Diagnostic Errors that Lead to Inappropriate Antimicrobial Use

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (8) ◽  
pp. 949-956 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory A. Filice ◽  
Dimitri M. Drekonja ◽  
Joseph R. Thurn ◽  
Galen M. Hamann ◽  
Bobbie T. Masoud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Antimicrobial Therapy ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Correct Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
Veterans Affairs ◽  
Antimicrobial Use ◽  
Reason For Admission ◽  
Index Condition

OBJECTIVEWe found previously that inappropriate inpatient antimicrobial use was often attributable to erroneous diagnoses. Here, we detail diagnostic errors and their relationship to inappropriate antimicrobial courses.DESIGNRetrospective cohort studySETTINGVeterans Affairs hospitalPATIENTSA cohort of 500 randomly selected inpatients with an antimicrobial courseMETHODSBlinded reviewers judged the accuracy of the initial provider diagnosis for the condition that led to an antimicrobial course and whether the course was appropriate.RESULTSThe diagnoses were correct in 291 cases (58%), incorrect in 156 cases (31%), and of indeterminate accuracy in 22 cases (4%). In the remaining 31 cases (6%), the diagnosis was a sign or symptom rather than a syndrome or disease. The odds ratio of a correct diagnosis was 4.3 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2–8.5) if the index condition was related to the reason for admission. When the diagnosis was correct, 181 of 292 courses (62%) were appropriate, compared with only 10 of 208 (5%) when the diagnosis was incorrect or indeterminate or when providers were treating a sign or symptom rather than a syndrome or disease (P<.001). Among the 309 cases in which antimicrobial courses were not appropriate, reasons varied by diagnostic accuracy; in 81 of 111 cases (73%) with a correct diagnosis, incorrect antimicrobial(s) were selected; in 166 of 198 other cases (84%), antimicrobial therapy was not indicated.CONCLUSIONSDiagnostic accuracy is important for optimal inpatient antimicrobial use. Antimicrobial stewardship strategies should help providers avoid diagnostic errors and know when antimicrobial therapy can be withheld safely.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36(8):949–956

scholarly journals The relationship between time to diagnose and diagnostic accuracy among internal medicine residents: a randomized experiment

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Staal ◽  
J. Alsma ◽  
S. Mamede ◽  
A. P. J. Olson ◽  
G. Prins-van Gilst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Correct Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
Slowing Down ◽  
Availability Bias ◽  
Internal Medicine Residents ◽  
Within Subjects ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Background Diagnostic errors have been attributed to cognitive biases (reasoning shortcuts), which are thought to result from fast reasoning. Suggested solutions include slowing down the reasoning process. However, slower reasoning is not necessarily more accurate than faster reasoning. In this study, we studied the relationship between time to diagnose and diagnostic accuracy. Methods We conducted a multi-center within-subjects experiment where we prospectively induced availability bias (using Mamede et al.’s methodology) in 117 internal medicine residents. Subsequently, residents diagnosed cases that resembled those bias cases but had another correct diagnosis. We determined whether residents were correct, incorrect due to bias (i.e. they provided the diagnosis induced by availability bias) or due to other causes (i.e. they provided another incorrect diagnosis) and compared time to diagnose. Results We did not successfully induce bias: no significant effect of availability bias was found. Therefore, we compared correct diagnoses to all incorrect diagnoses. Residents reached correct diagnoses faster than incorrect diagnoses (115 s vs. 129 s, p < .001). Exploratory analyses of cases where bias was induced showed a trend of time to diagnose for bias diagnoses to be more similar to correct diagnoses (115 s vs 115 s, p = .971) than to other errors (115 s vs 136 s, p = .082). Conclusions We showed that correct diagnoses were made faster than incorrect diagnoses, even within subjects. Errors due to availability bias may be different: exploratory analyses suggest a trend that biased cases were diagnosed faster than incorrect diagnoses. The hypothesis that fast reasoning leads to diagnostic errors should be revisited, but more research into the characteristics of cognitive biases is important because they may be different from other causes of diagnostic errors.

scholarly journals Improving medical residents’ self-assessment of their diagnostic accuracy: does feedback help?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josepha Kuhn ◽  
Pieter van den Berg ◽  
Silvia Mamede ◽  
Laura Zwaan ◽  
Patrick Bindels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Correct Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
Feedback Condition ◽  
Medical Residents ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
Absolute Accuracy ◽  
Self Assessment ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Difficult Cases

AbstractWhen physicians do not estimate their diagnostic accuracy correctly, i.e. show inaccurate diagnostic calibration, diagnostic errors or overtesting can occur. A previous study showed that physicians’ diagnostic calibration for easy cases improved, after they received feedback on their previous diagnoses. We investigated whether diagnostic calibration would also improve from this feedback when cases were more difficult. Sixty-nine general-practice residents were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. In the feedback condition, they diagnosed a case, rated their confidence in their diagnosis, their invested mental effort, and case complexity, and then were shown the correct diagnosis (feedback). This was repeated for 12 cases. Participants in the control condition did the same without receiving feedback. We analysed calibration in terms of (1) absolute accuracy (absolute difference between diagnostic accuracy and confidence), and (2) bias (confidence minus diagnostic calibration). There was no difference between the conditions in the measurements of calibration (absolute accuracy, p = .204; bias, p = .176). Post-hoc analyses showed that on correctly diagnosed cases (on which participants are either accurate or underconfident), calibration in the feedback condition was less accurate than in the control condition, p = .013. This study shows that feedback on diagnostic performance did not improve physicians’ calibration for more difficult cases. One explanation could be that participants were confronted with their mistakes and thereafter lowered their confidence ratings even if cases were diagnosed correctly. This shows how difficult it is to improve diagnostic calibration, which is important to prevent diagnostic errors or maltreatment.

scholarly journals Prevalence and characterisation of diagnostic error among 7-day all-cause hospital medicine readmissions: a retrospective cohort study

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (12) ◽  
pp. 971-979 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie E Raffel ◽  
Molly A Kantor ◽  
Peter Barish ◽  
Armond Esmaili ◽  
Hana Lim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Correct Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
Hospital Medicine ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Diagnostic Reasoning ◽  
Diagnostic Process ◽  
Patient Morbidity

BackgroundThe prevalence and aetiology of diagnostic error among hospitalised adults is unknown, though likely contributes to patient morbidity and mortality. We aim to identify and characterise the prevalence and types of diagnostic error among patients readmitted within 7 days of hospital discharge.MethodsRetrospective cohort study at a single urban academic hospital examining adult patients discharged from the medical service and readmitted to the same hospital within 7 days between January and December 2018. The primary outcome was diagnostic error presence, identified through two-physician adjudication using validated tools. Secondary outcomes included severity of error impact and characterisation of diagnostic process failures contributing to error.ResultsThere were 391 cases of unplanned 7-day readmission (5.2% of 7507 discharges), of which 376 (96.2%) were reviewed. Twenty-one (5.6%) admissions were found to contain at least one diagnostic error during the index admission. The most common problem areas in the diagnostic process included failure to order needed test(s) (n=11, 52.4%), erroneous clinician interpretation of test(s) (n=10, 47.6%) and failure to consider the correct diagnosis (n=8, 38.1%). Nineteen (90.5%) of the diagnostic errors resulted in moderate clinical impact, primarily due to short-term morbidity or contribution to the readmission.ConclusionThe prevalence of diagnostic error among 7-day medical readmissions was 5.6%. The most common drivers of diagnostic error were related to clinician diagnostic reasoning. Efforts to reduce diagnostic error should include strategies to augment diagnostic reasoning and improve clinician decision-making around diagnostic studies.

Can conversation analytic findings help with differential diagnosis in routine seizure clinic interactions?

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie Ekberg ◽  
Markus Reuber
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Correct Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
Epileptic Seizures ◽  
Routine Clinical Setting ◽  
Choice Of Treatment ◽  
Transient Loss ◽  
Factual Content ◽  
Patient’S History ◽  
Linguistic Methods

There are many areas in medicine in which the diagnosis poses significant difficulties and depends essentially on the clinician’s ability to take and interpret the patient’s history. The differential diagnosis of transient loss of consciousness (TLOC) is one such example, in particular the distinction between epilepsy and ‘psychogenic’ non-epileptic seizures (NES) is often difficult. A correct diagnosis is crucial because it determines the choice of treatment. Diagnosis is typically reliant on patients’ (and witnesses’) descriptions; however, conventional methods of history-taking focusing on the factual content of these descriptions are associated with relatively high rates of diagnostic errors. The use of linguistic methods (particularly conversation analysis) in research settings has demonstrated that these approaches can provide hints likely to be useful in the differentiation of epileptic and non-epileptic seizures. This paper explores to what extent (and under which conditions) the findings of these previous studies could be transposed from a research into a routine clinical setting.

An Analysis of Dental Implants Survival and Success

2018 ◽  
Vol 69 (9) ◽  
pp. 2465-2466
Author(s):  
Iustin Olariu ◽  
Roxana Radu ◽  
Teodora Olariu ◽  
Andrada Christine Serafim ◽  
Ramona Amina Popovici ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Medical History ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Health Related

Osseointegration of a dental implant may encounter a variety of problems caused by various factors, as prior health-related problems, patients� habits and the technique of the implant inserting. Retrospective cohort study of 70 patients who received implants between January 2011- April 2016 in one dental unit, with Kaplan-Meier method to calculate the probability of implants�s survival at 60 months. The analysis included demographic data, age, gender, medical history, behavior risk factors, type and location of the implant. For this cohort the implants�survival for the first 6 months was 92.86% compared to the number of patients and 97.56% compared to the number of total implants performed, with a cumulative failure rate of 2.43% after 60 months. Failures were focused exclusively on posterior mandible implants, on the percentage of 6.17%, odds ratio (OR) for these failures being 16.76 (P = 0.05) compared with other localisations of implants, exclusively in men with median age of 42 years.

scholarly journals Can a Difference in Gestational Age According to Biparietal Diameter and Abdominal Circumference Predict Intrapartum Placental Abruption?

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 2413
Author(s):  
Jee-Youn Hong ◽  
Jin-Ha Kim ◽  
Seo-yeon Kim ◽  
Ji-Hee Sung ◽  
Suk-Joo Choi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gestational Age ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Maternal Age ◽  
Placental Abruption ◽  
Independent Predictor ◽  
Abdominal Circumference ◽  
Biparietal Diameter ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Independent Risk Factors

This study aimed to investigate whether a difference in gestational age according to biparietal diameter (BPD) and abdominal circumference (AC) could be a clinically useful predictor of placental abruption during the intrapartum period. This retrospective cohort study was based on singletons who were delivered after 32 + 0 weeks between July 2015 and July 2020. We only included cases with at least two antepartum sonographies available within 4 weeks of delivery (n = 2790). We divided the study population into two groups according to the presence or absence of placental abruption and compared the clinical variables. The incidence of placental abruption was 2.0% (56/2790) and was associated with an older maternal age, a higher rate of preeclampsia, and being small for the gestational age. A difference of >2 weeks in gestational age according to BPD and AC occurred at a higher rate in the placental abruption group compared to the no abruption group (>2 weeks, 21.4% (12/56) vs. 7.5% (205/2734), p < 0.001; >3 weeks, 12.5% (7/56) vs. 2.0% (56/2734), p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis revealed that the differences of >2 weeks and >3 weeks were both independent risk factors for placental abruption (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval), 2.289 (1.140–4.600) and 3.918 (1.517–9.771), respectively) after adjusting for maternal age, preeclampsia, and small for gestational age births. We identified that a difference in gestational age of >2 weeks between BPD and AC could be an independent predictor of placental abruption.

scholarly journals AB1346-HPR REAL-WORLD EFFECTIVENESS AND PERCEIVED USEFULNESS OF SYMPTOM CHECKERS IN RHEUMATOLOGY: INTERIM REPORT FROM THE PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTER BETTER STUDY

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1961.1-1961
Author(s):  
J. Knitza ◽  
J. Mohn ◽  
C. Bergmann ◽  
E. Kampylafka ◽  
M. Hagen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Real World ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Correct Diagnosis ◽  
Perceived Usefulness ◽  
Symptom Duration ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Link Type ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Research Grant

Background:Symptom checkers (SC) promise to reduce diagnostic delay, misdiagnosis and effectively guide patients through healthcare systems. They are increasingly used, however little evidence exists about their real-life effectiveness.Objectives:The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, usage time, usability and perceived usefulness of two promising SC, ADA (www.ada.com) and Rheport (www.rheport.de). Furthermore, symptom duration and previous symptom checking was recorded.Methods:Cross-sectional interim clinical data from the first of three recruiting centers from the prospective, real-world, multicenter bETTeR-study (DKRS DRKS00017642) was used. Patients newly presenting to a secondary rheumatology outpatient clinic between September and December 2019 completed the ADA and Rheport SC. The time and answers were recorded and compared to the patient’s actual diagnosis. ADA provides up to 5 disease suggestions, Rheport calculates a risk score for rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) (≥1=RMD). For both SC the sensitivity, specificity was calculated regarding RMDs. Furthermore, patients completed a survey evaluating the SC usability using the system usability scale (SUS), perceived usefulness, previous symptom checking and symptom duration.Results:Of the 129 consecutive patients approached, 97 agreed to participate. 38% (37/97) of the presenting patients presented with an RMD (Figure 1). Mean symptom duration was 146 weeks and a mean number of 10 physician contacts occurred previously, to evaluate current symptoms. 56% (54/96) had previously checked their symptoms on the internet using search engines, spending a mean of 6 hours. Rheport showed a sensitivity of 49% (18/37) and specificity of 58% (35/60) concerning RMDs. ADA’s top 1 and top 5 disease suggestions concerning RMD showed a sensitivity of 43% (16/37) and 54% (20/37) and a specificity of 58% (35/60) and 52% (31/60), respectively. ADA listed the correct diagnosis of the patients with RMDs first or within the first 5 disease suggestions in 19% (7/37) and 30% (11/37), respectively. The average perceived usefulness for checking symptoms using ADA, internet search engines and Rheport was 3.0, 3.5 and 3.1 on a visual analog scale from 1-5 (5=very useful). 61% (59/96) and 64% (61/96) would recommend using ADA and Rheport, respectively. The mean SUS score of ADA and Rheport was 72/100 and 73/100. The mean usage time for ADA and Rheport was 8 and 9 minutes, respectively.Conclusion:This is the first prospective, real-world, multicenter study evaluating the diagnostic accuracy and other features of two currently used SC in rheumatology. These interim results suggest that diagnostic accuracy is limited, however SC are well accepted among patients and in some cases, correct diagnosis can be provided out of the pocket within few minutes, saving valuable time.Figure:Acknowledgments:This study was supported by an unrestricted research grant from Novartis.Disclosure of Interests:Johannes Knitza Grant/research support from: Research Grant: Novartis, Jacob Mohn: None declared, Christina Bergmann: None declared, Eleni Kampylafka Speakers bureau: Novartis, BMS, Janssen, Melanie Hagen: None declared, Daniela Bohr: None declared, Elizabeth Araujo Speakers bureau: Novartis, Lilly, Abbott, Matthias Englbrecht Grant/research support from: Roche Pharma, Chugai Pharma Europe, Consultant of: AbbVie, Roche Pharma, RheumaDatenRhePort GbR, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Chugai Pharma Europe, Lilly, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche Pharma, UCB, David Simon Grant/research support from: Else Kröner-Memorial Scholarship, Novartis, Consultant of: Novartis, Lilly, Arnd Kleyer Consultant of: Lilly, Gilead, Novartis,Abbvie, Speakers bureau: Novartis, Lilly, Timo Meinderink: None declared, Wolfgang Vorbrüggen: None declared, Cay-Benedict von der Decken: None declared, Stefan Kleinert Shareholder of: Morphosys, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Consultant of: Novartis, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Novartis, Celgene, Roche, Chugai, Janssen, Andreas Ramming Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Novartis, Consultant of: Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Gilead, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Janssen, Jörg Distler Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Consultant of: Boehringer Ingelheim, Paid instructor for: Boehringer Ingelheim, Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Peter Bartz-Bazzanella: None declared, Georg Schett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Roche and UCB, Axel Hueber Grant/research support from: Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Speakers bureau: GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Martin Welcker Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Novartis, UCB, Hexal, BMS, Lilly, Roche, Celgene, Sanofi, Consultant of: Abbvie, Actelion, Aescu, Amgen, Celgene, Hexal, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Aescu, Amgen, Biogen, Berlin Chemie, Celgene, GSK, Hexal, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB

scholarly journals The neurophysiological lesson from the Italian CIDP database

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Spina ◽  
◽  
Pietro Emiliano Doneddu ◽  
Giuseppe Liberatore ◽  
Dario Cocito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Motor Nerve ◽  
Lower Number ◽  
Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyradiculoneuropathy ◽  
Curve Analysis ◽  
Roc Curve Analysis ◽  
Electrophysiological Data ◽  
Electrophysiological Examination ◽  
Temporal Dispersion

Abstract Introduction Electrophysiological diagnosis of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) may be challenging. Thus, with the aim ofproviding some practical advice in electrophysiological approach to a patient with suspected CIDP, we analyzed electrophysiological data from 499 patients enrolled inthe Italian CIDP Database. Methods We calculated the rate of each demyelinating feature, the rate of demyelinating features per nerve, the diagnostic rate for upper andlower limb nerves, and, using a ROC curve analysis, the diagnostic accuracy of each couple of nerves and each demyelinating feature, for every CIDP subtype.Moreover, we compared the electrophysiological data of definite and probable CIDP patients with those of possible and not-fulfilling CIDP patients, and by a logisticregression analysis, we estimated the odds ratio (OR) to make an electrophysiological diagnosis of definite or probable CIDP. Results The ulnar nerve had the highestrate of demyelinating features and, when tested bilaterally, had the highest diagnostic accuracy except for DADS in which peroneal nerves were the most informative.In possible and not-fulfilling CIDP patients, a lower number of nerves and proximal temporal dispersion (TD) measurements had been performed compared to definiteand probable CIDP patients. Importantly, OR for each tested motor nerve and each TD measurement was 1.59 and 1.33, respectively. Conclusion Our findingsdemonstrated that the diagnosis of CIDP may be missed due to inadequate or incomplete electrophysiological examination or interpretation. At the same time, thesedata taken together could be useful to draw a thoughtful electrophysiological approach to patients suspected of CIDP.

scholarly journals Incidence and Outcomes of Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Admitted to Hospital With COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 205435812110277
Author(s):  
Tyler Pitre ◽  
Angela (Hong Tian) Dong ◽  
Aaron Jones ◽  
Jessica Kapralik ◽  
Sonya Cui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Acute Kidney Injury ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Disease Severity ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Icu Admission

Background: The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with COVID-19 and its association with mortality and disease severity is understudied in the Canadian population. Objective: To determine the incidence of AKI in a cohort of patients with COVID-19 admitted to medicine and intensive care unit (ICU) wards, its association with in-hospital mortality, and disease severity. Our aim was to stratify these outcomes by out-of-hospital AKI and in-hospital AKI. Design: Retrospective cohort study from a registry of patients with COVID-19. Setting: Three community and 3 academic hospitals. Patients: A total of 815 patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 between March 4, 2020, and April 23, 2021. Measurements: Stage of AKI, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality. Methods: We classified AKI by comparing highest to lowest recorded serum creatinine in hospital and staged AKI based on the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) system. We calculated the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio for the stage of AKI and the outcomes of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality. Results: Of the 815 patients registered, 439 (53.9%) developed AKI, 253 (57.6%) presented with AKI, and 186 (42.4%) developed AKI in-hospital. The odds of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and death increased as the AKI stage worsened. Stage 3 AKI that occurred during hospitalization increased the odds of death (odds ratio [OR] = 7.87 [4.35, 14.23]). Stage 3 AKI that occurred prior to hospitalization carried an increased odds of death (OR = 5.28 [2.60, 10.73]). Limitations: Observational study with small sample size limits precision of estimates. Lack of nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 and hospitalized patients without COVID-19 as controls limits causal inferences. Conclusions: Acute kidney injury, whether it occurs prior to or after hospitalization, is associated with a high risk of poor outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Routine assessment of kidney function in patients with COVID-19 may improve risk stratification. Trial registration: The study was not registered on a publicly accessible registry because it did not involve any health care intervention on human participants.

Antimicrobial Use Control Measures to Prevent and Control Antimicrobial Resistance in US Hospitals

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (10) ◽  
pp. 1088-1095 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan J. Zillich ◽  
Jason M. Sutherland ◽  
Stephen J. Wilson ◽  
Daniel J. Diekema ◽  
Erika J. Ernst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Antimicrobial Resistance ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Veterans Affairs ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Antimicrobial Use ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Recommended Practices

Objective.Clinical practice guidelines and recommended practices to control use of antibiotics have been published, but the effect of these practices on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) rates in hospitals is unknown. The objective of this study was to examine relationships between antimicrobial use control strategies and AMR rates in a national sample of US hospitals.Design.Cross-sectional, stratified study of a nationally representative sample of US hospitals.Methods.A survey instrument was sent to the person responsible for infection control at a sample of 670 US hospitals. The outcome was current prevalences of 4 epidemiologically important, drug-resistant pathogens, considered concurrently: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococci, ceftazidime-resistant Klebsiella species, and quinolone (ciprofloxacin)-resistant Escherichia coli Five independent variables regarding hospital practices were selected from the survey: the extent to which hospitals (1) implement practices recommended in clinical practice guidelines and ensure best practices for antimicrobial use, (2) disseminate information on clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial use, (3) use antimicrobial-related information technology, (4) use decision support tools, and (5) communicate to prescribers about antimicrobial use. Control variables included the hospitals' number of beds, teaching status, Veterans Affairs status, geographic region, and number of long-term care beds; and the presence of an intensive care unit, a burn unit, or transplant services. A generalized estimating equation modeled all resistance rates simultaneously to identify overall predictors of AMR levels at the facility.Results.Completed survey instruments were returned by 448 hospitals (67%). Four antimicrobial control measures were associated with higher prevalence of AMR. Implementation of recommended practices for antimicrobial use (P< .01) and optimization of the duration of empirical antibiotic prophylaxis (P<.01) were associated with a lower prevalence of AMR. Use of restrictive formularies (P = .05) and dissemination of clinical practice guideline information (P<.01) were associated with higher prevalence of AMR. Number of beds and Veterans Affairs status were also associated with higher AMR rates overall.Conclusions.Implementation of guideline-recommended practices to control antimicrobial use and optimize the duration of empirical therapy appears to help control AMR rates in US hospitals. A longitudinal study would confirm the results of this cross-sectional study. These results highlight the need for systems interventions and reengineering to ensure more-consistent application of guideline-recommended measures for antimicrobial use.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document