Dataset Information

Improving outcomes and antibiotic stewardship (IOAS) for patients with Gram-positive bloodstream infections through use of rapid testing: a quasi-experimental multicentre study of the Accelerate PhenoTest™ BC Kit.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Data from the Improving Outcomes and Antibiotic Stewardship for Patients with Bloodstream Infections: Accelerate PhenoTest™ BC Kit (AXDX) Registry Study were analysed to determine the impact of rapid organism identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) for Gram-positive bacteraemia.

Patients and methods

This multicentre, quasi-experimental study evaluated clinical and antimicrobial stewardship metrics following the implementation of AXDX. Data from hospitalized patients with bacteraemia were compared between groups, one that underwent testing on AXDX (post-AXDX) and one that underwent traditional identification and AST (pre-AXDX). An analysis of patients with Gram-positive bacteraemia was performed. The primary outcome was time to optimal therapy (TTOT). Secondary outcomes included time to first antibiotic modification (overall and Gram-positive), duration of unnecessary MRSA coverage, incidence of adverse events, length of stay and mortality.

Results

A total of 219 (109 pre-AXDX, 110 post-AXDX) patients with Gram-positive bacteraemia were included. Median TTOT was 36.3 h (IQR, 16.9-56.7) in the pre-AXDX group and 20.4 h (IQR, 7.5-36.7) in the post-AXDX group (P = 0.01). Compared with pre-AXDX, median time to first antibiotic modification (29.1 versus 15.9 h; P = 0.002), time to first Gram-positive antibiotic modification (33.2 versus 17.2 h; P = 0.003) and median duration of unnecessary MRSA coverage (58.4 versus 29.7 h; P = 0.04) were reduced post-AXDX. A trend towards decreased acute kidney injury (24% versus 13%; P = 0.06) was observed in the post-AXDX group. Groups did not differ in other secondary outcomes.

Conclusions

Implementation of AXDX testing for patients with Gram-positive bacteraemia shortened the TTOT and reduced unnecessary antibiotic exposure due to faster antibiotic modifications.

SUBMITTER: MacVane SH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8361360 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClusters of bloodstream infections caused by Burkholderia cepacia and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia are uncommon, but have been previously identified in hemodialysis centers that reprocessed dialyzers for reuse on patients. We investigated an outbreak of bloodstream infections caused by B cepacia and S maltophilia among hemodialysis patients in clinics of a dialysis organization.Study designOutbreak investigation, including matched case-control study.Setting & participantsHemodialysis patients treated in multiple outpatient clinics owned by a dialysis organization.PredictorsMain predictors were dialyzer reuse, dialyzer model, and dialyzer reprocessing practice.OutcomesCase patients had a bloodstream infection caused by B cepacia or S maltophilia; controls were patients without infection dialyzed at the same clinic on the same day as a case; results of environmental cultures and organism typing.Results17 cases (9 B cepacia and 8 S maltophilia bloodstream infections) occurred in 5 clinics owned by the same dialysis organization. Case patients were more likely to have received hemodialysis with a dialyzer that had been used more than 6 times (matched OR, 7.03; 95% CI, 1.38-69.76) and to have been dialyzed with a specific reusable dialyzer (Model R) with sealed ends (OR, 22.87; 95% CI, 4.49-∞). No major lapses during dialyzer reprocessing were identified that could explain the outbreak. B cepacia was isolated from samples collected from a dialyzer header-cleaning machine from a clinic with cases and was indistinguishable from a patient isolate collected from the same clinic, by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. Gram-negative bacteria were isolated from 2 reused Model R dialyzers that had undergone the facility's reprocessing procedure.LimitationsLimited statistical power and overmatching; few patient isolates and dialyzers available for testing.ConclusionsThis outbreak was likely caused by contamination during reprocessing of reused dialyzers. Results of this and previous investigations demonstrate that exposing patients to reused dialyzers increases the risk for bloodstream infections. To reduce infection risk, providers should consider implementing single dialyzer use whenever possible.