Cargando…
142. When You Can't Call It Colonization, Consider Cutting It Out: Mitigating Panels of Unusual Size to Improve C. difficile Diagnostic Specificity
BACKGROUND: The BioFire® FilmArray® Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel (GIPP) tests for 22 potential pathogens in stool, including Clostridioides difficile. C. difficile nucleic acid is detected via nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) targeting toxin A (TcdA) and/or toxin B (TcdB) genes. While PCR-b...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10678114/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.215 |
_version_ | 1785150288953344000 |
---|---|
author | Ilges, Dan Grant, Leah Huang, Angela Siebeneck, Eric Castro, John Seville, Maria T Grys, Thomas Speiser, Lisa Graf, Erin |
author_facet | Ilges, Dan Grant, Leah Huang, Angela Siebeneck, Eric Castro, John Seville, Maria T Grys, Thomas Speiser, Lisa Graf, Erin |
author_sort | Ilges, Dan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The BioFire® FilmArray® Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel (GIPP) tests for 22 potential pathogens in stool, including Clostridioides difficile. C. difficile nucleic acid is detected via nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) targeting toxin A (TcdA) and/or toxin B (TcdB) genes. While PCR-based diagnostic methods are highly sensitive, they lack specificity to differentiate colonization from C. difficile infection (CDI). Mayo Clinic Arizona (MCA) uses enzyme immunoassay (EIA) testing for toxin A/B and glutamate dehydrogenase antigens with reflex to PCR for discordance as the primary algorithm for diagnosing CDI; however, GIPP PCR testing circumvents this algorithm. When used in patients with low pretest probability for CDI, clinical false positives can lead to inappropriate diagnosis and treatment of colonization. GIPA Results in the Electronic Medical Record Pre-Intervention [Figure: see text] MCA Standalone C. difficile Testing Algorithm [Figure: see text] Abbreviations – EIA, enzyme immunoassay; GDH, glutamate dehydrogenase; NAAT, nucleic acid amplification test METHODS: We convened a multidisciplinary quality improvement team to reduce the detection and treatment of C. difficile colonization secondary to GIPP test results. Surveys were sent to providers and nurses as part of a formal gap analysis and included questions around ordering patterns, knowledge of appropriate tests, and associated costs. Baseline data was compiled from GIPP orders in MCA from 1/1/2022-9/30/2022. RESULTS: There were 1978 GIPP orders for 1694 patients during the study period (∼7 GIPPs/day). Most orders (65%) originated from ambulatory settings. The most common positive target was C. difficile (355/723, 49%), which resulted in treatment for suspected CDI in 94.9% (337/355) of cases. Of the 49 providers who responded to the survey, 86% ordered the GIPP at least monthly. Testing for C. difficile was the 2nd most common reason for ordering the GIPP. Most providers underestimated the cost of the panel and were unfamiliar with the differences between the GIPP and EIA testing algorithm. Nurses sought clarification on stool samples suitable for GIPP testing. Following education and modifications to ordering in the electronic health record, the decision was made to remove the C. difficile target from the GIPP. Provider Understanding of C. difficile Testing Methods [Figure: see text] GIPA Results in the Electronic Medical Record Post-Intervention [Figure: see text] CONCLUSION: Multiplex PCR panels are comprehensive but require careful implementation to facilitate diagnostic stewardship. Facilities with robust standalone C. difficile testing algorithms may consider removing the C. difficile target from the GIPP. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10678114 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106781142023-11-27 142. When You Can't Call It Colonization, Consider Cutting It Out: Mitigating Panels of Unusual Size to Improve C. difficile Diagnostic Specificity Ilges, Dan Grant, Leah Huang, Angela Siebeneck, Eric Castro, John Seville, Maria T Grys, Thomas Speiser, Lisa Graf, Erin Open Forum Infect Dis Abstract BACKGROUND: The BioFire® FilmArray® Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel (GIPP) tests for 22 potential pathogens in stool, including Clostridioides difficile. C. difficile nucleic acid is detected via nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) targeting toxin A (TcdA) and/or toxin B (TcdB) genes. While PCR-based diagnostic methods are highly sensitive, they lack specificity to differentiate colonization from C. difficile infection (CDI). Mayo Clinic Arizona (MCA) uses enzyme immunoassay (EIA) testing for toxin A/B and glutamate dehydrogenase antigens with reflex to PCR for discordance as the primary algorithm for diagnosing CDI; however, GIPP PCR testing circumvents this algorithm. When used in patients with low pretest probability for CDI, clinical false positives can lead to inappropriate diagnosis and treatment of colonization. GIPA Results in the Electronic Medical Record Pre-Intervention [Figure: see text] MCA Standalone C. difficile Testing Algorithm [Figure: see text] Abbreviations – EIA, enzyme immunoassay; GDH, glutamate dehydrogenase; NAAT, nucleic acid amplification test METHODS: We convened a multidisciplinary quality improvement team to reduce the detection and treatment of C. difficile colonization secondary to GIPP test results. Surveys were sent to providers and nurses as part of a formal gap analysis and included questions around ordering patterns, knowledge of appropriate tests, and associated costs. Baseline data was compiled from GIPP orders in MCA from 1/1/2022-9/30/2022. RESULTS: There were 1978 GIPP orders for 1694 patients during the study period (∼7 GIPPs/day). Most orders (65%) originated from ambulatory settings. The most common positive target was C. difficile (355/723, 49%), which resulted in treatment for suspected CDI in 94.9% (337/355) of cases. Of the 49 providers who responded to the survey, 86% ordered the GIPP at least monthly. Testing for C. difficile was the 2nd most common reason for ordering the GIPP. Most providers underestimated the cost of the panel and were unfamiliar with the differences between the GIPP and EIA testing algorithm. Nurses sought clarification on stool samples suitable for GIPP testing. Following education and modifications to ordering in the electronic health record, the decision was made to remove the C. difficile target from the GIPP. Provider Understanding of C. difficile Testing Methods [Figure: see text] GIPA Results in the Electronic Medical Record Post-Intervention [Figure: see text] CONCLUSION: Multiplex PCR panels are comprehensive but require careful implementation to facilitate diagnostic stewardship. Facilities with robust standalone C. difficile testing algorithms may consider removing the C. difficile target from the GIPP. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures Oxford University Press 2023-11-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10678114/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.215 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Abstract Ilges, Dan Grant, Leah Huang, Angela Siebeneck, Eric Castro, John Seville, Maria T Grys, Thomas Speiser, Lisa Graf, Erin 142. When You Can't Call It Colonization, Consider Cutting It Out: Mitigating Panels of Unusual Size to Improve C. difficile Diagnostic Specificity |
title | 142. When You Can't Call It Colonization, Consider Cutting It Out: Mitigating Panels of Unusual Size to Improve C. difficile Diagnostic Specificity |
title_full | 142. When You Can't Call It Colonization, Consider Cutting It Out: Mitigating Panels of Unusual Size to Improve C. difficile Diagnostic Specificity |
title_fullStr | 142. When You Can't Call It Colonization, Consider Cutting It Out: Mitigating Panels of Unusual Size to Improve C. difficile Diagnostic Specificity |
title_full_unstemmed | 142. When You Can't Call It Colonization, Consider Cutting It Out: Mitigating Panels of Unusual Size to Improve C. difficile Diagnostic Specificity |
title_short | 142. When You Can't Call It Colonization, Consider Cutting It Out: Mitigating Panels of Unusual Size to Improve C. difficile Diagnostic Specificity |
title_sort | 142. when you can't call it colonization, consider cutting it out: mitigating panels of unusual size to improve c. difficile diagnostic specificity |
topic | Abstract |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10678114/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.215 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ilgesdan 142whenyoucantcallitcolonizationconsidercuttingitoutmitigatingpanelsofunusualsizetoimprovecdifficilediagnosticspecificity AT grantleah 142whenyoucantcallitcolonizationconsidercuttingitoutmitigatingpanelsofunusualsizetoimprovecdifficilediagnosticspecificity AT huangangela 142whenyoucantcallitcolonizationconsidercuttingitoutmitigatingpanelsofunusualsizetoimprovecdifficilediagnosticspecificity AT siebeneckeric 142whenyoucantcallitcolonizationconsidercuttingitoutmitigatingpanelsofunusualsizetoimprovecdifficilediagnosticspecificity AT castrojohn 142whenyoucantcallitcolonizationconsidercuttingitoutmitigatingpanelsofunusualsizetoimprovecdifficilediagnosticspecificity AT sevillemariat 142whenyoucantcallitcolonizationconsidercuttingitoutmitigatingpanelsofunusualsizetoimprovecdifficilediagnosticspecificity AT grysthomas 142whenyoucantcallitcolonizationconsidercuttingitoutmitigatingpanelsofunusualsizetoimprovecdifficilediagnosticspecificity AT speiserlisa 142whenyoucantcallitcolonizationconsidercuttingitoutmitigatingpanelsofunusualsizetoimprovecdifficilediagnosticspecificity AT graferin 142whenyoucantcallitcolonizationconsidercuttingitoutmitigatingpanelsofunusualsizetoimprovecdifficilediagnosticspecificity |