Clinical and economic impact of rapid reporting of bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility results of the most frequently processed specimen types

2012 ◽  
Vol 31 (9) ◽  
pp. 2445-2452 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Galar ◽  
J. R. Yuste ◽  
M. Espinosa ◽  
F. Guillén-Grima ◽  
S. Hernáez-Crespo ◽  
...  
1999 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 1415-1418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan Barenfanger ◽  
Cheryl Drake ◽  
Gail Kacich

To assess the expected clinical and financial benefits of rapid reporting of microbiology results, we compared patients whose cultured samples were processed in the normal manner to patients whose samples were processed more rapidly due to a minor change in work flow. For the samples tested in the rapid-reporting time period, the vast majority of bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results were verified with the Vitek system on the same day that they were available. This time period was called rapid AST (RAST). For RAST, a technologist on the evening shift verified the data that became available during that shift. For the control time period, cultures were processed in the normal manner (normal AST [NAST]), which did not include evening-shift verification. For NAST, the results for approximately half of the cultures were verified on the first day that the result was available. The average turnaround time for the reporting of AST results was 39.2 h for RAST and 44.4 h for NAST (5.2 h faster for RAST [P = 0.001]). Subsequently, physicians were able to initiate appropriate antimicrobial therapy sooner for patients whose samples were tested as part of RAST (P = 0.006). The mortality rates were 7.9 and 9.6% for patients whose samples were tested as part of RAST and NAST, respectively (P = 0.45). The average length of stay was 10.7 days per patient for RAST and 12.6 days for NAST, a difference of 2.0 days less for RAST (P = 0.006). The average variable cost was $4,927 per patient for RAST and $6,677 for NAST, a difference of $1,750 less per patient for RAST (P = 0.001). This results in over $4 million in savings in variable costs per year in our hospital.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Perovic ◽  
Ali A. Yahaya ◽  
Crystal Viljoen ◽  
Jean-Bosco Ndihokubwayo ◽  
Marshagne Smith ◽  
...  

Background: In 2002, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched a regional microbiology external quality assessment (EQA) programme for national public health laboratories in the African region, initially targeting priority epidemic-prone bacterial diseases, and later including other common bacterial pathogens. Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyse the efficacy of an EQA programme as a laboratory quality system evaluation tool. Methods: We analysed the proficiency of laboratories’ performance of bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) for the period 2011–2016. The National Institute for Communicable Diseases of South Africa provided technical coordination following an agreement with WHO, and supplied EQA samples of selected bacterial organisms for microscopy (Gram stain), identification, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). National public health laboratories, as well as laboratories involved in the Invasive Bacterial Diseases Surveillance Network, were enrolled by the WHO Regional Office for Africa to participate in the EQA programme. We analysed participants’ results of 41 surveys, which included the following organisms sent as challenges: Streptococcus pneumonia, Haemophilus influenzae, Neisseria meningitidis, Salmonella Typhi, Salmonella Enteritidis, Shigella flexneri, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus anginosus, Enterococcus faecium, Serratia marcescens, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Enterobacter cloacae. Results: Eighty-one laboratories from 45 countries participated. Overall, 76% of participants obtained acceptable scores for identification, but a substantial proportion of AST scores were not in the acceptable range. Of 663 assessed AST responses, only 42% had acceptable scores. Conclusion: In the African Region, implementation of diagnostic stewardship in clinical bacteriology is generally suboptimal. This report illustrates that AST is poorly done compared to microscopy and identification. It is critically important to make the case for implementation of quality assurance in AST, as it is the cornerstone of antimicrobial resistance surveillance reporting and implementation of the Global Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Faro ◽  
Malika Mitchell ◽  
Yuh-Jue Chen ◽  
Sarah Kamal ◽  
Gerald Riddle ◽  
...  

Background. Elucidation of a pathogen’s antimicrobial susceptibility requires subculture after the organism is first isolated. This takes several days, requiring patients to be treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics. This approach contributes to the development of bacterial resistance.Methods. Microtiter wells were coated with a polyclonal antibody targeting the pathogen of interest. Bacterial suspensions were added in the presence/absence of selected antibiotics. After washing, captured bacteria were detected.Findings. Group B streptococcus (GBS),Enterococcus faecalis, andNeisseria gonorrhoeaewere each detected at 105 bacteria/mL following a 20-minute incubation period. Susceptibility to select antibiotics was discernable following a 6-hour incubation period (GBS andEnterococcus). Sensitivity was increased to 10−2 bacteria/mL for GBS, 10−1 bacteria/mL forE. faecalis, and 101 bacteria/mL forN. gonorrhoeaefollowing 18–24-hour culture.Conclusion. This novel assay allows for the highly sensitive and specific identification of a pathogen and simultaneous determination of its antimicrobial susceptibility in a reduced time.


The Analyst ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Sun ◽  
Weili Hong ◽  
Pu Wang ◽  
Guang-Hui Zheng ◽  
Xixiong Kang ◽  
...  

There is an urgent need to develop a rapid procedure that can rapidly identify and obtain antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results directly from positive blood cultures. Here, we report a...


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document