Although many children’s hospitals have established antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs), data-driven benchmarks for optimizing antimicrobial use across centers are lacking. We developed a multicenter quality improvement collaborative focused on sharing data reports and benchmarking antimicrobial use to improve antimicrobial prescribing among hospitalized children. A national antimicrobial stewardship collaborative among children’s hospitals, Sharing Antimicrobial Reports for Pediatric Stewardship (SHARPS), was established in 2013. Characteristics of the hospitals and their ASPs were obtained through a standardized survey. Antimicrobial-use data reports were developed on the basis of input from the participating hospitals. Collaborative learning opportunities were provided through monthly webinars and annual meetings. Since 2013, 36 US hospitals have participated in the SHARPS collaborative. The median full-time equivalent (pharmacist and physician) dedicated to 30 of these ASPs was 0.75 (interquartile range, 0.45–1.4). To date, the collaborative has developed 26 data reports that include benchmarking reports according to specific antimicrobial agents, indications, and clinical service lines. The collaborative has conducted 27 webinars and 3 in-person meetings to highlight the stewardship work being conducted in the hospitals. The data reports and learning opportunities have resulted in approximately 36 distinct stewardship interventions. A pediatric antimicrobial stewardship collaborative has been successful in promoting the development of and innovation among pediatric ASPs. Additional research is needed to determine the impact of these efforts.

In response to the growing epidemic of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections, antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) have been rapidly implemented in the United States (US). This study examines the prevalence of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) seven core elements of a successful ASP within a large subset of US Children’s Hospitals. In 2016, a survey was conducted of 52 pediatric hospitals assessing the presence of the seven core elements: leadership commitment, accountability, drug expertise, action, tracking, reporting, and education. Forty-nine hospitals (94%) had established ASPs and 41 hospitals (79%) included all seven core elements. Physician accountability (87%) and a dedicated ASP pharmacist or drug expert (88%) were present in the vast majority of hospitals. However, substantial variability existed in the financial support allotted to these positions. This variability did not predict program actions, tracking, reporting, and education. When compared with previous surveys, these results document a dramatic increase in the prevalence and resources of pediatric stewardship programs, although continued expansion is warranted. Further research is required to understand the feasibility of various core stewardship activities and the impact on patient outcomes in the setting of finite resources.

Background: Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a cephalosporin–β-lactamase inhibitor combination, is approved for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI). The safety and efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam in pediatric participants with cIAI were assessed. Methods: This phase 2 study (NCT03217136) randomized participants to either ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole or meropenem for treatment of cIAI in pediatric participants (<18 years). The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of intravenous ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole. Clinical cure at end of treatment (EOT) and test of cure (TOC) visits were secondary end points. Results: The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included 91 participants (ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole, n = 70; meropenem, n = 21). Complicated appendicitis was the most common diagnosis (93.4%); Escherichia coli was the most common pathogen (65.9%). Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 80.0% and 61.9% of participants receiving ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole and meropenem, drug-related AEs occurred in 18.6% and 14.3% and serious AEs occurred in 11.4% and 0% of participants receiving ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole and meropenem, respectively. No drug-related serious AEs or discontinuations due to drug-related AEs occurred. Rates of the clinical cure for ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole and meropenem at EOT were 80.0% and 95.2% (difference: −14.3; 95% confidence interval: −26.67 to 4.93) and at TOC were 80.0% and 100.0% (difference: −19.1; 95% confidence interval: −30.18 to −2.89), respectively; 6 of the 14 clinical failures for ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole at TOC were indeterminate responses imputed as failures per protocol. Conclusion: Ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole was well tolerated in pediatric participants with cIAI and had a safety profile similar to the established safety profile in adults. In this descriptive efficacy analysis, ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole appeared efficacious.

Background: Antibiotic-resistant infections have become a public health crisis that is driven by the inappropriate use of antibiotics. In the USA, antibiotic stewardship programs (ASP) have been established and are required by regulatory agencies to help combat the problem of antibiotic resistance. Post-operative antibiotic use in surgical cases deemed low-risk for infection is an area with significant overuse of antibiotics in children. Consensus among leading public health organizations has led to guidelines eliminating post-operative antibiotics in low-risk surgeries. However, the best strategies to de-implement these inappropriate antibiotics in this setting are unknown. Methods/design: A 3-year stepped wedge cluster randomized trial will be conducted at nine US Children’s Hospitals to assess the impact of two de-implementation strategies, order set change and facilitation training, on inappropriate post-operative antibiotic prescribing in low risk (i.e., clean and clean-contaminated) surgical cases. The facilitation training will amplify order set changes and will involve a 2-day workshop with antibiotic stewardship teams. This training will be led by an implementation scientist expert (VRM) and a pediatric infectious diseases physician with antibiotic stewardship expertise (JGN). The primary clinical outcome will be the percentage of surgical cases receiving unnecessary post-operative antibiotics. Secondary clinical outcomes will include the rate of surgical site infections and the rate of Clostridioides difficile infections, a common negative consequence of antibiotic use. Monthly semi-structured interviews at each hospital will assess the implementation process of the two strategies. The primary implementation outcome is penetration, which will be defined as the number of order sets changed or developed by each hospital during the study. Additional implementation outcomes will include the ASP team members’ assessment of the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of each strategy while they are being implemented. Discussion: This study will provide important information on the impact of two potential strategies to de-implement unnecessary post-operative antibiotic use in children while assessing important clinical outcomes. As more unnecessary medical practices are identified, de-implementation strategies, including facilitation, need to be rigorously evaluated. Along with this study, other rigorously designed studies evaluating additional strategies are needed to further advance the burgeoning field of de-implementation. Trial registration: NCT04366440. Registered April 28, 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04366440.

BACKGROUND: Schools provide essential functions for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), but their vulnerability to infection with SARS-CoV-2 are a barrier to in-person learning. This qualitative study aimed to understand how weekly SARS-CoV-2 screening testing of students and staff could best facilitate in-school learning during the pandemic. METHODS: Thirty-one focus groups were held with school staff and parents of children with IDD to examine the perceptions of COVID-19 during the 2020-2021 school year. Responses were analyzed using a directed thematic content analysis approach. RESULTS: Five principal themes were identified: risks of returning to in-person learning; facilitators and barriers to participation in SARS-CoV-2 screening testing; messaging strategies; and preferred messengers. IMPLICATIONS FOR SCHOOL HEALTH POLICY, PRACTICE, AND EQUITY: Staff and families agreed that saliva based SARS-CoV-2 screening testing helps increase comfort with in-person learning. Screening testing increased family and school staff comfort with in-person learning particularly because many students with special needs cannot adhere to public health guidelines. CONCLUSION: To keep children with IDD in school during the pandemic, families found SARS-CoV-2 screening testing important, particularly for students that cannot adhere to mitigation guidelines.

On December 31, 2019, no one knew how the world was about to change forever. In Wuhan, China, health care officials alerted the World Health Organization (WHO)