HM12’s final events. His presentation, “The Great Physician, c. 2012: How Hospitalists Must Lead Efforts to Identify and Become This New Breed,” is set for noon Wednesday, April 4.

“If hospitalists really want to be part of the transformation of healthcare and lead their hospitals forward, the featured presentations at HM12 should be required courses,” Dr. Glasheen says.

Dr. Conway

Dr. Ornstein

Dr. Wachter

Dr. Glasheen

SHM’s annual meeting will bring some of the top thinkers in healthcare and HM to San Diego in April to present the ideas hospitalists will be talking about for the next year. In fact, with their experience in healthcare policy, this year’s presenters will frame the conversations that hospitalists will have at HM13, outside of Washington, D.C.

HM12’s featured speakers include:

Patrick H. Conway, MD, MSc, FAAP, SFHM, chief medical officer and director of the Office of Clinical Standards and Quality for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS);

Norman J. Ornstein, PhD, MA, resident scholar, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research; and

Robert M. Wachter, MD, MHM, professor and associate chairman of medicine, University of California at San Francisco.

“The featured speakers at HM12 in San Diego are guaranteed to provoke conversation among hospitalists, other caregivers, and policymakers throughout the year and beyond,” says HM12 course director Jeff Glasheen, MD, SFHM. “This year’s lineup brings some of the best hospitalists, nonhospitalists, and perennial favorites to the podium. The breadth of their experience and their insight into providing the best care possible in the hospital will resonate with all of the hospitalists who come to the meeting—and will give them fresh new ideas to take back to their hospitals.”

Dr. Conway and Dr. Ornstein will present starting at 8:15 a.m. Monday, April 2 (visit www.hospitalmedicine2012.org for a complete schedule). Dr. Conway will address the implementation of the Affordable Care Act and how hospitalists can help lead the transformation of the healthcare system. Dr. Ornstein will immediately follow Dr. Conway with his featured address, “Making Health Policy in an Age of Dysfunctional Politics.”

As in years past, Dr. Wachter’s featured presentation will be one of HM12’s final events. His presentation, “The Great Physician, c. 2012: How Hospitalists Must Lead Efforts to Identify and Become This New Breed,” is set for noon Wednesday, April 4.

“If hospitalists really want to be part of the transformation of healthcare and lead their hospitals forward, the featured presentations at HM12 should be required courses,” Dr. Glasheen says.

Dr. Conway

Dr. Ornstein

Dr. Wachter

Dr. Glasheen

SHM’s annual meeting will bring some of the top thinkers in healthcare and HM to San Diego in April to present the ideas hospitalists will be talking about for the next year. In fact, with their experience in healthcare policy, this year’s presenters will frame the conversations that hospitalists will have at HM13, outside of Washington, D.C.

HM12’s featured speakers include:

Patrick H. Conway, MD, MSc, FAAP, SFHM, chief medical officer and director of the Office of Clinical Standards and Quality for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS);

Norman J. Ornstein, PhD, MA, resident scholar, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research; and

Robert M. Wachter, MD, MHM, professor and associate chairman of medicine, University of California at San Francisco.

“The featured speakers at HM12 in San Diego are guaranteed to provoke conversation among hospitalists, other caregivers, and policymakers throughout the year and beyond,” says HM12 course director Jeff Glasheen, MD, SFHM. “This year’s lineup brings some of the best hospitalists, nonhospitalists, and perennial favorites to the podium. The breadth of their experience and their insight into providing the best care possible in the hospital will resonate with all of the hospitalists who come to the meeting—and will give them fresh new ideas to take back to their hospitals.”

Dr. Conway and Dr. Ornstein will present starting at 8:15 a.m. Monday, April 2 (visit www.hospitalmedicine2012.org for a complete schedule). Dr. Conway will address the implementation of the Affordable Care Act and how hospitalists can help lead the transformation of the healthcare system. Dr. Ornstein will immediately follow Dr. Conway with his featured address, “Making Health Policy in an Age of Dysfunctional Politics.”

As in years past, Dr. Wachter’s featured presentation will be one of HM12’s final events. His presentation, “The Great Physician, c. 2012: How Hospitalists Must Lead Efforts to Identify and Become This New Breed,” is set for noon Wednesday, April 4.

“If hospitalists really want to be part of the transformation of healthcare and lead their hospitals forward, the featured presentations at HM12 should be required courses,” Dr. Glasheen says.

Every year, hospitalist group leaders across the country look forward to SHM’s annual State of Hospital Medicine report. The report provides thousands of data points that enable hospitalists to compare their own group’s productivity and compensation against national and regional averages.

And now, hospitalists can receive the 2012 report for free when they participate in the survey.

“This is the definitive tool for hospitalists to measure their compensation, practice models, and productivity against the most up-to-date information from hundreds of similar operations,” says Leslie Flores, SHM senior advisor of practice management.

The report will be somewhat different from the last two years; so, too, will submitting information for the survey. This year, SHM and MGMA will be conducting two separate but parallel surveys (MGMA will license the data from its survey to SHM), which will then be compiled into the State of Hospital Medicine report.

“The means for this year’s report will be different, but the end product—and its utility for hospitalist programs—will not differ greatly,” Flores says.

The report is a valuable tool for hospitalist group leaders because it contains national and regional data on:

• Hospitalist demographics;
• Practice and compensation models, including academic hospital medicine practices;
• Types of hospitals and patients served;
• Coverage models, including use of nonphysician practitioners (NPPs);
• Models of practice funding; and
• Comparisons of work RVUs by practice model.

Now is the time to start the survey, Flores says. In order to provide a data-rich report, the questionnaire requires more than just a few minutes to complete. The survey closes on March 9.

To begin, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/survey

Every year, hospitalist group leaders across the country look forward to SHM’s annual State of Hospital Medicine report. The report provides thousands of data points that enable hospitalists to compare their own group’s productivity and compensation against national and regional averages.

And now, hospitalists can receive the 2012 report for free when they participate in the survey.

“This is the definitive tool for hospitalists to measure their compensation, practice models, and productivity against the most up-to-date information from hundreds of similar operations,” says Leslie Flores, SHM senior advisor of practice management.

The report will be somewhat different from the last two years; so, too, will submitting information for the survey. This year, SHM and MGMA will be conducting two separate but parallel surveys (MGMA will license the data from its survey to SHM), which will then be compiled into the State of Hospital Medicine report.

“The means for this year’s report will be different, but the end product—and its utility for hospitalist programs—will not differ greatly,” Flores says.

The report is a valuable tool for hospitalist group leaders because it contains national and regional data on:

• Hospitalist demographics;
• Practice and compensation models, including academic hospital medicine practices;
• Types of hospitals and patients served;
• Coverage models, including use of nonphysician practitioners (NPPs);
• Models of practice funding; and
• Comparisons of work RVUs by practice model.

Now is the time to start the survey, Flores says. In order to provide a data-rich report, the questionnaire requires more than just a few minutes to complete. The survey closes on March 9.

To begin, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/survey

Every year, hospitalist group leaders across the country look forward to SHM’s annual State of Hospital Medicine report. The report provides thousands of data points that enable hospitalists to compare their own group’s productivity and compensation against national and regional averages.

And now, hospitalists can receive the 2012 report for free when they participate in the survey.

“This is the definitive tool for hospitalists to measure their compensation, practice models, and productivity against the most up-to-date information from hundreds of similar operations,” says Leslie Flores, SHM senior advisor of practice management.

The report will be somewhat different from the last two years; so, too, will submitting information for the survey. This year, SHM and MGMA will be conducting two separate but parallel surveys (MGMA will license the data from its survey to SHM), which will then be compiled into the State of Hospital Medicine report.

“The means for this year’s report will be different, but the end product—and its utility for hospitalist programs—will not differ greatly,” Flores says.

The report is a valuable tool for hospitalist group leaders because it contains national and regional data on:

• Hospitalist demographics;
• Practice and compensation models, including academic hospital medicine practices;
• Types of hospitals and patients served;
• Coverage models, including use of nonphysician practitioners (NPPs);
• Models of practice funding; and
• Comparisons of work RVUs by practice model.

Now is the time to start the survey, Flores says. In order to provide a data-rich report, the questionnaire requires more than just a few minutes to complete. The survey closes on March 9.

To begin, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/survey

Faced with a looming 27% cut in Medicare physician payment rates and a one-year timeline to find a solution, 2011 was the year Congress was going to stop the vicious circle of short-term “doc fix” patches and finally put an end to the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula. A serious solution really did seem possible when the House Energy and Commerce Committee solicited ideas on how to solve the problem.

SHM and other healthcare groups responded, and there seemed to be genuine interest in acting on the various plans that were presented.

What happened?

In reality, 2011 became the year of deficit reduction (if not in actions, at least in words). Every discussion in Congress seemed to come back to the deficit. Hearings were held, countless bills were introduced, blame was cast, and, eventually, the powerful Joint Deficit Deduction Committee, or “supercommittee,” was charged with finding at least $1.5 trillion in savings. At one point, the committee was even urged to “go big” and come up with $4 trillion in savings.

The deficit-reduction-or-bust mentality suddenly made an SGR fix and its $300 billion price tag seem like a pretty hard sell.

Undaunted, groups representing caregivers tried to turn the focus on the deficit into an opportunity and even approached the supercommittee to resolve the SGR matter—an illogical step at first glance, but the reasoning did make long-term sense. The cost of fixing the SGR will only increase with time, and it is estimated that elimination will cost $600 billion in 2016. A timely fix will be cheaper, as delay will only serve to further increase the deficit.

In an effort to appeal to the deficit committee, SHM worked closely with U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-Pa.) to develop and submit a framework for eliminating the SGR and eventually phasing out fee-for-service. Despite these efforts, the deficit committee failed, and lawmakers were left with limited time before the scheduled SGR payment cuts were to take effect on Jan. 1.

As 2011 came to a close, a short-term extension that would last until the end of February was all that Congress could agree to. The SGR cycle began anew.

The positive in all this is that, although an SGR replacement did not happen in 2011 and action in 2012 might turn out to be exceedingly difficult, there are now realistic replacement plans out there. For example, Schwartz is looking to introduce legislation based on her above-mentioned framework, but doing so will need broad support.

Moving forward, it will be imperative for societies like SHM and practitioners like hospitalists to keep pressure on Congress. Individual hospitalists will continue to play an important role by contacting their elected officials. This can be done through personal phone calls and letters, or by responding to SHM’s legislative action alerts. You can even act now by visiting SHM’s legislative action center.

For more public policy information and resources, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/advocacy

Faced with a looming 27% cut in Medicare physician payment rates and a one-year timeline to find a solution, 2011 was the year Congress was going to stop the vicious circle of short-term “doc fix” patches and finally put an end to the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula. A serious solution really did seem possible when the House Energy and Commerce Committee solicited ideas on how to solve the problem.

SHM and other healthcare groups responded, and there seemed to be genuine interest in acting on the various plans that were presented.

What happened?

In reality, 2011 became the year of deficit reduction (if not in actions, at least in words). Every discussion in Congress seemed to come back to the deficit. Hearings were held, countless bills were introduced, blame was cast, and, eventually, the powerful Joint Deficit Deduction Committee, or “supercommittee,” was charged with finding at least $1.5 trillion in savings. At one point, the committee was even urged to “go big” and come up with $4 trillion in savings.

The deficit-reduction-or-bust mentality suddenly made an SGR fix and its $300 billion price tag seem like a pretty hard sell.

Undaunted, groups representing caregivers tried to turn the focus on the deficit into an opportunity and even approached the supercommittee to resolve the SGR matter—an illogical step at first glance, but the reasoning did make long-term sense. The cost of fixing the SGR will only increase with time, and it is estimated that elimination will cost $600 billion in 2016. A timely fix will be cheaper, as delay will only serve to further increase the deficit.

In an effort to appeal to the deficit committee, SHM worked closely with U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-Pa.) to develop and submit a framework for eliminating the SGR and eventually phasing out fee-for-service. Despite these efforts, the deficit committee failed, and lawmakers were left with limited time before the scheduled SGR payment cuts were to take effect on Jan. 1.

As 2011 came to a close, a short-term extension that would last until the end of February was all that Congress could agree to. The SGR cycle began anew.

The positive in all this is that, although an SGR replacement did not happen in 2011 and action in 2012 might turn out to be exceedingly difficult, there are now realistic replacement plans out there. For example, Schwartz is looking to introduce legislation based on her above-mentioned framework, but doing so will need broad support.

Moving forward, it will be imperative for societies like SHM and practitioners like hospitalists to keep pressure on Congress. Individual hospitalists will continue to play an important role by contacting their elected officials. This can be done through personal phone calls and letters, or by responding to SHM’s legislative action alerts. You can even act now by visiting SHM’s legislative action center.

For more public policy information and resources, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/advocacy

Faced with a looming 27% cut in Medicare physician payment rates and a one-year timeline to find a solution, 2011 was the year Congress was going to stop the vicious circle of short-term “doc fix” patches and finally put an end to the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula. A serious solution really did seem possible when the House Energy and Commerce Committee solicited ideas on how to solve the problem.

SHM and other healthcare groups responded, and there seemed to be genuine interest in acting on the various plans that were presented.

What happened?

In reality, 2011 became the year of deficit reduction (if not in actions, at least in words). Every discussion in Congress seemed to come back to the deficit. Hearings were held, countless bills were introduced, blame was cast, and, eventually, the powerful Joint Deficit Deduction Committee, or “supercommittee,” was charged with finding at least $1.5 trillion in savings. At one point, the committee was even urged to “go big” and come up with $4 trillion in savings.

The deficit-reduction-or-bust mentality suddenly made an SGR fix and its $300 billion price tag seem like a pretty hard sell.

Undaunted, groups representing caregivers tried to turn the focus on the deficit into an opportunity and even approached the supercommittee to resolve the SGR matter—an illogical step at first glance, but the reasoning did make long-term sense. The cost of fixing the SGR will only increase with time, and it is estimated that elimination will cost $600 billion in 2016. A timely fix will be cheaper, as delay will only serve to further increase the deficit.

In an effort to appeal to the deficit committee, SHM worked closely with U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-Pa.) to develop and submit a framework for eliminating the SGR and eventually phasing out fee-for-service. Despite these efforts, the deficit committee failed, and lawmakers were left with limited time before the scheduled SGR payment cuts were to take effect on Jan. 1.

As 2011 came to a close, a short-term extension that would last until the end of February was all that Congress could agree to. The SGR cycle began anew.

The positive in all this is that, although an SGR replacement did not happen in 2011 and action in 2012 might turn out to be exceedingly difficult, there are now realistic replacement plans out there. For example, Schwartz is looking to introduce legislation based on her above-mentioned framework, but doing so will need broad support.

Moving forward, it will be imperative for societies like SHM and practitioners like hospitalists to keep pressure on Congress. Individual hospitalists will continue to play an important role by contacting their elected officials. This can be done through personal phone calls and letters, or by responding to SHM’s legislative action alerts. You can even act now by visiting SHM’s legislative action center.

For more public policy information and resources, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/advocacy

Dr. Demyun

March S. Demyun, MD, has accepted a position as program director of the newly developed hospitalist program at Wesley Medical Center in Hattiesburg, Miss. Dr. Demyun joined the hospital as an internist in 2005. The new team will consist of one other full-time hospitalist, a full-time nurse practitioner, and five other internists.

Dr. Valin

J.P. Valin, MD, has been selected as chief medical officer for Banner Medical Group’s Western region. Dr. Valin is chief of staff at McKee Medical Center in Loveland, Colo., as well as the director of McKee’s hospitalist program.

Sarah Swift, MD, has been appointed director of Central Vermont Medical Center’s hospitalist program in Berlin. Dr. Swift most recently served as an inpatient-attending physician at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in the division of hospital medicine. She also was on the faculty of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine in Philadelphia.

David Levy, MD, pulmonary disease physician and hospitalist at Beth Israel Medical Center-Kings Highway Division in Brooklyn, N.Y., was presented with the Nefesh Chaya Community Service Award by the Bikur Cholim of Flatbush for outstanding contributions to the community.

Dr. Gray

Jamie Gray, MD, was awarded the 2011 Rising Star Award by Vail Valley Medical Center in Vail, Colo., where she is vice president of the medical staff and an adult hospitalist. The award is for physicians who have been at the hospital for five or fewer years, and acknowledges a standout physician’s abilities in leadership, quality, community contributions, and the daily use of evidence-based medicine. Dr. Gray was chosen by her peers, physician leadership, and hospital administration.

Dr. Arora

Vineet Arora, MD, MPP, FACP, FHM, associate professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, was named one of the “20 People Who Make Healthcare Better 2011” by HealthLeaders Media. Dr. Arora was recognized for her research on sleep schedules for residents to improve quality and safety.

Dr. Demyun

March S. Demyun, MD, has accepted a position as program director of the newly developed hospitalist program at Wesley Medical Center in Hattiesburg, Miss. Dr. Demyun joined the hospital as an internist in 2005. The new team will consist of one other full-time hospitalist, a full-time nurse practitioner, and five other internists.

Dr. Valin

J.P. Valin, MD, has been selected as chief medical officer for Banner Medical Group’s Western region. Dr. Valin is chief of staff at McKee Medical Center in Loveland, Colo., as well as the director of McKee’s hospitalist program.

Sarah Swift, MD, has been appointed director of Central Vermont Medical Center’s hospitalist program in Berlin. Dr. Swift most recently served as an inpatient-attending physician at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in the division of hospital medicine. She also was on the faculty of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine in Philadelphia.

David Levy, MD, pulmonary disease physician and hospitalist at Beth Israel Medical Center-Kings Highway Division in Brooklyn, N.Y., was presented with the Nefesh Chaya Community Service Award by the Bikur Cholim of Flatbush for outstanding contributions to the community.

Dr. Gray

Jamie Gray, MD, was awarded the 2011 Rising Star Award by Vail Valley Medical Center in Vail, Colo., where she is vice president of the medical staff and an adult hospitalist. The award is for physicians who have been at the hospital for five or fewer years, and acknowledges a standout physician’s abilities in leadership, quality, community contributions, and the daily use of evidence-based medicine. Dr. Gray was chosen by her peers, physician leadership, and hospital administration.

Dr. Arora

Vineet Arora, MD, MPP, FACP, FHM, associate professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, was named one of the “20 People Who Make Healthcare Better 2011” by HealthLeaders Media. Dr. Arora was recognized for her research on sleep schedules for residents to improve quality and safety.

Dr. Demyun

March S. Demyun, MD, has accepted a position as program director of the newly developed hospitalist program at Wesley Medical Center in Hattiesburg, Miss. Dr. Demyun joined the hospital as an internist in 2005. The new team will consist of one other full-time hospitalist, a full-time nurse practitioner, and five other internists.

Dr. Valin

J.P. Valin, MD, has been selected as chief medical officer for Banner Medical Group’s Western region. Dr. Valin is chief of staff at McKee Medical Center in Loveland, Colo., as well as the director of McKee’s hospitalist program.

Sarah Swift, MD, has been appointed director of Central Vermont Medical Center’s hospitalist program in Berlin. Dr. Swift most recently served as an inpatient-attending physician at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in the division of hospital medicine. She also was on the faculty of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine in Philadelphia.

David Levy, MD, pulmonary disease physician and hospitalist at Beth Israel Medical Center-Kings Highway Division in Brooklyn, N.Y., was presented with the Nefesh Chaya Community Service Award by the Bikur Cholim of Flatbush for outstanding contributions to the community.

Dr. Gray

Jamie Gray, MD, was awarded the 2011 Rising Star Award by Vail Valley Medical Center in Vail, Colo., where she is vice president of the medical staff and an adult hospitalist. The award is for physicians who have been at the hospital for five or fewer years, and acknowledges a standout physician’s abilities in leadership, quality, community contributions, and the daily use of evidence-based medicine. Dr. Gray was chosen by her peers, physician leadership, and hospital administration.

Dr. Arora

Vineet Arora, MD, MPP, FACP, FHM, associate professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, was named one of the “20 People Who Make Healthcare Better 2011” by HealthLeaders Media. Dr. Arora was recognized for her research on sleep schedules for residents to improve quality and safety.

For some hospitalists, coding can be akin to what a humorist once said about the weather: Everyone grumbles about it, but no one ever does anything about it. But, like weather, good coding can have a profound effect on a hospitalist practice’s operations and revenues. Unlike the weather, hospitalists can now do something about it.

This month, SHM introduced CODE-H (Coding Optimally by Documenting Effectively for Hospitalists), a series of Web-based education sessions that will help hospitalists optimize their revenue streams through better coding. CODE-H will provide easy access to training and support on coding and documentation issues unique to hospitalists.

“Coding is an integral part of the day-to-day operations for hospitalists, but hospitalists rarely take the opportunity to improve their coding efforts,” says Barb Pierce, CCS-P, ACS-EM, who will be leading the first CODE-H session.

Pierce’s session will be presented live to subscribers on Feb. 1. It, along with all sessions, will be archived for on-demand use.

In addition to formal educational webinars, the series creates an opportunity for individuals with an interest in coding to interact with the webinar faculty and other hospitalists.

Subscribers are encouraged to share the wealth with others in their hospitalist practice. For the subscription price of $1,200, hospitalists get access to the full array of CODE-H resources and programs for up to 10 people in their practices. Additional participants from the same site can be added to the subscription for $50 each.

Hospitalists can register today at www.hospitalmedicine.org/codeh.

For some hospitalists, coding can be akin to what a humorist once said about the weather: Everyone grumbles about it, but no one ever does anything about it. But, like weather, good coding can have a profound effect on a hospitalist practice’s operations and revenues. Unlike the weather, hospitalists can now do something about it.

This month, SHM introduced CODE-H (Coding Optimally by Documenting Effectively for Hospitalists), a series of Web-based education sessions that will help hospitalists optimize their revenue streams through better coding. CODE-H will provide easy access to training and support on coding and documentation issues unique to hospitalists.

“Coding is an integral part of the day-to-day operations for hospitalists, but hospitalists rarely take the opportunity to improve their coding efforts,” says Barb Pierce, CCS-P, ACS-EM, who will be leading the first CODE-H session.

Pierce’s session will be presented live to subscribers on Feb. 1. It, along with all sessions, will be archived for on-demand use.

In addition to formal educational webinars, the series creates an opportunity for individuals with an interest in coding to interact with the webinar faculty and other hospitalists.

Subscribers are encouraged to share the wealth with others in their hospitalist practice. For the subscription price of $1,200, hospitalists get access to the full array of CODE-H resources and programs for up to 10 people in their practices. Additional participants from the same site can be added to the subscription for $50 each.

Hospitalists can register today at www.hospitalmedicine.org/codeh.

For some hospitalists, coding can be akin to what a humorist once said about the weather: Everyone grumbles about it, but no one ever does anything about it. But, like weather, good coding can have a profound effect on a hospitalist practice’s operations and revenues. Unlike the weather, hospitalists can now do something about it.

This month, SHM introduced CODE-H (Coding Optimally by Documenting Effectively for Hospitalists), a series of Web-based education sessions that will help hospitalists optimize their revenue streams through better coding. CODE-H will provide easy access to training and support on coding and documentation issues unique to hospitalists.

“Coding is an integral part of the day-to-day operations for hospitalists, but hospitalists rarely take the opportunity to improve their coding efforts,” says Barb Pierce, CCS-P, ACS-EM, who will be leading the first CODE-H session.

Pierce’s session will be presented live to subscribers on Feb. 1. It, along with all sessions, will be archived for on-demand use.

In addition to formal educational webinars, the series creates an opportunity for individuals with an interest in coding to interact with the webinar faculty and other hospitalists.

Subscribers are encouraged to share the wealth with others in their hospitalist practice. For the subscription price of $1,200, hospitalists get access to the full array of CODE-H resources and programs for up to 10 people in their practices. Additional participants from the same site can be added to the subscription for $50 each.

Hospitalists can register today at www.hospitalmedicine.org/codeh.

One of the most intriguing changes in hospitalist practice staffing over the past few years is the increase in the number of groups integrating nurse practitioners (NPs) and/or physician assistants (PAs) into workflows. When SHM surveyed HM groups in 2005, only 29% of respondents reported having NPs and/or PAs in their practices. In 2011, nearly half (49%) of respondents to the SHM-MGMA nonacademic survey have NPs/PAs in their practices; academic hospital medicine practices were only slightly lower, at 47%.

Of course, it is always important to keep in mind that the respondent pool for the SHM-MGMA surveys is broader than SHM’s historical survey base, which could lead to different results.

Nevertheless, my anecdotal experience from talking with hospitalists around the country, and the experience of SHM Practice Analysis Committee members, supports the conclusion that the proportion of practices using NPs/PAs is growing, and that the number of NPs/PAs per practice is also growing.

Last year, MGMA created new NP/PA specialties just for HM—“Nurse Practitioner: Hospitalist” and “Physician Assistant: Hospitalist.” Data were submitted for only 26 NPs and 23 PAs in these specialties—but hey, it’s a start. Very few practices submitted encounters or wRVUs for hospitalist NPs or PAs, so the only item for which enough data were submitted to report results was compensation, as shown in the table.

NPs in the sample were about evenly divided between hospital-employed and not hospital-employed; however, most of the PAs were hospital-employed. The only region in which enough of the NPs and PAs were located to separately report data was the Southern section. And the vast majority of both NPs and PAs in the sample worked in practices with a shift-based staffing model.

Practice Analysis Committee (PAC) member Scarlett Blue, RN, MSN, vice president of quality and clinical development at Atlanta-based Eagle Hospital Physicians, believes the growing number of NPs and PAs is an indication not only of the continued shortage of physician resources, but also of growing recognition of the value that NPs/PAs can bring to a hospitalist practice. She notes that although Eagle has had NPs/PAs in its practices for some time, the company recently responded to this growth by appointing a national director for hospitalist NP-PA services who is an acute-care nurse practitioner (ACNP) and a doctor of nursing practice (DNP).

Dan Fuller, president of IN Compass Health and a PAC member, concurs. “We’ve had varying success incorporating NPs and PAs so far,” he says. “But as a model, it makes sense. We need to find ways to extend the abilities of our physicians without sacrificing quality.”

The 2012 MGMA surveys are again requesting compensation and productivity data for hospitalist NPs and PAs, and we’re hoping for a robust response. SHM’s new, independent State of Hospital Medicine survey includes questions about NPs and PAs as well. The questionnaires, which only take a few minutes to complete, are available through March 9 at www.hospitalmedicine.org/survey.

Leslie Flores, SHM senior advisor, practice management

MGMA and SHM compensation and productivity surveys are available through March 9; to participate, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/survey

One of the most intriguing changes in hospitalist practice staffing over the past few years is the increase in the number of groups integrating nurse practitioners (NPs) and/or physician assistants (PAs) into workflows. When SHM surveyed HM groups in 2005, only 29% of respondents reported having NPs and/or PAs in their practices. In 2011, nearly half (49%) of respondents to the SHM-MGMA nonacademic survey have NPs/PAs in their practices; academic hospital medicine practices were only slightly lower, at 47%.

Of course, it is always important to keep in mind that the respondent pool for the SHM-MGMA surveys is broader than SHM’s historical survey base, which could lead to different results.

Nevertheless, my anecdotal experience from talking with hospitalists around the country, and the experience of SHM Practice Analysis Committee members, supports the conclusion that the proportion of practices using NPs/PAs is growing, and that the number of NPs/PAs per practice is also growing.

Last year, MGMA created new NP/PA specialties just for HM—“Nurse Practitioner: Hospitalist” and “Physician Assistant: Hospitalist.” Data were submitted for only 26 NPs and 23 PAs in these specialties—but hey, it’s a start. Very few practices submitted encounters or wRVUs for hospitalist NPs or PAs, so the only item for which enough data were submitted to report results was compensation, as shown in the table.

NPs in the sample were about evenly divided between hospital-employed and not hospital-employed; however, most of the PAs were hospital-employed. The only region in which enough of the NPs and PAs were located to separately report data was the Southern section. And the vast majority of both NPs and PAs in the sample worked in practices with a shift-based staffing model.

Practice Analysis Committee (PAC) member Scarlett Blue, RN, MSN, vice president of quality and clinical development at Atlanta-based Eagle Hospital Physicians, believes the growing number of NPs and PAs is an indication not only of the continued shortage of physician resources, but also of growing recognition of the value that NPs/PAs can bring to a hospitalist practice. She notes that although Eagle has had NPs/PAs in its practices for some time, the company recently responded to this growth by appointing a national director for hospitalist NP-PA services who is an acute-care nurse practitioner (ACNP) and a doctor of nursing practice (DNP).

Dan Fuller, president of IN Compass Health and a PAC member, concurs. “We’ve had varying success incorporating NPs and PAs so far,” he says. “But as a model, it makes sense. We need to find ways to extend the abilities of our physicians without sacrificing quality.”

The 2012 MGMA surveys are again requesting compensation and productivity data for hospitalist NPs and PAs, and we’re hoping for a robust response. SHM’s new, independent State of Hospital Medicine survey includes questions about NPs and PAs as well. The questionnaires, which only take a few minutes to complete, are available through March 9 at www.hospitalmedicine.org/survey.

Leslie Flores, SHM senior advisor, practice management

MGMA and SHM compensation and productivity surveys are available through March 9; to participate, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/survey

One of the most intriguing changes in hospitalist practice staffing over the past few years is the increase in the number of groups integrating nurse practitioners (NPs) and/or physician assistants (PAs) into workflows. When SHM surveyed HM groups in 2005, only 29% of respondents reported having NPs and/or PAs in their practices. In 2011, nearly half (49%) of respondents to the SHM-MGMA nonacademic survey have NPs/PAs in their practices; academic hospital medicine practices were only slightly lower, at 47%.

Of course, it is always important to keep in mind that the respondent pool for the SHM-MGMA surveys is broader than SHM’s historical survey base, which could lead to different results.

Nevertheless, my anecdotal experience from talking with hospitalists around the country, and the experience of SHM Practice Analysis Committee members, supports the conclusion that the proportion of practices using NPs/PAs is growing, and that the number of NPs/PAs per practice is also growing.

Last year, MGMA created new NP/PA specialties just for HM—“Nurse Practitioner: Hospitalist” and “Physician Assistant: Hospitalist.” Data were submitted for only 26 NPs and 23 PAs in these specialties—but hey, it’s a start. Very few practices submitted encounters or wRVUs for hospitalist NPs or PAs, so the only item for which enough data were submitted to report results was compensation, as shown in the table.

NPs in the sample were about evenly divided between hospital-employed and not hospital-employed; however, most of the PAs were hospital-employed. The only region in which enough of the NPs and PAs were located to separately report data was the Southern section. And the vast majority of both NPs and PAs in the sample worked in practices with a shift-based staffing model.

Practice Analysis Committee (PAC) member Scarlett Blue, RN, MSN, vice president of quality and clinical development at Atlanta-based Eagle Hospital Physicians, believes the growing number of NPs and PAs is an indication not only of the continued shortage of physician resources, but also of growing recognition of the value that NPs/PAs can bring to a hospitalist practice. She notes that although Eagle has had NPs/PAs in its practices for some time, the company recently responded to this growth by appointing a national director for hospitalist NP-PA services who is an acute-care nurse practitioner (ACNP) and a doctor of nursing practice (DNP).

Dan Fuller, president of IN Compass Health and a PAC member, concurs. “We’ve had varying success incorporating NPs and PAs so far,” he says. “But as a model, it makes sense. We need to find ways to extend the abilities of our physicians without sacrificing quality.”

The 2012 MGMA surveys are again requesting compensation and productivity data for hospitalist NPs and PAs, and we’re hoping for a robust response. SHM’s new, independent State of Hospital Medicine survey includes questions about NPs and PAs as well. The questionnaires, which only take a few minutes to complete, are available through March 9 at www.hospitalmedicine.org/survey.

Leslie Flores, SHM senior advisor, practice management

MGMA and SHM compensation and productivity surveys are available through March 9; to participate, visit www.hospitalmedicine.org/survey

Clinical question: What are the rates of serious bacterial infection (SBI) in infants with bronchiolitis?

Background: Fever is common in young infants with viral bronchiolitis. Infants younger than 90 days of age with clinical bronchiolitis and fever often are evaluated according to established guidelines for fever without source. The extent to which this work-up is necessary remains unclear, as rates for bacteremia, urinary tract infections (UTIs), and meningitis have not been precisely defined in this population.

Study design: Systematic review of the literature.

Synopsis: After a Medline database search including the terms serious bacterial infection, bacteremia, meningitis, urinary tract infection, bronchiolitis, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), studies and bibliographies were screened for articles that allowed for a calculation of site- and age-specific rates of SBI. Studies based in ICUs and studies of pneumonia were excluded. Eleven studies were analyzed.

The prevalence rate for UTI was 3.3% based on a random effects meta-analysis. Study design and setting did not appear to influence this rate; however, the prevalence of UTI was higher in RSV-positive infants as opposed to infants with clinical bronchiolitis. Rates for bacteremia were very low, and there were no reported cases of meningitis.

This study provides useful information to guide clinical decision-making in the setting of a young, febrile infant presenting with bronchiolitis. Nonselective work-up for SBI appeared to be routine in the studies reviewed; the yield of work-up for bacteremia was extremely low (and zero for meningitis). Thus, investigations of blood and cerebrospinal fluid might be unnecessary in the uncomplicated patient.

Although it appears that UTIs do occur with reasonable frequency in this population, a primary limitation of the review is that the studies analyzed primarily used urine culture as a means of diagnosis without publication of urinalysis results. This increases the likelihood that UTI rates are overestimated in this population, as asymptomatic bacteriuria is a potential confounder.

Bottom line: Serious bacterial infection is rare in febrile young infants with bronchiolitis.

Citation: Ralston S, Hill V, Waters A. Occult serious bacterial infection in infants younger than 60 to 90 days with bronchiolitis: a systematic review. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011;165(10):951-956.

Reviewed by Pediatric Editor Mark Shen, MD, FHM, medical director of hospital medicine at Dell Children’s Medical Center, Austin, Texas.

Clinical question: What are the rates of serious bacterial infection (SBI) in infants with bronchiolitis?

Background: Fever is common in young infants with viral bronchiolitis. Infants younger than 90 days of age with clinical bronchiolitis and fever often are evaluated according to established guidelines for fever without source. The extent to which this work-up is necessary remains unclear, as rates for bacteremia, urinary tract infections (UTIs), and meningitis have not been precisely defined in this population.

Study design: Systematic review of the literature.

Synopsis: After a Medline database search including the terms serious bacterial infection, bacteremia, meningitis, urinary tract infection, bronchiolitis, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), studies and bibliographies were screened for articles that allowed for a calculation of site- and age-specific rates of SBI. Studies based in ICUs and studies of pneumonia were excluded. Eleven studies were analyzed.

The prevalence rate for UTI was 3.3% based on a random effects meta-analysis. Study design and setting did not appear to influence this rate; however, the prevalence of UTI was higher in RSV-positive infants as opposed to infants with clinical bronchiolitis. Rates for bacteremia were very low, and there were no reported cases of meningitis.

This study provides useful information to guide clinical decision-making in the setting of a young, febrile infant presenting with bronchiolitis. Nonselective work-up for SBI appeared to be routine in the studies reviewed; the yield of work-up for bacteremia was extremely low (and zero for meningitis). Thus, investigations of blood and cerebrospinal fluid might be unnecessary in the uncomplicated patient.

Although it appears that UTIs do occur with reasonable frequency in this population, a primary limitation of the review is that the studies analyzed primarily used urine culture as a means of diagnosis without publication of urinalysis results. This increases the likelihood that UTI rates are overestimated in this population, as asymptomatic bacteriuria is a potential confounder.

Bottom line: Serious bacterial infection is rare in febrile young infants with bronchiolitis.

Citation: Ralston S, Hill V, Waters A. Occult serious bacterial infection in infants younger than 60 to 90 days with bronchiolitis: a systematic review. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011;165(10):951-956.

Reviewed by Pediatric Editor Mark Shen, MD, FHM, medical director of hospital medicine at Dell Children’s Medical Center, Austin, Texas.

Clinical question: What are the rates of serious bacterial infection (SBI) in infants with bronchiolitis?

Background: Fever is common in young infants with viral bronchiolitis. Infants younger than 90 days of age with clinical bronchiolitis and fever often are evaluated according to established guidelines for fever without source. The extent to which this work-up is necessary remains unclear, as rates for bacteremia, urinary tract infections (UTIs), and meningitis have not been precisely defined in this population.

Study design: Systematic review of the literature.

Synopsis: After a Medline database search including the terms serious bacterial infection, bacteremia, meningitis, urinary tract infection, bronchiolitis, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), studies and bibliographies were screened for articles that allowed for a calculation of site- and age-specific rates of SBI. Studies based in ICUs and studies of pneumonia were excluded. Eleven studies were analyzed.

The prevalence rate for UTI was 3.3% based on a random effects meta-analysis. Study design and setting did not appear to influence this rate; however, the prevalence of UTI was higher in RSV-positive infants as opposed to infants with clinical bronchiolitis. Rates for bacteremia were very low, and there were no reported cases of meningitis.

This study provides useful information to guide clinical decision-making in the setting of a young, febrile infant presenting with bronchiolitis. Nonselective work-up for SBI appeared to be routine in the studies reviewed; the yield of work-up for bacteremia was extremely low (and zero for meningitis). Thus, investigations of blood and cerebrospinal fluid might be unnecessary in the uncomplicated patient.

Although it appears that UTIs do occur with reasonable frequency in this population, a primary limitation of the review is that the studies analyzed primarily used urine culture as a means of diagnosis without publication of urinalysis results. This increases the likelihood that UTI rates are overestimated in this population, as asymptomatic bacteriuria is a potential confounder.

Bottom line: Serious bacterial infection is rare in febrile young infants with bronchiolitis.

Citation: Ralston S, Hill V, Waters A. Occult serious bacterial infection in infants younger than 60 to 90 days with bronchiolitis: a systematic review. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011;165(10):951-956.

Reviewed by Pediatric Editor Mark Shen, MD, FHM, medical director of hospital medicine at Dell Children’s Medical Center, Austin, Texas.

click for large version

Case

A 58-year-old male smoker with moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (FEV1 56% predicted) is admitted with an acute exacerbation of COPD for the second time this year. He presented to the ED with increased productive cough and shortness of breath, similar to prior exacerbations. He denies fevers, myalgias, or upper-respiratory symptoms. Physical exam is notable for bilateral inspiratory and expiratory wheezing. His sputum is purulent. He is given continuous nebulizer therapy and one dose of oral prednisone, but his dyspnea and wheezing persist. Chest X-ray does not reveal an infiltrate.

Should this patient be treated with antibiotics and, if so, what regimen is most appropriate?

Overview

Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) present a major health burden, accounting for more than 2.4% of all hospital admissions and causing significant morbidity, mortality, and costs.¹ During 2006 and 2007, COPD mortality in the United States topped 39 deaths per 100,000 people, and more recently, hospital costs related to COPD were expected to exceed $13 billion annually.² Patients with AECOPD also experience decreased quality of life and faster decline in pulmonary function, further highlighting the need for timely and appropriate treatment.¹

Several guidelines have proposed treatment strategies now considered standard of care in AECOPD management.^3,4,5,6 These include the use of corticosteroids, bronchodilator agents, and, in select cases, antibiotics. While there is well-established evidence for the use of steroids and bronchodilators in AECOPD, the debate continues over the appropriate use of antibiotics in the treatment of acute exacerbations. There are multiple potential factors leading to AECOPD, including viruses, bacteria, and common pollutants; as such, antibiotic treatment may not be indicated for all patients presenting with exacerbations. Further, the risks of antibiotic treatment—including adverse drug events, selection for drug-resistant bacteria, and associated costs—are not insignificant.

However, bacterial infections do play a role in approximately 50% of patients with AECOPD and, for this population, use of antibiotics may confer important benefits.⁷

Interestingly, a retrospective cohort study of 84,621 patients admitted for AECOPD demonstrated that 85% of patients received antibiotics at some point during hospitalization.⁸

Support for Antibiotics

Several randomized trials have compared clinical outcomes in patients with AECOPD who have received antibiotics versus those who received placebos. Most of these had small sample sizes and studied only ββ-lactam and tetracycline antibiotics in an outpatient setting; there are limited data involving inpatients and newer drugs. Nevertheless, antibiotic treatment has been associated with decreased risk of adverse outcomes in AECOPD.

One meta-analysis demonstrated that antibiotics reduced treatment failures by 66% and in-hospital mortality by 78% in the subset of trials involving hospitalized patients.⁸ Similarly, analysis of a large retrospective cohort of patients hospitalized for AECOPD found a significantly lower risk of treatment failure in antibiotic-treated versus untreated patients.⁹ Specifically, treated patients had lower rates of in-hospital mortality and readmission for AECOPD and a lower likelihood of requiring subsequent mechanical ventilation during the index hospitalization.

Data also suggest that antibiotic treatment during exacerbations might favorably impact subsequent exacerbations.¹⁰ A retrospective study of 18,928 Dutch patients with AECOPD compared outcomes among patients who had received antibiotics (most frequently doxycycline or a penicillin) as part of their therapy to those who did not. The authors demonstrated that the median time to the next exacerbation was significantly longer in the patients receiving antibiotics.¹⁰ Further, both mortality and overall risk of developing a subsequent exacerbation were significantly decreased in the antibiotic group, with median follow-up of approximately two years.

Indications for Antibiotics

Clinical symptoms. A landmark study by Anthonisen and colleagues set forth three clinical criteria that have formed the basis for treating AECOPD with antibiotics in subsequent studies and in clinical practice.¹¹ Often referred to as the “cardinal symptoms” of AECOPD, these include increased dyspnea, sputum volume, and sputum purulence. In this study, 173 outpatients with COPD were randomized to a 10-day course of antibiotics or placebo at onset of an exacerbation and followed clinically. The authors found that antibiotic-treated patients were significantly more likely than the placebo group to achieve treatment success, defined as resolution of all exacerbated symptoms within 21 days (68.1% vs. 55.0%, P<0.01).

Importantly, treated patients were also significantly less likely to experience clinical deterioration after 72 hours (9.9% vs. 18.9%, P<0.05). Patients with Type I exacerbations, characterized by all three cardinal symptoms, were most likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy, followed by patients with Type II exacerbations, in whom only two of the symptoms were present. Subsequent studies have suggested that sputum purulence correlates well with the presence of acute bacterial infection and therefore may be a reliable clinical indicator of patients who are likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy.¹²

Laboratory data. While sputum purulence is associated with bacterial infection, sputum culture is less reliable, as pathogenic bacteria are commonly isolated from patients with both AECOPD and stable COPD. In fact, the prevalence of bacterial colonization in moderate to severe COPD might be as high as 50%.¹³ Therefore, a positive bacterial sputum culture, in the absence of purulence or other signs of infection, is not recommended as the sole basis for which to prescribe antibiotics.

Serum biomarkers, most notably C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin, have been studied as a newer approach to identify patients who might benefit from antibiotic therapy for AECOPD. Studies have demonstrated increased CRP levels during AECOPD, particularly in patients with purulent sputum and positive bacterial sputum cultures.¹² Procalcitonin is preferentially elevated in bacterial infections.

One randomized, placebo-controlled trial in hospitalized patients with AECOPD demonstrated a significant reduction in antibiotic usage based on low procalcitonin levels, without negatively impacting clinical success rate, hospital mortality, subsequent antibiotic needs, or time to next exacerbation.¹⁴ However, due to inconsistent evidence, use of these markers to guide antibiotic administration in AECOPD has not yet been definitively established.^14,15 Additionally, these laboratory results are often not available at the point of care, potentially limiting their utility in the decision to initiate antibiotics.

click for large version

Severity of illness. Severity of illness is an important factor in the decision to treat AECOPD with antibiotics. Patients with advanced, underlying airway obstruction, as measured by FEV1, are more likely to have a bacterial cause of AECOPD.¹⁶ Additionally, baseline clinical characteristics including advanced age and comorbid conditions, particularly cardiovascular disease and diabetes, increase the risk of severe exacerbations.¹⁷

One meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials found that patients with severe exacerbations were likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy, while patients with mild or moderate exacerbations had no reduction in treatment failure or mortality rates.¹⁸ Patients presenting with acute respiratory failure necessitating intensive care and/or ventilator support (noninvasive or invasive) have also been shown to benefit from antibiotics.¹⁹

Current clinical guidelines vary slightly in their recommendations regarding when to give antibiotics in AECOPD (see Table 1). However, existing evidence favors antibiotic treatment for those patients presenting with two or three cardinal symptoms, specifically those with increased sputum purulence, and those with severe disease (i.e. pre-existing advanced airflow obstruction and/or exacerbations requiring mechanical ventilation). Conversely, studies have shown that many patients, particularly those with milder exacerbations, experience resolution of symptoms without antibiotic treatment.^11,18

click for large version

Antibiotic Choice in AECOPD

Risk stratification. In patients likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy, an understanding of the relationship between severity of COPD, host risk factors for poor outcomes, and microbiology is paramount to guide clinical decision-making. Historically, such bacteria as Haemophilus influenzae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Moraxella catarrhalis have been implicated in the pathogenesis of AECOPD.^3,7 In patients with simple exacerbations, antibiotics that target these pathogens should be used (see Table 2).

However, patients with more severe underlying airway obstruction (i.e. FEV1<50%) and risk factors for poor outcomes, specifically recent hospitalization (≥2 days during the previous 90 days), frequent antibiotics (>3 courses during the previous year), and severe exacerbations are more likely to be infected with resistant strains or gram-negative organisms.^3,7 Pseudomonas aeruginosa, in particular, is of increasing concern in this population. In patients with complicated exacerbations, more broad-coverage, empiric antibiotics should be initiated (see Table 2).

With this in mind, patients meeting criteria for treatment must first be stratified according to the severity of COPD and risk factors for poor outcomes before a decision regarding a specific antibiotic is reached. Figure 1 outlines a recommended approach for antibiotic administration in AECOPD. The optimal choice of antibiotics must consider cost-effectiveness, local patterns of antibiotic resistance, tissue penetration, patient adherence, and risk of such adverse drug events as diarrhea.

click for large version

Comparative effectiveness. Current treatment guidelines do not favor the use of any particular antibiotic in simple AECOPD.^3,4,5,6 However, as selective pressure has led to in vitro resistance to antibiotics traditionally considered first-line (e.g. doxycycline, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, amoxicillin), the use of second-line antibiotics (e.g. fluoroquinolones, macrolides, cephalosporins, β-lactam/ β-lactamase inhibitors) has increased. Consequently, several studies have compared the effectiveness of different antimicrobial regimens.

One meta-analysis found that second-line antibiotics, when compared with first-line agents, provided greater clinical improvement to patients with AECOPD, without significant differences in mortality, microbiologic eradication, or incidence of adverse drug events.²⁰ Among the subgroup of trials enrolling hospitalized patients, the clinical effectiveness of second-line agents remained significantly greater than that of first-line agents.

Another meta-analysis compared trials that studied only macrolides, quinolones, and amoxicillin-clavulanate and found no difference in terms of short-term clinical effectiveness; however, there was weak evidence to suggest that quinolones were associated with better microbiological success and fewer recurrences of AECOPD.²¹ Fluoroquinolones are preferred in complicated cases of AECOPD in which there is a greater risk for enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas species.^3,7

Antibiotic Duration

The duration of antibiotic therapy in AECOPD has been studied extensively, with randomized controlled trials consistently demonstrating no additional benefit to courses extending beyond five days. One meta-analysis of 21 studies found similar clinical and microbiologic cure rates among patients randomized to antibiotic treatment for ≤5 days versus >5 days.²² A subgroup analysis of the trials evaluating different durations of the same antibiotic also demonstrated no difference in clinical effectiveness, and this finding was confirmed in a separate meta-analysis.^22,23

Advantages to shorter antibiotic courses include improved compliance and decreased rates of resistance. The usual duration of antibiotic therapy is three to seven days, depending upon the response to therapy.³

Back to the Case

As the patient has no significant comorbidities or risk factors, and meets criteria for a simple Anthonisen Type I exacerbation (increased dyspnea, sputum, and sputum purulence), antibiotic therapy with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole is initiated on admission, in addition to the previously started steroid and bronchodilator treatments. The patient’s clinical status improves, and he is discharged on hospital Day 3 with a prescription to complete a five-day course of antibiotics.

Bottom Line

Antibiotic therapy is effective in select AECOPD patients, with maximal benefits obtained when the decision to treat is based on careful consideration of characteristic clinical symptoms and severity of illness. Choice and duration of antibiotics should follow likely bacterial causes and current guidelines.

Dr. Cunningham is an assistant professor of internal medicine and academic hospitalist in the section of hospital medicine at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, Tenn. Dr. LaBrin is assistant professor of internal medicine and pediatrics and an academic hospitalist at Vanderbilt. Dr. Markley is a clinical instructor and academic hospitalist at Vanderbilt.

References

1. Donaldson GC, Wedzicha JA. COPD exacerbations: 1. Epidemiology. Thorax. 2006;61:164-168.
2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. 2009 NHLBI Morbidity and Mortality Chartbook. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute website. Available at: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/resources/docs/cht-book.htm Accessed Oct. 10, 2011.
3. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) website. Available at: www.goldcopd.org/guidelines-resources.html Accessed Oct. 10, 2011.
4. Celli BR, MacNee W, Agusti A, et al. Standards for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with COPD: a summary of the ATS/ERS position paper. Eur Resp J. 2004;23:932-946.
5. National Clinical Guideline Centre. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in adults in primary and secondary care. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence website. Available at: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG101/Guidance/pdf/English. Accessed Oct. 10, 2011.
6. O’Donnell DE, Aaron S, Bourbeau J, et al. Canadian Thoracic Society recommendations for management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—2007 update. Can Respir J. 2007;14(Suppl B):5B-32B.
7. Sethi S, Murphy TF. Infection in the pathogenesis and course of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2355-2565.
8. Quon BS, Qi Gan W, Sin DD. Contemporary management of acute exacerbations of COPD: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Chest. 2008;133:756-766.
9. Rothberg MB, Pekow PS, Lahti M, Brody O, Skiest DJ, Lindenauer PK. Antibiotic therapy and treatment failure in patients hospitalized for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. JAMA. 2010;303:2035-2042.
10. Roede BM, Bresser P, Bindels PJE, et al. Antibiotic treatment is associated with reduced risk of subsequent exacerbation in obstructive lung disease: a historical population based cohort study. Thorax. 2008;63:968-973.
11. Anthonisen NR, Manfreda J, Warren CP, Hershfield ES, Harding GKM, Nelson NA. Antibiotic therapy in exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ann Intern Med. 1987;106:196-204.
12. Stockley RA, O’Brien C, Pye A, Hill SL. Relationship of sputum color to nature and outpatient management of acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 2000;117:1638-1645.
13. Rosell A, Monso E, Soler N, et al. Microbiologic determinants of exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Arch Intern Med. 2005; 165:891-897.
14. Stolz D, Christ-Crain M, Bingisser R, et al. Antibiotic treatment of exacerbations of COPD: a randomized, controlled trial comparing procalcitonin-guidance with standard therapy. Chest. 2007;131:9-19.
15. Daniels JMA, Schoorl M, Snijders D, et al. Procalcitonin vs C-reactive protein as predictive markers of response to antibiotic therapy in acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 2010;138:1108-1015.
16. Miravitlles M, Espinosa C, Fernandez-Laso E, Martos JA, Maldonado JA, Gallego M. Relationship between bacterial flora in sputum and functional impairment in patients with acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 1999;116:40-46.
17. Patil SP, Krishnan JA, Lechtzin N, Diette GB. In-hospital mortality following acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1180-1186.
18. Puhan MA, Vollenweider D, Latshang T, Steurer J, Steurer-Stey C. Exacerbations of chronic obstructive lung disease: when are antibiotics indicated? A systematic review. Resp Res. 2007;8:30-40.
19. Nouira S, Marghli S, Belghith M, Besbes L, Elatrous S, Abroug F. Once daily ofloxacin in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation requiring mechanical ventilation: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2001;358:2020-2025.
20. Dimopoulos G, Siempos II, Korbila IP, Manta KG, Falagas ME. Comparison of first-line with second-line antibiotics for acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Chest. 2007;132:447-455.
21. Siempos II, Dimopoulos G, Korbila IP, Manta KG, Falagas ME. Macrolides, quinolones and amoxicillin/clavulanate for chronic bronchitis: a meta-analysis. Eur Resp J. 2007;29:1127-1137.
22. El-Moussaoui, Roede BM, Speelman P, Bresser P, Prins JM, Bossuyt PMM. Short-course antibiotic treatment in acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and COPD: a meta-analysis of double-blind studies. Thorax. 2008;63:415-422.
23. Falagas ME, Avgeri SG, Matthaiou DK, Dimopoulos G, Siempos II. Short- versus long-duration antimicrobial treatment for exacerbations of chronic bronchitis: a meta-analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;62:442-450.

click for large version

Case

A 58-year-old male smoker with moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (FEV1 56% predicted) is admitted with an acute exacerbation of COPD for the second time this year. He presented to the ED with increased productive cough and shortness of breath, similar to prior exacerbations. He denies fevers, myalgias, or upper-respiratory symptoms. Physical exam is notable for bilateral inspiratory and expiratory wheezing. His sputum is purulent. He is given continuous nebulizer therapy and one dose of oral prednisone, but his dyspnea and wheezing persist. Chest X-ray does not reveal an infiltrate.

Should this patient be treated with antibiotics and, if so, what regimen is most appropriate?

Overview

Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) present a major health burden, accounting for more than 2.4% of all hospital admissions and causing significant morbidity, mortality, and costs.¹ During 2006 and 2007, COPD mortality in the United States topped 39 deaths per 100,000 people, and more recently, hospital costs related to COPD were expected to exceed $13 billion annually.² Patients with AECOPD also experience decreased quality of life and faster decline in pulmonary function, further highlighting the need for timely and appropriate treatment.¹

Several guidelines have proposed treatment strategies now considered standard of care in AECOPD management.^3,4,5,6 These include the use of corticosteroids, bronchodilator agents, and, in select cases, antibiotics. While there is well-established evidence for the use of steroids and bronchodilators in AECOPD, the debate continues over the appropriate use of antibiotics in the treatment of acute exacerbations. There are multiple potential factors leading to AECOPD, including viruses, bacteria, and common pollutants; as such, antibiotic treatment may not be indicated for all patients presenting with exacerbations. Further, the risks of antibiotic treatment—including adverse drug events, selection for drug-resistant bacteria, and associated costs—are not insignificant.

However, bacterial infections do play a role in approximately 50% of patients with AECOPD and, for this population, use of antibiotics may confer important benefits.⁷

Interestingly, a retrospective cohort study of 84,621 patients admitted for AECOPD demonstrated that 85% of patients received antibiotics at some point during hospitalization.⁸

Support for Antibiotics

Several randomized trials have compared clinical outcomes in patients with AECOPD who have received antibiotics versus those who received placebos. Most of these had small sample sizes and studied only ββ-lactam and tetracycline antibiotics in an outpatient setting; there are limited data involving inpatients and newer drugs. Nevertheless, antibiotic treatment has been associated with decreased risk of adverse outcomes in AECOPD.

One meta-analysis demonstrated that antibiotics reduced treatment failures by 66% and in-hospital mortality by 78% in the subset of trials involving hospitalized patients.⁸ Similarly, analysis of a large retrospective cohort of patients hospitalized for AECOPD found a significantly lower risk of treatment failure in antibiotic-treated versus untreated patients.⁹ Specifically, treated patients had lower rates of in-hospital mortality and readmission for AECOPD and a lower likelihood of requiring subsequent mechanical ventilation during the index hospitalization.

Data also suggest that antibiotic treatment during exacerbations might favorably impact subsequent exacerbations.¹⁰ A retrospective study of 18,928 Dutch patients with AECOPD compared outcomes among patients who had received antibiotics (most frequently doxycycline or a penicillin) as part of their therapy to those who did not. The authors demonstrated that the median time to the next exacerbation was significantly longer in the patients receiving antibiotics.¹⁰ Further, both mortality and overall risk of developing a subsequent exacerbation were significantly decreased in the antibiotic group, with median follow-up of approximately two years.

Indications for Antibiotics

Clinical symptoms. A landmark study by Anthonisen and colleagues set forth three clinical criteria that have formed the basis for treating AECOPD with antibiotics in subsequent studies and in clinical practice.¹¹ Often referred to as the “cardinal symptoms” of AECOPD, these include increased dyspnea, sputum volume, and sputum purulence. In this study, 173 outpatients with COPD were randomized to a 10-day course of antibiotics or placebo at onset of an exacerbation and followed clinically. The authors found that antibiotic-treated patients were significantly more likely than the placebo group to achieve treatment success, defined as resolution of all exacerbated symptoms within 21 days (68.1% vs. 55.0%, P<0.01).

Importantly, treated patients were also significantly less likely to experience clinical deterioration after 72 hours (9.9% vs. 18.9%, P<0.05). Patients with Type I exacerbations, characterized by all three cardinal symptoms, were most likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy, followed by patients with Type II exacerbations, in whom only two of the symptoms were present. Subsequent studies have suggested that sputum purulence correlates well with the presence of acute bacterial infection and therefore may be a reliable clinical indicator of patients who are likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy.¹²

Laboratory data. While sputum purulence is associated with bacterial infection, sputum culture is less reliable, as pathogenic bacteria are commonly isolated from patients with both AECOPD and stable COPD. In fact, the prevalence of bacterial colonization in moderate to severe COPD might be as high as 50%.¹³ Therefore, a positive bacterial sputum culture, in the absence of purulence or other signs of infection, is not recommended as the sole basis for which to prescribe antibiotics.

Serum biomarkers, most notably C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin, have been studied as a newer approach to identify patients who might benefit from antibiotic therapy for AECOPD. Studies have demonstrated increased CRP levels during AECOPD, particularly in patients with purulent sputum and positive bacterial sputum cultures.¹² Procalcitonin is preferentially elevated in bacterial infections.

One randomized, placebo-controlled trial in hospitalized patients with AECOPD demonstrated a significant reduction in antibiotic usage based on low procalcitonin levels, without negatively impacting clinical success rate, hospital mortality, subsequent antibiotic needs, or time to next exacerbation.¹⁴ However, due to inconsistent evidence, use of these markers to guide antibiotic administration in AECOPD has not yet been definitively established.^14,15 Additionally, these laboratory results are often not available at the point of care, potentially limiting their utility in the decision to initiate antibiotics.

click for large version

Severity of illness. Severity of illness is an important factor in the decision to treat AECOPD with antibiotics. Patients with advanced, underlying airway obstruction, as measured by FEV1, are more likely to have a bacterial cause of AECOPD.¹⁶ Additionally, baseline clinical characteristics including advanced age and comorbid conditions, particularly cardiovascular disease and diabetes, increase the risk of severe exacerbations.¹⁷

One meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials found that patients with severe exacerbations were likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy, while patients with mild or moderate exacerbations had no reduction in treatment failure or mortality rates.¹⁸ Patients presenting with acute respiratory failure necessitating intensive care and/or ventilator support (noninvasive or invasive) have also been shown to benefit from antibiotics.¹⁹

Current clinical guidelines vary slightly in their recommendations regarding when to give antibiotics in AECOPD (see Table 1). However, existing evidence favors antibiotic treatment for those patients presenting with two or three cardinal symptoms, specifically those with increased sputum purulence, and those with severe disease (i.e. pre-existing advanced airflow obstruction and/or exacerbations requiring mechanical ventilation). Conversely, studies have shown that many patients, particularly those with milder exacerbations, experience resolution of symptoms without antibiotic treatment.^11,18

click for large version

Antibiotic Choice in AECOPD

Risk stratification. In patients likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy, an understanding of the relationship between severity of COPD, host risk factors for poor outcomes, and microbiology is paramount to guide clinical decision-making. Historically, such bacteria as Haemophilus influenzae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Moraxella catarrhalis have been implicated in the pathogenesis of AECOPD.^3,7 In patients with simple exacerbations, antibiotics that target these pathogens should be used (see Table 2).

However, patients with more severe underlying airway obstruction (i.e. FEV1<50%) and risk factors for poor outcomes, specifically recent hospitalization (≥2 days during the previous 90 days), frequent antibiotics (>3 courses during the previous year), and severe exacerbations are more likely to be infected with resistant strains or gram-negative organisms.^3,7 Pseudomonas aeruginosa, in particular, is of increasing concern in this population. In patients with complicated exacerbations, more broad-coverage, empiric antibiotics should be initiated (see Table 2).

With this in mind, patients meeting criteria for treatment must first be stratified according to the severity of COPD and risk factors for poor outcomes before a decision regarding a specific antibiotic is reached. Figure 1 outlines a recommended approach for antibiotic administration in AECOPD. The optimal choice of antibiotics must consider cost-effectiveness, local patterns of antibiotic resistance, tissue penetration, patient adherence, and risk of such adverse drug events as diarrhea.

click for large version

Comparative effectiveness. Current treatment guidelines do not favor the use of any particular antibiotic in simple AECOPD.^3,4,5,6 However, as selective pressure has led to in vitro resistance to antibiotics traditionally considered first-line (e.g. doxycycline, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, amoxicillin), the use of second-line antibiotics (e.g. fluoroquinolones, macrolides, cephalosporins, β-lactam/ β-lactamase inhibitors) has increased. Consequently, several studies have compared the effectiveness of different antimicrobial regimens.

One meta-analysis found that second-line antibiotics, when compared with first-line agents, provided greater clinical improvement to patients with AECOPD, without significant differences in mortality, microbiologic eradication, or incidence of adverse drug events.²⁰ Among the subgroup of trials enrolling hospitalized patients, the clinical effectiveness of second-line agents remained significantly greater than that of first-line agents.

Another meta-analysis compared trials that studied only macrolides, quinolones, and amoxicillin-clavulanate and found no difference in terms of short-term clinical effectiveness; however, there was weak evidence to suggest that quinolones were associated with better microbiological success and fewer recurrences of AECOPD.²¹ Fluoroquinolones are preferred in complicated cases of AECOPD in which there is a greater risk for enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas species.^3,7

Antibiotic Duration

The duration of antibiotic therapy in AECOPD has been studied extensively, with randomized controlled trials consistently demonstrating no additional benefit to courses extending beyond five days. One meta-analysis of 21 studies found similar clinical and microbiologic cure rates among patients randomized to antibiotic treatment for ≤5 days versus >5 days.²² A subgroup analysis of the trials evaluating different durations of the same antibiotic also demonstrated no difference in clinical effectiveness, and this finding was confirmed in a separate meta-analysis.^22,23

Advantages to shorter antibiotic courses include improved compliance and decreased rates of resistance. The usual duration of antibiotic therapy is three to seven days, depending upon the response to therapy.³

Back to the Case

As the patient has no significant comorbidities or risk factors, and meets criteria for a simple Anthonisen Type I exacerbation (increased dyspnea, sputum, and sputum purulence), antibiotic therapy with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole is initiated on admission, in addition to the previously started steroid and bronchodilator treatments. The patient’s clinical status improves, and he is discharged on hospital Day 3 with a prescription to complete a five-day course of antibiotics.

Bottom Line

Antibiotic therapy is effective in select AECOPD patients, with maximal benefits obtained when the decision to treat is based on careful consideration of characteristic clinical symptoms and severity of illness. Choice and duration of antibiotics should follow likely bacterial causes and current guidelines.

Dr. Cunningham is an assistant professor of internal medicine and academic hospitalist in the section of hospital medicine at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, Tenn. Dr. LaBrin is assistant professor of internal medicine and pediatrics and an academic hospitalist at Vanderbilt. Dr. Markley is a clinical instructor and academic hospitalist at Vanderbilt.

References

1. Donaldson GC, Wedzicha JA. COPD exacerbations: 1. Epidemiology. Thorax. 2006;61:164-168.
2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. 2009 NHLBI Morbidity and Mortality Chartbook. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute website. Available at: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/resources/docs/cht-book.htm Accessed Oct. 10, 2011.
3. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) website. Available at: www.goldcopd.org/guidelines-resources.html Accessed Oct. 10, 2011.
4. Celli BR, MacNee W, Agusti A, et al. Standards for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with COPD: a summary of the ATS/ERS position paper. Eur Resp J. 2004;23:932-946.
5. National Clinical Guideline Centre. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in adults in primary and secondary care. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence website. Available at: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG101/Guidance/pdf/English. Accessed Oct. 10, 2011.
6. O’Donnell DE, Aaron S, Bourbeau J, et al. Canadian Thoracic Society recommendations for management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—2007 update. Can Respir J. 2007;14(Suppl B):5B-32B.
7. Sethi S, Murphy TF. Infection in the pathogenesis and course of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2355-2565.
8. Quon BS, Qi Gan W, Sin DD. Contemporary management of acute exacerbations of COPD: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Chest. 2008;133:756-766.
9. Rothberg MB, Pekow PS, Lahti M, Brody O, Skiest DJ, Lindenauer PK. Antibiotic therapy and treatment failure in patients hospitalized for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. JAMA. 2010;303:2035-2042.
10. Roede BM, Bresser P, Bindels PJE, et al. Antibiotic treatment is associated with reduced risk of subsequent exacerbation in obstructive lung disease: a historical population based cohort study. Thorax. 2008;63:968-973.
11. Anthonisen NR, Manfreda J, Warren CP, Hershfield ES, Harding GKM, Nelson NA. Antibiotic therapy in exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ann Intern Med. 1987;106:196-204.
12. Stockley RA, O’Brien C, Pye A, Hill SL. Relationship of sputum color to nature and outpatient management of acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 2000;117:1638-1645.
13. Rosell A, Monso E, Soler N, et al. Microbiologic determinants of exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Arch Intern Med. 2005; 165:891-897.
14. Stolz D, Christ-Crain M, Bingisser R, et al. Antibiotic treatment of exacerbations of COPD: a randomized, controlled trial comparing procalcitonin-guidance with standard therapy. Chest. 2007;131:9-19.
15. Daniels JMA, Schoorl M, Snijders D, et al. Procalcitonin vs C-reactive protein as predictive markers of response to antibiotic therapy in acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 2010;138:1108-1015.
16. Miravitlles M, Espinosa C, Fernandez-Laso E, Martos JA, Maldonado JA, Gallego M. Relationship between bacterial flora in sputum and functional impairment in patients with acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 1999;116:40-46.
17. Patil SP, Krishnan JA, Lechtzin N, Diette GB. In-hospital mortality following acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1180-1186.
18. Puhan MA, Vollenweider D, Latshang T, Steurer J, Steurer-Stey C. Exacerbations of chronic obstructive lung disease: when are antibiotics indicated? A systematic review. Resp Res. 2007;8:30-40.
19. Nouira S, Marghli S, Belghith M, Besbes L, Elatrous S, Abroug F. Once daily ofloxacin in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation requiring mechanical ventilation: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2001;358:2020-2025.
20. Dimopoulos G, Siempos II, Korbila IP, Manta KG, Falagas ME. Comparison of first-line with second-line antibiotics for acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Chest. 2007;132:447-455.
21. Siempos II, Dimopoulos G, Korbila IP, Manta KG, Falagas ME. Macrolides, quinolones and amoxicillin/clavulanate for chronic bronchitis: a meta-analysis. Eur Resp J. 2007;29:1127-1137.
22. El-Moussaoui, Roede BM, Speelman P, Bresser P, Prins JM, Bossuyt PMM. Short-course antibiotic treatment in acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and COPD: a meta-analysis of double-blind studies. Thorax. 2008;63:415-422.
23. Falagas ME, Avgeri SG, Matthaiou DK, Dimopoulos G, Siempos II. Short- versus long-duration antimicrobial treatment for exacerbations of chronic bronchitis: a meta-analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;62:442-450.

click for large version

Case

A 58-year-old male smoker with moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (FEV1 56% predicted) is admitted with an acute exacerbation of COPD for the second time this year. He presented to the ED with increased productive cough and shortness of breath, similar to prior exacerbations. He denies fevers, myalgias, or upper-respiratory symptoms. Physical exam is notable for bilateral inspiratory and expiratory wheezing. His sputum is purulent. He is given continuous nebulizer therapy and one dose of oral prednisone, but his dyspnea and wheezing persist. Chest X-ray does not reveal an infiltrate.

Should this patient be treated with antibiotics and, if so, what regimen is most appropriate?

Overview

Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) present a major health burden, accounting for more than 2.4% of all hospital admissions and causing significant morbidity, mortality, and costs.¹ During 2006 and 2007, COPD mortality in the United States topped 39 deaths per 100,000 people, and more recently, hospital costs related to COPD were expected to exceed $13 billion annually.² Patients with AECOPD also experience decreased quality of life and faster decline in pulmonary function, further highlighting the need for timely and appropriate treatment.¹

Several guidelines have proposed treatment strategies now considered standard of care in AECOPD management.^3,4,5,6 These include the use of corticosteroids, bronchodilator agents, and, in select cases, antibiotics. While there is well-established evidence for the use of steroids and bronchodilators in AECOPD, the debate continues over the appropriate use of antibiotics in the treatment of acute exacerbations. There are multiple potential factors leading to AECOPD, including viruses, bacteria, and common pollutants; as such, antibiotic treatment may not be indicated for all patients presenting with exacerbations. Further, the risks of antibiotic treatment—including adverse drug events, selection for drug-resistant bacteria, and associated costs—are not insignificant.

However, bacterial infections do play a role in approximately 50% of patients with AECOPD and, for this population, use of antibiotics may confer important benefits.⁷

Interestingly, a retrospective cohort study of 84,621 patients admitted for AECOPD demonstrated that 85% of patients received antibiotics at some point during hospitalization.⁸

Support for Antibiotics

Several randomized trials have compared clinical outcomes in patients with AECOPD who have received antibiotics versus those who received placebos. Most of these had small sample sizes and studied only ββ-lactam and tetracycline antibiotics in an outpatient setting; there are limited data involving inpatients and newer drugs. Nevertheless, antibiotic treatment has been associated with decreased risk of adverse outcomes in AECOPD.

One meta-analysis demonstrated that antibiotics reduced treatment failures by 66% and in-hospital mortality by 78% in the subset of trials involving hospitalized patients.⁸ Similarly, analysis of a large retrospective cohort of patients hospitalized for AECOPD found a significantly lower risk of treatment failure in antibiotic-treated versus untreated patients.⁹ Specifically, treated patients had lower rates of in-hospital mortality and readmission for AECOPD and a lower likelihood of requiring subsequent mechanical ventilation during the index hospitalization.

Data also suggest that antibiotic treatment during exacerbations might favorably impact subsequent exacerbations.¹⁰ A retrospective study of 18,928 Dutch patients with AECOPD compared outcomes among patients who had received antibiotics (most frequently doxycycline or a penicillin) as part of their therapy to those who did not. The authors demonstrated that the median time to the next exacerbation was significantly longer in the patients receiving antibiotics.¹⁰ Further, both mortality and overall risk of developing a subsequent exacerbation were significantly decreased in the antibiotic group, with median follow-up of approximately two years.

Indications for Antibiotics

Clinical symptoms. A landmark study by Anthonisen and colleagues set forth three clinical criteria that have formed the basis for treating AECOPD with antibiotics in subsequent studies and in clinical practice.¹¹ Often referred to as the “cardinal symptoms” of AECOPD, these include increased dyspnea, sputum volume, and sputum purulence. In this study, 173 outpatients with COPD were randomized to a 10-day course of antibiotics or placebo at onset of an exacerbation and followed clinically. The authors found that antibiotic-treated patients were significantly more likely than the placebo group to achieve treatment success, defined as resolution of all exacerbated symptoms within 21 days (68.1% vs. 55.0%, P<0.01).

Importantly, treated patients were also significantly less likely to experience clinical deterioration after 72 hours (9.9% vs. 18.9%, P<0.05). Patients with Type I exacerbations, characterized by all three cardinal symptoms, were most likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy, followed by patients with Type II exacerbations, in whom only two of the symptoms were present. Subsequent studies have suggested that sputum purulence correlates well with the presence of acute bacterial infection and therefore may be a reliable clinical indicator of patients who are likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy.¹²

Laboratory data. While sputum purulence is associated with bacterial infection, sputum culture is less reliable, as pathogenic bacteria are commonly isolated from patients with both AECOPD and stable COPD. In fact, the prevalence of bacterial colonization in moderate to severe COPD might be as high as 50%.¹³ Therefore, a positive bacterial sputum culture, in the absence of purulence or other signs of infection, is not recommended as the sole basis for which to prescribe antibiotics.

Serum biomarkers, most notably C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin, have been studied as a newer approach to identify patients who might benefit from antibiotic therapy for AECOPD. Studies have demonstrated increased CRP levels during AECOPD, particularly in patients with purulent sputum and positive bacterial sputum cultures.¹² Procalcitonin is preferentially elevated in bacterial infections.

One randomized, placebo-controlled trial in hospitalized patients with AECOPD demonstrated a significant reduction in antibiotic usage based on low procalcitonin levels, without negatively impacting clinical success rate, hospital mortality, subsequent antibiotic needs, or time to next exacerbation.¹⁴ However, due to inconsistent evidence, use of these markers to guide antibiotic administration in AECOPD has not yet been definitively established.^14,15 Additionally, these laboratory results are often not available at the point of care, potentially limiting their utility in the decision to initiate antibiotics.

click for large version

Severity of illness. Severity of illness is an important factor in the decision to treat AECOPD with antibiotics. Patients with advanced, underlying airway obstruction, as measured by FEV1, are more likely to have a bacterial cause of AECOPD.¹⁶ Additionally, baseline clinical characteristics including advanced age and comorbid conditions, particularly cardiovascular disease and diabetes, increase the risk of severe exacerbations.¹⁷

One meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials found that patients with severe exacerbations were likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy, while patients with mild or moderate exacerbations had no reduction in treatment failure or mortality rates.¹⁸ Patients presenting with acute respiratory failure necessitating intensive care and/or ventilator support (noninvasive or invasive) have also been shown to benefit from antibiotics.¹⁹

Current clinical guidelines vary slightly in their recommendations regarding when to give antibiotics in AECOPD (see Table 1). However, existing evidence favors antibiotic treatment for those patients presenting with two or three cardinal symptoms, specifically those with increased sputum purulence, and those with severe disease (i.e. pre-existing advanced airflow obstruction and/or exacerbations requiring mechanical ventilation). Conversely, studies have shown that many patients, particularly those with milder exacerbations, experience resolution of symptoms without antibiotic treatment.^11,18

click for large version

Antibiotic Choice in AECOPD

Risk stratification. In patients likely to benefit from antibiotic therapy, an understanding of the relationship between severity of COPD, host risk factors for poor outcomes, and microbiology is paramount to guide clinical decision-making. Historically, such bacteria as Haemophilus influenzae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Moraxella catarrhalis have been implicated in the pathogenesis of AECOPD.^3,7 In patients with simple exacerbations, antibiotics that target these pathogens should be used (see Table 2).

However, patients with more severe underlying airway obstruction (i.e. FEV1<50%) and risk factors for poor outcomes, specifically recent hospitalization (≥2 days during the previous 90 days), frequent antibiotics (>3 courses during the previous year), and severe exacerbations are more likely to be infected with resistant strains or gram-negative organisms.^3,7 Pseudomonas aeruginosa, in particular, is of increasing concern in this population. In patients with complicated exacerbations, more broad-coverage, empiric antibiotics should be initiated (see Table 2).

With this in mind, patients meeting criteria for treatment must first be stratified according to the severity of COPD and risk factors for poor outcomes before a decision regarding a specific antibiotic is reached. Figure 1 outlines a recommended approach for antibiotic administration in AECOPD. The optimal choice of antibiotics must consider cost-effectiveness, local patterns of antibiotic resistance, tissue penetration, patient adherence, and risk of such adverse drug events as diarrhea.

click for large version

Comparative effectiveness. Current treatment guidelines do not favor the use of any particular antibiotic in simple AECOPD.^3,4,5,6 However, as selective pressure has led to in vitro resistance to antibiotics traditionally considered first-line (e.g. doxycycline, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, amoxicillin), the use of second-line antibiotics (e.g. fluoroquinolones, macrolides, cephalosporins, β-lactam/ β-lactamase inhibitors) has increased. Consequently, several studies have compared the effectiveness of different antimicrobial regimens.

One meta-analysis found that second-line antibiotics, when compared with first-line agents, provided greater clinical improvement to patients with AECOPD, without significant differences in mortality, microbiologic eradication, or incidence of adverse drug events.²⁰ Among the subgroup of trials enrolling hospitalized patients, the clinical effectiveness of second-line agents remained significantly greater than that of first-line agents.

Another meta-analysis compared trials that studied only macrolides, quinolones, and amoxicillin-clavulanate and found no difference in terms of short-term clinical effectiveness; however, there was weak evidence to suggest that quinolones were associated with better microbiological success and fewer recurrences of AECOPD.²¹ Fluoroquinolones are preferred in complicated cases of AECOPD in which there is a greater risk for enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas species.^3,7

Antibiotic Duration

The duration of antibiotic therapy in AECOPD has been studied extensively, with randomized controlled trials consistently demonstrating no additional benefit to courses extending beyond five days. One meta-analysis of 21 studies found similar clinical and microbiologic cure rates among patients randomized to antibiotic treatment for ≤5 days versus >5 days.²² A subgroup analysis of the trials evaluating different durations of the same antibiotic also demonstrated no difference in clinical effectiveness, and this finding was confirmed in a separate meta-analysis.^22,23

Advantages to shorter antibiotic courses include improved compliance and decreased rates of resistance. The usual duration of antibiotic therapy is three to seven days, depending upon the response to therapy.³

Back to the Case

As the patient has no significant comorbidities or risk factors, and meets criteria for a simple Anthonisen Type I exacerbation (increased dyspnea, sputum, and sputum purulence), antibiotic therapy with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole is initiated on admission, in addition to the previously started steroid and bronchodilator treatments. The patient’s clinical status improves, and he is discharged on hospital Day 3 with a prescription to complete a five-day course of antibiotics.

Bottom Line

Antibiotic therapy is effective in select AECOPD patients, with maximal benefits obtained when the decision to treat is based on careful consideration of characteristic clinical symptoms and severity of illness. Choice and duration of antibiotics should follow likely bacterial causes and current guidelines.

Dr. Cunningham is an assistant professor of internal medicine and academic hospitalist in the section of hospital medicine at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, Tenn. Dr. LaBrin is assistant professor of internal medicine and pediatrics and an academic hospitalist at Vanderbilt. Dr. Markley is a clinical instructor and academic hospitalist at Vanderbilt.

References

1. Donaldson GC, Wedzicha JA. COPD exacerbations: 1. Epidemiology. Thorax. 2006;61:164-168.
2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. 2009 NHLBI Morbidity and Mortality Chartbook. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute website. Available at: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/resources/docs/cht-book.htm Accessed Oct. 10, 2011.
3. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) website. Available at: www.goldcopd.org/guidelines-resources.html Accessed Oct. 10, 2011.
4. Celli BR, MacNee W, Agusti A, et al. Standards for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with COPD: a summary of the ATS/ERS position paper. Eur Resp J. 2004;23:932-946.
5. National Clinical Guideline Centre. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in adults in primary and secondary care. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence website. Available at: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG101/Guidance/pdf/English. Accessed Oct. 10, 2011.
6. O’Donnell DE, Aaron S, Bourbeau J, et al. Canadian Thoracic Society recommendations for management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—2007 update. Can Respir J. 2007;14(Suppl B):5B-32B.
7. Sethi S, Murphy TF. Infection in the pathogenesis and course of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2355-2565.
8. Quon BS, Qi Gan W, Sin DD. Contemporary management of acute exacerbations of COPD: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Chest. 2008;133:756-766.
9. Rothberg MB, Pekow PS, Lahti M, Brody O, Skiest DJ, Lindenauer PK. Antibiotic therapy and treatment failure in patients hospitalized for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. JAMA. 2010;303:2035-2042.
10. Roede BM, Bresser P, Bindels PJE, et al. Antibiotic treatment is associated with reduced risk of subsequent exacerbation in obstructive lung disease: a historical population based cohort study. Thorax. 2008;63:968-973.
11. Anthonisen NR, Manfreda J, Warren CP, Hershfield ES, Harding GKM, Nelson NA. Antibiotic therapy in exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ann Intern Med. 1987;106:196-204.
12. Stockley RA, O’Brien C, Pye A, Hill SL. Relationship of sputum color to nature and outpatient management of acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 2000;117:1638-1645.
13. Rosell A, Monso E, Soler N, et al. Microbiologic determinants of exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Arch Intern Med. 2005; 165:891-897.
14. Stolz D, Christ-Crain M, Bingisser R, et al. Antibiotic treatment of exacerbations of COPD: a randomized, controlled trial comparing procalcitonin-guidance with standard therapy. Chest. 2007;131:9-19.
15. Daniels JMA, Schoorl M, Snijders D, et al. Procalcitonin vs C-reactive protein as predictive markers of response to antibiotic therapy in acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 2010;138:1108-1015.
16. Miravitlles M, Espinosa C, Fernandez-Laso E, Martos JA, Maldonado JA, Gallego M. Relationship between bacterial flora in sputum and functional impairment in patients with acute exacerbations of COPD. Chest. 1999;116:40-46.
17. Patil SP, Krishnan JA, Lechtzin N, Diette GB. In-hospital mortality following acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1180-1186.
18. Puhan MA, Vollenweider D, Latshang T, Steurer J, Steurer-Stey C. Exacerbations of chronic obstructive lung disease: when are antibiotics indicated? A systematic review. Resp Res. 2007;8:30-40.
19. Nouira S, Marghli S, Belghith M, Besbes L, Elatrous S, Abroug F. Once daily ofloxacin in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation requiring mechanical ventilation: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2001;358:2020-2025.
20. Dimopoulos G, Siempos II, Korbila IP, Manta KG, Falagas ME. Comparison of first-line with second-line antibiotics for acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Chest. 2007;132:447-455.
21. Siempos II, Dimopoulos G, Korbila IP, Manta KG, Falagas ME. Macrolides, quinolones and amoxicillin/clavulanate for chronic bronchitis: a meta-analysis. Eur Resp J. 2007;29:1127-1137.
22. El-Moussaoui, Roede BM, Speelman P, Bresser P, Prins JM, Bossuyt PMM. Short-course antibiotic treatment in acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and COPD: a meta-analysis of double-blind studies. Thorax. 2008;63:415-422.
23. Falagas ME, Avgeri SG, Matthaiou DK, Dimopoulos G, Siempos II. Short- versus long-duration antimicrobial treatment for exacerbations of chronic bronchitis: a meta-analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;62:442-450.

Aultidisciplinary patient rounding system implemented on a non-teaching hospitalist unit at the Ohio State University Medical Center (OSUMC) has been well received by unit staff, according to an HM11 abstract presentation. Key to its success, says lead author and OSUMC hospitalist Eric Schumacher, DO, MBA, was to involve nursing staff from the start and to work closely with the unit’s nurse manager and charge nurse.

“Once we got their buy-in, we proposed what we wanted to do and asked for their suggestions,” Dr. Schumacher says.

Hospitalists partner with the nurse leaders to establish a morning bedside rounding process on the unit, using a “Physician Nurse Rounding Sheet” for each hospitalist. The sheet is prepared daily by the charge nurse and unit clerks, listing the hospitalist’s patients, assigned nurses, and phone numbers. A short debriefing is performed outside the patient’s room before each encounter, and a daily feedback sheet is given to the patient and family with a picture of the hospitalist, a list of all care-team members, and such information as goals for the day, pending tests and consultations, and anticipated discharge date.

“Part of the challenge is to create a process that is efficient for both doctors and nurses, given multiple nurses caring for multiple patients,” Dr. Schumacher says.

Charge nurses or nursing managers provide backup when the bedside nurse is not available for bedside rounding. “Right now we’re rounding with hospitalists and nurses only, but a long-term goal is to expand it to include the social worker and other ancillary professionals,” he says.

Preliminary data on the project show the feasibility of multidisciplinary rounding, with elevated Press Ganey patient satisfaction scores on the unit in the first two months after rounding began. In the third month, compliance with rounding went down, and so did satisfaction scores, but with a renewed commitment the following month, scores went back up again. Subjective reports from hospitalists also suggest fewer interruptions during the day from nursing pages, Dr. Schumacher says.

Aultidisciplinary patient rounding system implemented on a non-teaching hospitalist unit at the Ohio State University Medical Center (OSUMC) has been well received by unit staff, according to an HM11 abstract presentation. Key to its success, says lead author and OSUMC hospitalist Eric Schumacher, DO, MBA, was to involve nursing staff from the start and to work closely with the unit’s nurse manager and charge nurse.

“Once we got their buy-in, we proposed what we wanted to do and asked for their suggestions,” Dr. Schumacher says.

Hospitalists partner with the nurse leaders to establish a morning bedside rounding process on the unit, using a “Physician Nurse Rounding Sheet” for each hospitalist. The sheet is prepared daily by the charge nurse and unit clerks, listing the hospitalist’s patients, assigned nurses, and phone numbers. A short debriefing is performed outside the patient’s room before each encounter, and a daily feedback sheet is given to the patient and family with a picture of the hospitalist, a list of all care-team members, and such information as goals for the day, pending tests and consultations, and anticipated discharge date.

“Part of the challenge is to create a process that is efficient for both doctors and nurses, given multiple nurses caring for multiple patients,” Dr. Schumacher says.

Charge nurses or nursing managers provide backup when the bedside nurse is not available for bedside rounding. “Right now we’re rounding with hospitalists and nurses only, but a long-term goal is to expand it to include the social worker and other ancillary professionals,” he says.

Preliminary data on the project show the feasibility of multidisciplinary rounding, with elevated Press Ganey patient satisfaction scores on the unit in the first two months after rounding began. In the third month, compliance with rounding went down, and so did satisfaction scores, but with a renewed commitment the following month, scores went back up again. Subjective reports from hospitalists also suggest fewer interruptions during the day from nursing pages, Dr. Schumacher says.

Aultidisciplinary patient rounding system implemented on a non-teaching hospitalist unit at the Ohio State University Medical Center (OSUMC) has been well received by unit staff, according to an HM11 abstract presentation. Key to its success, says lead author and OSUMC hospitalist Eric Schumacher, DO, MBA, was to involve nursing staff from the start and to work closely with the unit’s nurse manager and charge nurse.

“Once we got their buy-in, we proposed what we wanted to do and asked for their suggestions,” Dr. Schumacher says.

Hospitalists partner with the nurse leaders to establish a morning bedside rounding process on the unit, using a “Physician Nurse Rounding Sheet” for each hospitalist. The sheet is prepared daily by the charge nurse and unit clerks, listing the hospitalist’s patients, assigned nurses, and phone numbers. A short debriefing is performed outside the patient’s room before each encounter, and a daily feedback sheet is given to the patient and family with a picture of the hospitalist, a list of all care-team members, and such information as goals for the day, pending tests and consultations, and anticipated discharge date.

“Part of the challenge is to create a process that is efficient for both doctors and nurses, given multiple nurses caring for multiple patients,” Dr. Schumacher says.

Charge nurses or nursing managers provide backup when the bedside nurse is not available for bedside rounding. “Right now we’re rounding with hospitalists and nurses only, but a long-term goal is to expand it to include the social worker and other ancillary professionals,” he says.

Preliminary data on the project show the feasibility of multidisciplinary rounding, with elevated Press Ganey patient satisfaction scores on the unit in the first two months after rounding began. In the third month, compliance with rounding went down, and so did satisfaction scores, but with a renewed commitment the following month, scores went back up again. Subjective reports from hospitalists also suggest fewer interruptions during the day from nursing pages, Dr. Schumacher says.