scholarly journals An Audit of Repeat Testing at an Academic Medical Center

2018 ◽  
Vol 150 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle D Hueth ◽  
Brian R Jackson ◽  
Robert L Schmidt
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S293-S294
Author(s):  
Areej Bukhari ◽  
Jessica Seidelman ◽  
Becky A Smith ◽  
Sarah S Lewis ◽  
Michael J Smith ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Children infected with SARS-CoV-2 often have mild or no symptoms, making symptom screening an ineffective tool for determining isolation precautions. As an infection control measure, universal pre-procedural and admission SARS-CoV-2 testing for pediatric patients was implemented in April and August 2020, respectively. Limited data exist on the utility screening programs in the pediatric population. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of pediatric patients (birth to 18 years) admitted to a tertiary care academic medical center from April 2020 to May 2021 that had one or more SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care or polymerase chain reaction tests performed. We describe demographic data, positivity rates and repeat testing trends observed in our cohort. Results A total of 2,579 SARS-CoV-2 tests were performed among 1,027 pediatric inpatients. Of these, 51 tests (2%) from 45 patients (4.3%) resulted positive. Community infection rates ranged from 4.5-60 cases/100,000 persons/day during the study period. Hispanic patients comprised 16% of the total children tested, but were disproportionately overrepresented (40%) among those testing positive (Figure1). Of 654 children with repeated tests, 7 (0.1%) converted to positive from a prior negative result. Median days between repeat tests was 12 (IQR 6-45), not necessarily performed during the same hospital stay. Five of these 7 patients had tests repeated < 3 days from a negative result, of which only 2 had no history of recent infection by testing performed at an outside facility. Pre-procedural tests accounted for 35% of repeat testing, of which 0.9% were positive. Repeated tests were most frequently ordered for patients in hematology/oncology (35%) and solid organ transplant/surgical (33%) wards, each with < 3% positive conversion rate. Notably, no hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the study period. Pediatric SARS-CoV-2 Testing Distributed by Race/Ethnicity Conclusion The positivity rate of universal pre-procedural and admission SARS-CoV-2 testing in pediatric patients was low in our inpatient cohort. Tests repeated < 3 days from a negative result were especially low yield, suggesting limited utility of this practice. Diagnostic testing stewardship in certain populations may be useful, especially as community infection rates decline. Disclosures Michael J. Smith, MD, M.S.C.E, Merck (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support) Rebekah W. Moehring, MD, MPH, UpToDate, Inc. (Other Financial or Material Support, Author Royalties)


2002 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 95-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
JoAnn Manson ◽  
Beverly Rockhill ◽  
Margery Resnick ◽  
Eleanor Shore ◽  
Carol Nadelson ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 144 (5) ◽  
pp. S-1109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha J. Quade ◽  
Joshua Mourot ◽  
Anita Afzali ◽  
Mika N. Sinanan ◽  
Scott D. Lee ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 07 (02) ◽  
pp. 115-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiffany Liu ◽  
Chia Wu ◽  
David Steinberg ◽  
David Bozentka ◽  
L. Levin ◽  
...  

Background Obtaining wrist radiographs prior to surgeon evaluation may be wasteful for patients ultimately diagnosed with de Quervain tendinopathy (DQT). Questions/Purpose Our primary question was whether radiographs directly influence treatment of patients presenting with DQT. A secondary question was whether radiographs influence the frequency of injection and surgical release between cohorts with and without radiographs evaluated within the same practice. Patients and Methods Patients diagnosed with DQT by fellowship-trained hand surgeons at an urban academic medical center were identified retrospectively. Basic demographics and radiographic findings were tabulated. Clinical records were studied to determine whether radiographic findings corroborated history or physical examination findings, and whether management was directly influenced by radiographic findings. Frequencies of treatment with injection and surgery were separately tabulated and compared between cohorts with and without radiographs. Results We included 181 patients (189 wrists), with no differences in demographics between the 58% (110 wrists) with and 42% (79 wrists) without radiographs. Fifty (45%) of imaged wrists demonstrated one or more abnormalities; however, even for the 13 (12%) with corroborating history and physical examination findings, wrist radiography did not directly influence a change in management for any patient in this series. No difference was observed in rates of injection or surgical release either upon initial presentation, or at most recent documented follow-up, between those with and without radiographs. No differences in frequency, types, or total number of additional simultaneous surgical procedures were observed for those treated surgically. Conclusion Wrist radiography does not influence management of patients presenting DQT. Level of Evidence This is a level III, diagnostic study.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s168-s169
Author(s):  
Rebecca Choudhury ◽  
Ronald Beaulieu ◽  
Thomas Talbot ◽  
George Nelson

Background: As more US hospitals report antibiotic utilization to the CDC, standardized antimicrobial administration ratios (SAARs) derived from patient care unit-based antibiotic utilization data will increasingly be used to guide local antibiotic stewardship interventions. Location-based antibiotic utilization surveillance data are often utilized given the relative ease of ascertainment. However, aggregating antibiotic use data on a unit basis may have variable effects depending on the number of clinical teams providing care. In this study, we examined antibiotic utilization from units at a tertiary-care hospital to illustrate the potential challenges of using unit-based antibiotic utilization to change individual prescribing. Methods: We used inpatient pharmacy antibiotic use administration records at an adult tertiary-care academic medical center over a 6-month period from January 2019 through June 2019 to describe the geographic footprints and AU of medical, surgical, and critical care teams. All teams accounting for at least 1 patient day present on each unit during the study period were included in the analysis, as were all teams prescribing at least 1 antibiotic day of therapy (DOT). Results: The study population consisted of 24 units: 6 ICUs (25%) and 18 non-ICUs (75%). Over the study period, the average numbers of teams caring for patients in ICU and non-ICU wards were 10.2 (range, 3.2–16.9) and 13.7 (range, 10.4–18.9), respectively. Units were divided into 3 categories by the number of teams, accounting for ≥70% of total patient days present (Fig. 1): “homogenous” (≤3), “pauciteam” (4–7 teams), and “heterogeneous” (>7 teams). In total, 12 (50%) units were “pauciteam”; 7 (29%) were “homogeneous”; and 5 (21%) were “heterogeneous.” Units could also be classified as “homogenous,” “pauciteam,” or “heterogeneous” based on team-level antibiotic utilization or DOT for specific antibiotics. Different patterns emerged based on antibiotic restriction status. Classifying units based on vancomycin DOT (unrestricted) exhibited fewer “heterogeneous” units, whereas using meropenem DOT (restricted) revealed no “heterogeneous” units. Furthermore, the average number of units where individual clinical teams prescribed an antibiotic varied widely (range, 1.4–12.3 units per team). Conclusions: Unit-based antibiotic utilization data may encounter limitations in affecting prescriber behavior, particularly on units where a large number of clinical teams contribute to antibiotic utilization. Additionally, some services prescribing antibiotics across many hospital units may be minimally influenced by unit-level data. Team-based antibiotic utilization may allow for a more targeted metric to drive individual team prescribing.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document