239. Implementation of a Vertical Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention for Patients Colonized with Clostridium difficile

<p>Objective:</p> <p>To determine whether implementation of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions improve management of bacteriuria in hospitalized adults.</p> <p>Data Sources:</p> <p>EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Clinical Trials Registries via Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception through May 2021. Reference lists of included studies were searched, and Scopus was used to retrieve articles that cited included references.</p> <p>Study Selection and Data Extraction:</p> <p>Randomized and nonrandomized trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time-series studies, and repeated measures studies evaluating AMS interventions for hospitalized adult inpatients with bacteriuria were included. Risk of bias was assessed independently by 3 team members and compared. Results were summarized descriptively.</p> <p>Data Synthesis:</p> <p>The search yielded 5509 articles, of which 13 met inclusion criteria. Most common interventions included education (N = 8) and audit and feedback (N = 5) alone or in combination with other interventions. Where assessed, resource and antimicrobial use primarily decreased and appropriateness of antimicrobial use improved; however, impact on guideline adherence was variable. All studies were rated as having unclear or serious risk of bias. This review summarizes and assesses the quality of evidence for AMS interventions to improve the management of bacteriuria. Results provide guidance to both AMS teams and researchers aiming to develop and/or evaluate AMS interventions for management of bacteriuria.</p> <p>Conclusions:</p> <p>This review demonstrated benefit of AMS interventions on management of bacteriuria. However, most studies had some risk of bias, and an overall effect across studies is unclear due to heterogeneity in outcome measures. </p>

<p>Objective:</p> <p>To determine whether implementation of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions improve management of bacteriuria in hospitalized adults.</p> <p>Data Sources:</p> <p>EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Clinical Trials Registries via Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception through May 2021. Reference lists of included studies were searched, and Scopus was used to retrieve articles that cited included references.</p> <p>Study Selection and Data Extraction:</p> <p>Randomized and nonrandomized trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time-series studies, and repeated measures studies evaluating AMS interventions for hospitalized adult inpatients with bacteriuria were included. Risk of bias was assessed independently by 3 team members and compared. Results were summarized descriptively.</p> <p>Data Synthesis:</p> <p>The search yielded 5509 articles, of which 13 met inclusion criteria. Most common interventions included education (N = 8) and audit and feedback (N = 5) alone or in combination with other interventions. Where assessed, resource and antimicrobial use primarily decreased and appropriateness of antimicrobial use improved; however, impact on guideline adherence was variable. All studies were rated as having unclear or serious risk of bias. This review summarizes and assesses the quality of evidence for AMS interventions to improve the management of bacteriuria. Results provide guidance to both AMS teams and researchers aiming to develop and/or evaluate AMS interventions for management of bacteriuria.</p> <p>Conclusions:</p> <p>This review demonstrated benefit of AMS interventions on management of bacteriuria. However, most studies had some risk of bias, and an overall effect across studies is unclear due to heterogeneity in outcome measures. </p>

Rapid diagnostic testing with matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) decreases the time to organism identification by 24 to 36 h compared to the amount of time required by conventional methods. However, there are limited data evaluating the impact of MALDI-TOF with real-time antimicrobial stewardship team (AST) review and intervention on antimicrobial prescribing and outcomes for patients with bacteremia and blood cultures contaminated with coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (CoNS). A quasiexperimental study was conducted to analyze the impact of rapid diagnostic testing with MALDI-TOF plus AST review and intervention for adult hospitalized patients with blood cultures positive for CoNS. Antibiotic prescribing patterns and clinical outcomes were compared before and after implementation of MALDI-TOF with AST intervention for patients with CoNS bacteremia and CoNS contamination. A total of 324 patients with a positive CoNS blood culture were included; 246 were deemed to have contaminated cultures (117 in the preintervention group and 129 in AST the intervention group), and 78 patients had bacteremia (46 in the preintervention group and 32 in the AST intervention group). No differences in demographics were seen between the groups, and similar rates of contamination occurred between the preintervention and AST intervention groups (64.3% versus 72.6%, P = 0.173). Patients with bacteremia were initiated on optimal therapy sooner in the AST intervention group (58.7 versus 34.4 h, P = 0.030), which was associated with a similarly decreased mortality (21.7% versus 3.1%, P = 0.023). Patients with CoNS-contaminated cultures had similar rates of mortality, lengths of hospitalization, recurrent bloodstream infections, and 30-day hospital readmissions, but the AST intervention group had a decreased duration of unnecessary antibiotic therapy (1.31 versus 3.89 days, P = 0.032) and a decreased number of vancomycin trough assays performed (0.88 versus 1.95, P < 0.001). In patients with CoNS bacteremia, rapid pathogen identification integrated with real-time stewardship interventions improved timely organism identification and initiation of antibiotic therapy. Patients in the AST group with blood cultures contaminated with CoNS had decreased inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing and decreased unnecessary serum vancomycin trough assays.

Establishing core competencies for antimicrobial stewardship teams: a consensus development using the modified Delphi technique-an European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Study Group for Antimicrobial Stewardship position paper.

BackgroundAccelerate Pheno® (AP) is a novel diagnostic system that provides rapid identification and antibiotic susceptibility results for most commonly isolated organisms within hours of blood culture (BC) positivity. There are little data on this technology’s real-world implementation with antimicrobial stewardship intervention and effect on optimal targeted therapy.MethodsAP was implemented at UIHC in September 2018 and paired with antimicrobial stewardship team (AST) review. AST recommendations were provided in real time during weekday hours and through a retrospective review process for off-hours results. Microbiologic and clinical data were collected prospectively. Due to inconsistencies in instrument performance identified after the first month, two post-implementation periods (Group A = October 2018–January 2019; Group B = February 2019–mid-April 2019) were analyzed to assess quality improvement efforts during clinical roll-out.ResultsIn the 6.5-month combined period, 690 unique BC samples were run on AP and reviewed by AST (417 in A; 273 in B). Performance of the technology improved, with 78.9% (329/417) of isolates in Grp A identified vs. 85.3% in Grp B (233/273). Percentage of runs with progression to antibiotic susceptibility improved from 76.1% to 92.3%. Over both time periods, AST intervened on 277 samples (Figure 1). Recommendations (bug-drug mismatch, de-escalation, dose optimization, and infectious disease consult) were accepted at a rate of 97.4%. Time from BC positivity to optimal therapy was 15.3 hours (Figure 2).ConclusionImplementation of AP with AST review resulted in rapid identification and antibiotic susceptibility results with early optimization of antimicrobial therapy. Highest impact was seen in the management of patients with resistant Gram-negative infections. Oversight of the implementation by a partnership of clinical microbiology and the antimicrobial stewardship team was critical in identifying real-time implementation issues and opportunities for quality improvement. Though real-world performance was slightly inferior to published trial data, the instrument’s exceedingly fast time to AS represents a significant advantage over other systems and enhances clinical care and patient safety particularly when paired with AST intervention.DisclosuresAll authors: No reported disclosures.

BackgroundInfectious diseases consult (IDC) and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) intervention independently demonstrate improved management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB). However, data supporting utilizing both strategies is limited. The objective of the current study is to assess evidence-based bundle adherence for SAB in the presence and absence of mandatory IDC and AMS pharmacist review in a multi-site health system.MethodsThis retrospective study included adult inpatients with SAB from January 2016 to December 2018 at seven hospitals. Outcomes were compared between three groups: pre-mandatory IDC and AMS review (group 1), post-mandatory IDC and pre-AMS review (group 2), and post-mandatory IDC and AMS review (group 3). The primary outcome was bundle adherence defined as: appropriate intravenous antimicrobial therapy, appropriate duration of therapy, 24–48-hour surveillance cultures until documented clearance, echocardiography, and removal of indwelling intravenous catheters, if applicable. Secondary endpoints included individual bundle components, source control, length of stay (LOS), 30-day bacteremia-related readmission, and in-hospital all-cause mortality.ResultsA total of 579 patients met the final inclusion criteria for analysis. Complete bundle adherence was achieved in 65% of patients for group 1 (n = 371), 54% for group 2 (n = 87), and 76% for group 3 (n = 121). Adherence to bundle elements was significantly higher in group 3 when compared with group 1 (odds ratio [OR] 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37–0.93), and group 2 (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.20 – 0.67). No difference in bundle adherence was noted between groups 1 and 2. When comparing groups 1, 2 and 3, significant differences were seen in obtaining echocardiography (91% vs. 83% vs. 100%; P = 0.0378), and hospital LOS (10.5 vs. 8.85 vs. 12.0 days; P = 0.0149), respectively. Increased hospital LOS in group 3 may be due to nonsignificant higher rates of complicated bacteremia compared with groups 2 and 1 (32% vs. 44% vs. 43%, P = 0.09), respectively. No differences were noted for readmission or mortality.ConclusionThe addition of AMS pharmacist review to mandatory IDC significantly improved quality care bundle adherence.DisclosuresAll authors: No reported disclosures.

BackgroundHospitals in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) face context-specific challenges in implementing antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes. The Global Point Prevalence Survey (Global-PPS) project has established a network of hospitals across 90 countries, using point prevalence surveys to monitor antimicrobial use and guide AMS activities. However, little is known about AMS implementation in these hospitals. Using qualitative research, we aim to explore the implementation process in LMIC hospitals within the Global-PPS network and the factors influencing it, identify potential implementation strategies, and evaluate the role of Global-PPS in this process.MethodsA qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured online interviews with healthcare workers (HCWs) involved in AMS in LMIC hospitals within the Global-PPS network. Participants were selected using a combination of convenience and purposive sampling and included clinicians, microbiologists, pharmacists, and nurses. Interviews followed a topic guide based on the integrated checklist of determinants of practice (TICD Checklist). Transcripts were analysed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analyses.FindingsTwenty-two HCWs from 16 countries were interviewed. Hospitals were in different stages of the AMS implementation process at the time of the study, from pre-implementation to institutionalisation of AMS as part of the continuous quality improvement process. While the Global-PPS provided a valuable tool for education and implementation, contextual barriers often hindered the translation of findings into targeted interventions. Four themes influenced AMS implementation, “institutional support and resource allocation”, “AMS team functioning, roles, and expertise”, “adoption and integration of AMS recommendations”, and “data-driven decision-making” as a cross-cutting theme. Key determinants included AMS team competencies, multidisciplinary teams, sustainable funding and leadership support, diagnostic capacity, and reliable data to inform interventions. We also identified various strategies employed by local AMS teams to enhance implementation.ConclusionsThis study examines AMS implementation in LMIC hospitals in the Global-PPS network and identifies key determinants. AMS teams address challenges through task shifting, local engagement and ownership. While empirical evidence on the effectiveness of these strategies is limited, these insights can guide future AMS interventions and studies within LMIC hospitals. Strengthening AMS requires bridging the gap between measurement and action and expanding research on behaviour change.

Background/AimsThe clinical characteristics of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) in patients within the Asia-Pacific region who test positive on the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) and negative on the toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA, hereafter referred to as “Toxin”) are unclear. We evaluated the clinical significance and associated factors of NAAT+/Toxin− patients whose diagnosis of CDI was confirmed by toxigenic C. difficile culture.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study enrolled adult patients admitted to Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital between January 2015 and December 2015 with a diagnosis of active CDI.ResultsIn total, 3,311 stool samples were subjected to C. difficile culture, NAAT, and toxin EIA. Among them, 298 culture-positive patients fulfilled the criteria for CDI, and 3 NAAT−/Toxin− patients were excluded. The risk factors for a negative EIA and positive NAAT and culture results were evaluated in 295 patients. Among them, 128 patients were Toxin− and 167 were Toxin+. No clinical or laboratory parameters (fever, white blood cell count of < 1,000/mm3, eosinophils, C-reactive protein, creatinine, or albumin) differed significantly between NAAT+/Toxin+ and NAAT+/Toxin− patients. In addition, the clinical outcomes did not differ between the two groups. In the multivariable analysis, previous use of antibiotics was inversely associated with negative EIA results, whereas high-dose corticosteroid use was positively associated.ConclusionsClinical outcomes related to CDI are not different between NAAT+/Toxin+ and NAAT+/Toxin− patients, emphasizing the need for individual clinical evaluation.

BackgroundUS laboratories are increasingly using nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) to diagnose Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) due to their increased sensitivity over toxin enzyme immunoassays (EIA), but NAATs may be more likely than toxin EIAs to detect colonization rather than true disease. Limited data indicate patients positive by toxin EIA (toxin+) have worse outcomes than those positive by NAAT (NAAT+) only, suggesting toxin EIA detects true infection more often than NAAT. We used multisite CDI surveillance data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Emerging Infections Program to compare clinical course and outcomes between toxin+ and NAAT+ only patients.MethodsA case was defined as a positive C. difficile test in a person ≥1 year old with no positive tests in the prior 8 weeks. Cases detected during 2014–2015 by a testing algorithm using toxin EIA and NAAT were classified as toxin+ or NAAT+ only. Medical charts were reviewed. Death data were obtained from state death registries. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to compare CDI recurrence and 90-day mortality between the two groups, adjusting for age, sex, race, Charlson comorbidity index, and receipt of oral vancomycin. For the outcome of recurrence, we also adjusted for history of CDI in the prior 6 months.ResultsOf 4,878 cases, 2160 (44%) were toxin+ and 2,718 (56%) were NAAT+ only. Toxin+ cases were more likely than NAAT+ only cases to be ≥65 years old (48% vs. 38%; P < 0.0001), have white blood cells ≥15,000/µL (483/1,539 [31%] vs. 423/1,978 [21%]; P < 0.0001), and have received oral vancomycin ≤3 days of diagnosis (32% vs. 29%; P = 0.03). Comparing toxin+ to NAAT+ only cases, 21% vs. 11% had a recurrence (P < 0.0001), of which 71% vs. 33% had a toxin+ recurrence (P < 0.0001), and 10% vs. 9% died ≤90 days of diagnosis (P = 0.12). In multivariable analysis, a toxin+ result was associated with recurrence (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.61–2.22) but not with 90-day mortality (aOR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.81–1.22).ConclusionToxin+ CDI is more severe by some markers and more likely to recur as toxin+. However, there was no difference in adjusted mortality, which may reflect an effect on mortality in NAAT+ only cases from mild CDI, receipt of unnecessary CDI treatment, or other factors.DisclosuresG. Dumyati, Seres: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee.

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs in hospitals comprise coordinated strategies to optimise antimicrobial use. The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the healthcare system, including AMS. This study aimed to understand the work processes of AMS teams during COVID-19 hospital restrictions and the role technology played in supporting AMS. Observations and interviews were conducted with AMS teams at two hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Participants reported an increase in antimicrobial use, a loss of resources for AMS activities, and reduced in-person interactions. Meetings were performed through videoconferencing, which resulted in greater access to information but led to poorer communication and impacted interdisciplinary relationships. As COVID-19 restrictions recede, AMS program changes should be evaluated to understand the most effective strategies to facilitate evidence-based AMS practices.

Background50% of antibiotic courses in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are unnecessary, leading to increased risk of harm such as Clostridiodes difficile infection and antibiotic-resistant organisms. Antimicrobial stewardship (AS) interventions play an important role in optimizing antibiotic use. Most studies addressing strategies to improve antibiotic prescribing in LTCFs showed modest and unsustained results. We aimed to identify facilitators, barriers and strategies in implementing a urinary tract infection (UTI)-focused AS intervention at an LTCF in Toronto.MethodsA qualitative approach using conventional content analysis was used. Through purposeful sampling, we recruited different LTCF healthcare providers and administrators at Kensington Gardens. Interviewees attended focus groups or one-on-one interviews. Data were collected using a semi-structured interview guide. Data were analyzed inductively using a codebook modified in an iterative analytic process. Barriers and facilitators with potential strategies were summarized and mapped using the COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation and behavior) model (Mitchie et al.) and emerging themes identified.ResultsSixteen participants were interviewed. The most common barriers were family pressure, lack of access and test result delay while the barrier themes were lack of access, inadequate communication, lack of time and lack of knowledge of both HCPs and resident’s families. These can be addressed by the most common facilitators and facilitator themes, which included good communication between healthcare professionals (HCPs), education for HCPs and families and collaboration between HCPs. Most barriers and facilitators were mapped to the opportunities domain of the COM-B model.ConclusionStrategies for improved UTI-focused antimicrobial stewardship intervention in LTC setting should focus on increasing opportunities and innovative formats for education, communication and collaboration among HCPs and with families although barriers and facilitators in all aspects of the COM-B model were identified.DisclosuresAll authors: No reported disclosures.

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have a higher incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). Previous studies have demonstrated negative clinical outcomes in IBD patients with CDI compared to patients without CDI. The clinical presentation of CDI is indistinguishable from IBD exacerbation, thus posing a frequent clinical dilemma on the role of Clostridioides infection in the testing, diagnosis, and treatment of these patients. To compare clinical outcomes of CDI in patients with IBD to those without IBD. Retrospective cohort of adult patients admitted to Rabin Medical Center Israel between the years 2014 and 2020 with a concurrent diagnosis of IBD and CDI. Matching 1:2 was performed between the IBD patients and the non-IBD population with respect to age and sex. Sixty-seven patients with IBD and 134 patients without IBD were included in the study. The groups' median age was 40.6 (interquartile range [IQR] of 29.8-68.9), with 45.8% male and 54.2% female. The non-IBD group had a higher Charlson score with 2 (IQR 0; 5) versus 0 (IQR 0; 4) in the IBD group (P value <.01). Patients with IBD had more exposure to systemic antibiotics, 71.1% versus 26.3% (P value <.01). In a multivariable analysis we found no difference in 90-day mortality and rate of relapse between the 2 study groups with an odds ratio of 1.709 (95% confidence interval 0.321-9.905) and odds ratio of 0.209 (95% confidence interval 0.055-1.513) respectively. In our cohort patients with IBD who present with diarrhea and concomitant CDI have similar rates of relapse and mortality compared with patients without IBD.

Background Inappropriate treatment of bacteriuria is commonly reported. While evidence to support antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions has been published, few studies justify intervention components or incorporate theory into designing interventions. The objective of the study was to develop a theory-informed multifaceted AMS intervention to improve management of bacteriuria in adults admitted to hospital. Methods We used the 4-step approach described by French and colleagues to develop a theory informed intervention. A systematic review of AMS interventions to improve antibiotic use for bacteriuria was completed. In addition, local barriers to improving antimicrobial use in hospitalized adults with bacteriuria were assessed through a qualitative study using focus groups with health care providers. Barriers identified through the qualitative study were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework and the COM-B model then linked to the Behaviour Change Wheel. Published literature, focus group results, and practical considerations were used by our team to identify and rank possible solutions. Consensus on which interventions to implement locally was achieved using the Nominal Group Technique. Results Ten interventions that could address local challenges with antimicrobial prescribing for bacteriuria were identified. The highest-ranking interventions were audit and feedback (to individuals or teams), active educational sessions, development of clinical order sets, and incorporating clinical decision support with culture results. A multifaceted intervention that included monthly audit and feedback on management of bacteriuria to multidisciplinary teams in combination with case-based virtual education sessions was developed and is currently being piloted at four tertiary and community hospitals. Conclusion Use of theory to identify local barriers and facilitators to improving antimicrobial use in combination with evidence and practical considerations should be incorporated into design and implementation of AMS interventions. Further work will evaluate impact of this theory-informed AMS intervention on antimicrobial prescribing for bacteriuria in hospitalized adults. Disclosures Emily Black, BSc(Pharm), PharmD, Drug Evaluation Alliance of Nova Scotia: Grant/Research Support|Research Nova Scotia: Grant/Research Support Paul Bonnar, MD, BioMerieux: Honoraria|Paladin Labs: Honoraria Samuel G. Campbell, FRCP (Edin), Astra Zeneca: Board Member

BackgroundAntibiotic stewardship and infection control programs rely on C. difficile infection (CDI) test results to measure CDI incidence in the hospital setting. C. difficile carriage is common and distinguishing infection from colonization is difficult with the highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) commonly used. Current guidelines recommend a multi-step algorithm for testing. The impact on patient outcomes and CDI metrics are largely unknown.MethodsThis was a pre-post study at the University of Maryland Medical Center, evaluating the impact of a CDI testing strategy (introduced October 2018) that simultaneously reported NAAT and confirmatory enzyme immunoassay (EIA) when used with existing best practice alerts for appropriate testing. Pre-intervention (November 2017–September 2018) and post intervention (October 2018–March 2019) periods were compared for mean CDI incidence (CDI per 10,000 admissions) defined by: (1) positive NAAT, (2) reported CDI (last positive test), and (3) treated CDI (receiving oral vancomycin). Both community and hospital-onset cases were included. The NAAT CDI incidence was used as the pre-intervention comparison for all 3 measures. In addition, oral vancomycin days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 patient-days (PD) was compared. Pre–post comparisons of mean CDI incidence and mean DOT rates were done using Student t-test.ResultsThere were 3,237 samples tested (2,269 pre and 968 post-intervention) with 376 NAAT positive (262 pre and 114 post-intervention). Of the 99 tests with reflex EIA, there were 74 discordant tests (NAAT +/EIA -) with 35 (47%) treated for CDI. Mean NAAT CDI incidence pre-intervention was 54 per 10,000 admissions. Post-intervention mean CDI incidence decreased as follows: 45 NAAT CDI per 10,000 admissions (P = 0.13), 15 reported CDI per 1000 admissions (P < 0.0001), and 28 treated CDI per 10,000 admissions (P = 0.0007). Oral vancomycin DOT per 1,000 PD decreased from 16 to 9 (P = 0.0002).ConclusionC. difficile NAAT testing with confirmatory EIA, in combination with best practice alert, decreased reported and treated cases of CDI, which may distinguish infection vs. colonization and avoid unnecessary treatment, beyond that achieved with alerts that improve appropriate patient selection for testing.DisclosuresAll authors: No reported disclosures.

Background: Antimicrobial therapy for asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) is often unnecessary and is a common reason for inappropriate antimicrobial use in hospitalized patients. Unnecessary ASB treatment leads to collateral damage such as resistance, and Clostridium difficile infections. This study evaluated the impact of interdisciplinary antimicrobial stewardship interventions on antimicrobial utilization in ASB. Methods: This was a quasi-experimental institutional review board (IRB)-approved study evaluating the impact of antimicrobial stewardship on antibiotic utilization for ASB in a pilot medical-surgical unit. The control phase was from August-October 2017 and the postintervention phase was from December-March 2018. In the control phase, electronic medical records of patients with positive urine cultures were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified as either having ASB or urinary tract infection (UTI) based on the absence or presence of UTI symptoms documented in the medical record. The intervention phase consisted of educational in-services to providers, nurses, and pharmacists. Clinical pharmacists for the pilot unit utilized an electronic real-time surveillance system to identify patients with positive urine cultures. With nurses' collaboration, clinical pharmacists classified these patients as either having UTI or ASB. Stewardship interventions were made in real-time to discontinue antibiotics in patients with ASB. Results: There were 65 and 77 patients with bacteriuria in the pre- and postintervention phases. Among these, ASB was present in 29 (45%) and 27 (35%) patients, respectively. After excluding those receiving antibiotics for concurrent nonurinary indications, the combination of education with pharmacist and nursing interventions decreased unnecessary ASB treatment from 18 (62%) to 6 (22%) patients (relative risk: 0.36, 95% confidence interval: 0.16-0.72, P = .003). Conclusion: The findings of this study highlight the importance of interdisciplinary interventions in reducing unnecessary antimicrobial therapy for the treatment of ASB. With increasing antimicrobial resistance, healthcare institutions should evaluate the role of these interdisciplinary interventions to reduce unnecessary treatment for ASB.