Cargando…

2341. Effectiveness of Interventions Targeting Stewardship of Clostridium difficile Testing

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is the most common healthcare-associated infection. C. difficile PCR assays do not differentiate between colonization (seen in up to 21% of inpatients) and symptomatic disease, highlighting the importance of testing only symptomatic patients. METHODS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sterling, Stephanie, Sarah, Hochman, Kappus, Natalie, Reed, Alexis, Kramer, Preston
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6809662/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2019
_version_ 1783462046064443392
author Sterling, Stephanie
Sarah, Hochman
Kappus, Natalie
Reed, Alexis
Kramer, Preston
author_facet Sterling, Stephanie
Sarah, Hochman
Kappus, Natalie
Reed, Alexis
Kramer, Preston
author_sort Sterling, Stephanie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is the most common healthcare-associated infection. C. difficile PCR assays do not differentiate between colonization (seen in up to 21% of inpatients) and symptomatic disease, highlighting the importance of testing only symptomatic patients. METHODS: Interventions included system-wide implementation of C. difficile testing guidelines, face-to-face education of licensed providers, and Best Practice Alerts (BPAs) embedded in the electronic health record (EHR) C. difficile PCR order. The guidelines recommend testing only when ≥ 3 liquid bowel movements within a 24-hour period, without laxatives, oral contrast or new enteral feeds in the preceding 24 hours, and without recent C. difficile PCR test (negative ≤ 7 days or positive < 30 days). We reviewed 100 consecutive C. difficile PCR orders across two hospitals pre- and post-intervention to assess compliance with guidelines; performed weekly review of all C. difficile PCRs, all BPA responses and all hospital-onset CDI. Cost savings were calculated based on published estimates of CDI attributable costs. RESULTS: Hospital-onset CDI rates fell from 0.75 to 0.48 cases per 1000 patient-days, with an estimated costs savings of $259,555 per quarter and $1.04 million per year. There were no deaths due to CDI and no morbidity due to delayed CDI diagnosis. C. difficile PCR guideline compliance increased from 39% to 53%; orders decreased by 50% post-intervention. Receipt of laxatives and < 3 episodes of diarrhea were the most common reasons for guideline noncompliance. BPAs fired an average of 150 times/month. The most common trigger for BPA was laxative use. Providers canceled PCR orders in 40% of BPA events. CONCLUSION: Interventions incorporating testing guidelines, face-to-face education, and EHR-embedded decision support resulted in fewer C. difficile PCRs orders, increased guideline compliance, lower rates of hospital-onset CDI and cost savings of $1 million per year without an increase in CDI-attributable death or morbidity. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6809662
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68096622019-10-28 2341. Effectiveness of Interventions Targeting Stewardship of Clostridium difficile Testing Sterling, Stephanie Sarah, Hochman Kappus, Natalie Reed, Alexis Kramer, Preston Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is the most common healthcare-associated infection. C. difficile PCR assays do not differentiate between colonization (seen in up to 21% of inpatients) and symptomatic disease, highlighting the importance of testing only symptomatic patients. METHODS: Interventions included system-wide implementation of C. difficile testing guidelines, face-to-face education of licensed providers, and Best Practice Alerts (BPAs) embedded in the electronic health record (EHR) C. difficile PCR order. The guidelines recommend testing only when ≥ 3 liquid bowel movements within a 24-hour period, without laxatives, oral contrast or new enteral feeds in the preceding 24 hours, and without recent C. difficile PCR test (negative ≤ 7 days or positive < 30 days). We reviewed 100 consecutive C. difficile PCR orders across two hospitals pre- and post-intervention to assess compliance with guidelines; performed weekly review of all C. difficile PCRs, all BPA responses and all hospital-onset CDI. Cost savings were calculated based on published estimates of CDI attributable costs. RESULTS: Hospital-onset CDI rates fell from 0.75 to 0.48 cases per 1000 patient-days, with an estimated costs savings of $259,555 per quarter and $1.04 million per year. There were no deaths due to CDI and no morbidity due to delayed CDI diagnosis. C. difficile PCR guideline compliance increased from 39% to 53%; orders decreased by 50% post-intervention. Receipt of laxatives and < 3 episodes of diarrhea were the most common reasons for guideline noncompliance. BPAs fired an average of 150 times/month. The most common trigger for BPA was laxative use. Providers canceled PCR orders in 40% of BPA events. CONCLUSION: Interventions incorporating testing guidelines, face-to-face education, and EHR-embedded decision support resulted in fewer C. difficile PCRs orders, increased guideline compliance, lower rates of hospital-onset CDI and cost savings of $1 million per year without an increase in CDI-attributable death or morbidity. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6809662/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2019 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. 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
Sterling, Stephanie
Sarah, Hochman
Kappus, Natalie
Reed, Alexis
Kramer, Preston
2341. Effectiveness of Interventions Targeting Stewardship of Clostridium difficile Testing
title 2341. Effectiveness of Interventions Targeting Stewardship of Clostridium difficile Testing
title_full 2341. Effectiveness of Interventions Targeting Stewardship of Clostridium difficile Testing
title_fullStr 2341. Effectiveness of Interventions Targeting Stewardship of Clostridium difficile Testing
title_full_unstemmed 2341. Effectiveness of Interventions Targeting Stewardship of Clostridium difficile Testing
title_short 2341. Effectiveness of Interventions Targeting Stewardship of Clostridium difficile Testing
title_sort 2341. effectiveness of interventions targeting stewardship of clostridium difficile testing
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6809662/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2019
work_keys_str_mv AT sterlingstephanie 2341effectivenessofinterventionstargetingstewardshipofclostridiumdifficiletesting
AT sarahhochman 2341effectivenessofinterventionstargetingstewardshipofclostridiumdifficiletesting
AT kappusnatalie 2341effectivenessofinterventionstargetingstewardshipofclostridiumdifficiletesting
AT reedalexis 2341effectivenessofinterventionstargetingstewardshipofclostridiumdifficiletesting
AT kramerpreston 2341effectivenessofinterventionstargetingstewardshipofclostridiumdifficiletesting