Dataset Information

Intensivists' beliefs about rapid multiplex molecular diagnostic testing and its potential role in improving prescribing decisions and antimicrobial stewardship: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Rapid molecular diagnostic tests to investigate the microbial aetiology of pneumonias may improve treatment and antimicrobial stewardship in intensive care units (ICUs). Clinicians' endorsement and uptake of these tests is crucial to maximise engagement; however, adoption may be impeded if users harbour unaddressed concerns or if device usage is incompatible with local practice. Accordingly, we strove to identify ICU clinicians' beliefs about molecular diagnostic tests for pneumonias before implementation at the point-of-care.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 critical care doctors working in four ICUs in the United Kingdom. A clinical vignette depicting a fictitious patient with signs of pneumonia was used to explore clinicians' beliefs about the importance of molecular diagnostics and their concerns. Data were analysed thematically.

Results

Clinicians' beliefs about molecular tests could be grouped into two categories: perceived potential of molecular diagnostics to improve antibiotic prescribing (Molecular Diagnostic Necessity) and concerns about how the test results could be implemented into practice (Molecular Diagnostic Concerns). Molecular Diagnostic Necessity stemmed from beliefs that positive results would facilitate targeted antimicrobial therapy; that negative results would signal the absence of a pathogen, and consequently that having the molecular diagnostic results would bolster clinicians' prescribing confidence. Molecular Diagnostic Concerns included unfamiliarity with the device's capabilities, worry that it would detect non-pathogenic bacteria, uncertainty whether it would fail to detect pathogens, and discomfort with withholding antibiotics until receiving molecular test results.

Conclusions

Clinicians believed rapid molecular diagnostics for pneumonias were potentially important and were open to using them; however, they harboured concerns about the tests' capabilities and integration into clinical practice. Implementation strategies should bolster users' necessity beliefs while reducing their concerns; this can be accomplished by publicising the tests' purpose and benefits, identifying and addressing clinicians' misconceptions, establishing a trial period for first-hand familiarisation, and emphasising that, with a swift (e.g., 60-90 min) test, antibiotics can be started and refined after molecular diagnostic results become available.

SUBMITTER: Pandolfo AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8243627 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness and acceptability of antimicrobial stewardship-focused implementation strategies on inpatient fluoroquinolones.MethodsStewardship champions at 15 hospitals were surveyed regarding the use and acceptability of strategies to improve fluoroquinolone prescribing. Antibiotic days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 days present (DP) for sites with and without prospective audit and feedback (PAF) and/or prior approval were compared.ResultsAmong all of the sites, 60% had PAF or prior approval implemented for fluoroquinolones. Compared to sites using neither strategy (64.2 ± 34.4 DOT/DP), fluoroquinolone prescribing rates were lower for sites that employed PAF and/or prior approval (35.5 ± 9.8; P = .03) and decreased from 2017 to 2018 (P < .001). This decrease occurred without an increase in advanced-generation cephalosporins. Total antibiotic rates were 13% lower for sites with PAF and/or prior approval, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .20). Sites reporting that PAF and/or prior approval were "completely" accepted had lower fluoroquinolone rates than sites where it was "moderately" accepted (34.2 ± 5.7 vs 48.7 ± 4.5; P < .01). Sites reported that clinical pathways and/or local guidelines (93%), prior approval (93%), and order forms (80%) "would" or "may" be effective in improving fluoroquinolone use. Although most sites (73%) indicated that requiring infectious disease consults would or may be effective in improving fluoroquinolones, 87% perceived implementation to be difficult.ConclusionsPAF and prior approval implementation strategies focused on fluoroquinolones were associated with significantly lower fluoroquinolone prescribing rates and nonsignificant decreases in total antibiotic use, suggesting limited evidence for class substitution. The association of acceptability of strategies with lower rates highlights the importance of culture. These results may indicate increased acceptability of implementation strategies and/or sensitivity to FDA warnings.

Project description:Pending antibiotic susceptibility results, vancomycin is often used for bloodstream infections (BSIs) to ensure treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). As rapid discrimination of methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) from MRSA in BSIs could decrease vancomycin use and allow early optimization of beta-lactam therapy, this study evaluated the impact of the use of rapid molecular testing for MSSA and MRSA coupled with an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) intervention. Between January and July 2020, the Cepheid Xpert MRSA/SA blood culture assay was performed on blood cultures with Gram-positive cocci in clusters that were identified as S. aureus using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS). The ASP team member then consulted with the treating physician. The time to optimal therapy (TTOT) and clinical outcomes, including length of hospital stay (LOS), were compared between the intervention (n = 29) and historical (n = 27) cohorts. TTOT was defined as the time from the first blood culture draw to the use of appropriately dosed antistaphylococcal beta-lactam monotherapy without vancomycin. Molecular testing significantly reduced the median time to MSSA and MRSA discrimination to 7.8 h, compared to 24.3 h with culture-based methods (P < 0.001). Compared to the control group, the median TTOT in the ASP intervention group was significantly shorter (P = 0.041) at 38.0 h (versus 50.1 h). Rapid discrimination between MRSA and MSSA using molecular testing, paired with an ASP intervention, significantly reduced the TTOT in patients with MSSA BSIs. IMPORTANCE Our research shows that time to optimal antibiotic treatment for serious bloodstream infections can be improved with rapid molecular sensitivity testing and feedback to prescribers. This can be implemented in laboratories without full microbiology services or training to improve patient outcomes by improving antimicrobial use.

Project description:Bloodstream infections are associated with considerable morbidity and health care costs. Molecular rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) are a promising complement to conventional laboratory methods for the diagnosis of bloodstream infections and may reduce the time to effective therapy among patients with bloodstream infections. The concurrent implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) may reinforce these benefits. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectivenesses of competing strategies for the diagnosis of bloodstream infection alone or combined with an ASP. To this effect, we constructed a decision-analytic model comparing 12 strategies for the diagnosis of bloodstream infection. The main arms compared the use of mRDT and conventional laboratory methods with or without an ASP. The baseline strategy used as the standard was the use of conventional laboratory methods without an ASP, and our decision-analytic model assessed the cost-effectivenesses of 5 principal strategies: mRDT (with and without an ASP), mRDT with an ASP, mRDT without an ASP, conventional laboratory methods with an ASP, and conventional laboratory methods without an ASP. Furthermore, based on the availability of data in the literature, we assessed the cost-effectivenesses of 7 mRDT subcategories, as follows: PCR with an ASP, matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) analysis with an ASP, peptide nucleic acid fluorescent in situ hybridization (PNA-FISH) with an ASP, a blood culture nanotechnology microarray system for Gram-negative bacteria (BC-GP) with an ASP, a blood culture nanotechnology microarray system for Gram-positive bacteria (BC-GN) with an ASP, PCR without an ASP, and PNA-FISH without an ASP. Our patient population consisted of adult inpatients in U.S. hospitals with suspected bloodstream infection. The time horizon of the model was the projected life expectancy of the patients. In a base-case analysis, cost-effectiveness was determined by calculating the numbers of bloodstream infection deaths averted, the numbers of quality-adjusted life years gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). In a probabilistic analysis, uncertainty was addressed by plotting cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves for various willingness-to-pay thresholds. In the base-case analysis, MALDI-TOF analysis with an ASP was the most cost-effective strategy, resulting in savings of $29,205 per quality-adjusted life year and preventing 1 death per 14 patients with suspected bloodstream infection tested compared to conventional laboratory methods without an ASP (ICER, -$29,205/quality-adjusted life year). BC-GN with an ASP (ICER, -$23,587/quality-adjusted life year), PCR with an ASP (ICER, -$19,833/quality-adjusted life year), and PCR without an ASP (ICER, -$21,039/quality-adjusted life year) were other cost-effective options. In the probabilistic analysis, mRDT was dominant and cost-effective in 85.1% of simulations. Importantly, mRDT with an ASP had an 80.0% chance of being cost-effective, while mRDT without an ASP had only a 41.1% chance. In conclusion, our findings suggest that mRDTs are cost-effective for the diagnosis of patients with suspected bloodstream infection and can reduce health care expenditures. Notably, the combination of mRDT and an ASP can result in substantial health care savings.