Cargando…

2159. Methodological Threats to the Standardized Infection and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratios

BACKGROUND: Standardized ratios, such as the CDC’s Standardized Infection Ratio (SIR) and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratio (SAAR), are used to assess hospital infection control and stewardship programs. While there has been a focus to improve adjustment factors in the prediction model...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lofgren, Eric, Lokhnygina, Yuliya, Moehring, Rebekah W
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6252912/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1815
_version_ 1783373374560403456
author Lofgren, Eric
Lokhnygina, Yuliya
Moehring, Rebekah W
author_facet Lofgren, Eric
Lokhnygina, Yuliya
Moehring, Rebekah W
author_sort Lofgren, Eric
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Standardized ratios, such as the CDC’s Standardized Infection Ratio (SIR) and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratio (SAAR), are used to assess hospital infection control and stewardship programs. While there has been a focus to improve adjustment factors in the prediction models for these ratios, there remain limitations to these methods in assessments of program effects. METHODS: We use a previously published mathematical model of an intensive care unit to simulate transmission of Staphylococcus aureus and the administration of antimicrobials to treat it. This approach allows for the calculation of an MRSA LabID SIR and Anti-MRSA adult ICU SAAR score with perfect adjustment, where the only difference between the simulated ICUs is due to random chance. We then evaluated the interpretations and statistical significance of these ratio measures as gauges of hospital program performance. RESULTS: Over a single year of 200 simulations, the models produced SIR/SAAR scores ranging from 0.47 to 1.73, with a median of 0.99, representing a considerable spread of scores obtained due to chance. The P-values measuring if these measures were different from 1.0 were significant in 86% of those facilities. Extending the simulation past one year exacerbated this tendency to over-identify scores as significant, and also showed that 53.5% of hospitals had improving (26%) or worsening (27.5%) of scores due to regression to the mean. This scenario could be falsely interpreted as the result of interventions put in place in response to their first year scores. CONCLUSION: Standardized ratio methods did not provide clear and actionable information, even with perfect adjustment. Statistically significant fluctuations occurred due to chance which could be mistakenly been attributed to actions taken by the hospital. Several methods, such as the use of percentiles rather than p-values, or presenting simulation-based projections of facility data, may help alleviate these problems. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6252912
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62529122018-11-28 2159. Methodological Threats to the Standardized Infection and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratios Lofgren, Eric Lokhnygina, Yuliya Moehring, Rebekah W Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Standardized ratios, such as the CDC’s Standardized Infection Ratio (SIR) and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratio (SAAR), are used to assess hospital infection control and stewardship programs. While there has been a focus to improve adjustment factors in the prediction models for these ratios, there remain limitations to these methods in assessments of program effects. METHODS: We use a previously published mathematical model of an intensive care unit to simulate transmission of Staphylococcus aureus and the administration of antimicrobials to treat it. This approach allows for the calculation of an MRSA LabID SIR and Anti-MRSA adult ICU SAAR score with perfect adjustment, where the only difference between the simulated ICUs is due to random chance. We then evaluated the interpretations and statistical significance of these ratio measures as gauges of hospital program performance. RESULTS: Over a single year of 200 simulations, the models produced SIR/SAAR scores ranging from 0.47 to 1.73, with a median of 0.99, representing a considerable spread of scores obtained due to chance. The P-values measuring if these measures were different from 1.0 were significant in 86% of those facilities. Extending the simulation past one year exacerbated this tendency to over-identify scores as significant, and also showed that 53.5% of hospitals had improving (26%) or worsening (27.5%) of scores due to regression to the mean. This scenario could be falsely interpreted as the result of interventions put in place in response to their first year scores. CONCLUSION: Standardized ratio methods did not provide clear and actionable information, even with perfect adjustment. Statistically significant fluctuations occurred due to chance which could be mistakenly been attributed to actions taken by the hospital. Several methods, such as the use of percentiles rather than p-values, or presenting simulation-based projections of facility data, may help alleviate these problems. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2018-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6252912/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1815 Text en © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Abstracts
Lofgren, Eric
Lokhnygina, Yuliya
Moehring, Rebekah W
2159. Methodological Threats to the Standardized Infection and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratios
title 2159. Methodological Threats to the Standardized Infection and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratios
title_full 2159. Methodological Threats to the Standardized Infection and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratios
title_fullStr 2159. Methodological Threats to the Standardized Infection and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratios
title_full_unstemmed 2159. Methodological Threats to the Standardized Infection and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratios
title_short 2159. Methodological Threats to the Standardized Infection and Standardized Antimicrobial Administration Ratios
title_sort 2159. methodological threats to the standardized infection and standardized antimicrobial administration ratios
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6252912/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1815
work_keys_str_mv AT lofgreneric 2159methodologicalthreatstothestandardizedinfectionandstandardizedantimicrobialadministrationratios
AT lokhnyginayuliya 2159methodologicalthreatstothestandardizedinfectionandstandardizedantimicrobialadministrationratios
AT moehringrebekahw 2159methodologicalthreatstothestandardizedinfectionandstandardizedantimicrobialadministrationratios