Cargando…

181. Impact of Rapid Diagnostic Technology on Patients with Candidemia

BACKGROUND: Candida spp. are the fourth most common cause of bloodstream infections (BSI) in the United States and have an associated mortality rate of 19-40.5%. Mortality rates are further impacted by delay in time to adequate antifungal therapy, historically due to delayed time to identification o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Funderburk, Patrick, Carr, Amy L, Hayes, Jillian E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9752172/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac492.259
_version_ 1784850655577374720
author Funderburk, Patrick
Carr, Amy L
Hayes, Jillian E
author_facet Funderburk, Patrick
Carr, Amy L
Hayes, Jillian E
author_sort Funderburk, Patrick
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Candida spp. are the fourth most common cause of bloodstream infections (BSI) in the United States and have an associated mortality rate of 19-40.5%. Mortality rates are further impacted by delay in time to adequate antifungal therapy, historically due to delayed time to identification on culture. The utilization of rapid diagnostic technology (RDT) has been effective in timely identification of bacterial pathogens causing BSI, but RDT for fungal organisms has demonstrated mixed results. At AdventHealth Central Florida Division South (CFD-S), pharmacists provide 24-hour coverage for real-time notification of all positive blood culture results. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact of the GenMark ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panels (BCID) fungal pathogen (FP) panel paired with 24/7, pharmacist-driven response in patients with candidemia.  METHODS: This multi-site, pre/post, retrospective chart review included adult patients admitted to CFD-S with at least one positive blood culture with Candida spp. from June 2019 through May 2020 (pre-RDT), and August 2020 through July 2021 (post-RDT). Patients receiving systemic antifungal prophylaxis, with known candidiasis at time of index RDT result, or who discharged prior to culture positivity were excluded. The primary outcome was time to effective antifungal therapy in patients with candidemia. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients were included in the study (100 pre-RDT and 100 post-RDT). Overall, patients had a median age of 61 years and 50% were male. Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1; median APACHEII score differed by three points (13.5 vs. 16.5). Time to effective therapy was similar between groups (39.8 vs. 38.5 hours, p=0.217). There was no difference in secondary outcomes (Table 2) other than ICU length of stay (2.5 vs. 6.0 days, p=0.033) and all-cause in-hospital mortality (15% vs. 30%, p=0.011). [Figure: see text] [Figure: see text] CONCLUSION: Pharmacist-driven, real-time response to RDT did not significantly impact time to effective antifungal therapy in patients with candidemia. Higher rate of in-hospital mortality was likely a reflection of increased severity of illness in the post-RDT group. DISCLOSURES: Amy L. Carr, PharmD, BCIDP, Shionogi: Advisory Board.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9752172
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97521722022-12-16 181. Impact of Rapid Diagnostic Technology on Patients with Candidemia Funderburk, Patrick Carr, Amy L Hayes, Jillian E Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Candida spp. are the fourth most common cause of bloodstream infections (BSI) in the United States and have an associated mortality rate of 19-40.5%. Mortality rates are further impacted by delay in time to adequate antifungal therapy, historically due to delayed time to identification on culture. The utilization of rapid diagnostic technology (RDT) has been effective in timely identification of bacterial pathogens causing BSI, but RDT for fungal organisms has demonstrated mixed results. At AdventHealth Central Florida Division South (CFD-S), pharmacists provide 24-hour coverage for real-time notification of all positive blood culture results. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact of the GenMark ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panels (BCID) fungal pathogen (FP) panel paired with 24/7, pharmacist-driven response in patients with candidemia.  METHODS: This multi-site, pre/post, retrospective chart review included adult patients admitted to CFD-S with at least one positive blood culture with Candida spp. from June 2019 through May 2020 (pre-RDT), and August 2020 through July 2021 (post-RDT). Patients receiving systemic antifungal prophylaxis, with known candidiasis at time of index RDT result, or who discharged prior to culture positivity were excluded. The primary outcome was time to effective antifungal therapy in patients with candidemia. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients were included in the study (100 pre-RDT and 100 post-RDT). Overall, patients had a median age of 61 years and 50% were male. Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1; median APACHEII score differed by three points (13.5 vs. 16.5). Time to effective therapy was similar between groups (39.8 vs. 38.5 hours, p=0.217). There was no difference in secondary outcomes (Table 2) other than ICU length of stay (2.5 vs. 6.0 days, p=0.033) and all-cause in-hospital mortality (15% vs. 30%, p=0.011). [Figure: see text] [Figure: see text] CONCLUSION: Pharmacist-driven, real-time response to RDT did not significantly impact time to effective antifungal therapy in patients with candidemia. Higher rate of in-hospital mortality was likely a reflection of increased severity of illness in the post-RDT group. DISCLOSURES: Amy L. Carr, PharmD, BCIDP, Shionogi: Advisory Board. Oxford University Press 2022-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9752172/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac492.259 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. 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 Abstracts
Funderburk, Patrick
Carr, Amy L
Hayes, Jillian E
181. Impact of Rapid Diagnostic Technology on Patients with Candidemia
title 181. Impact of Rapid Diagnostic Technology on Patients with Candidemia
title_full 181. Impact of Rapid Diagnostic Technology on Patients with Candidemia
title_fullStr 181. Impact of Rapid Diagnostic Technology on Patients with Candidemia
title_full_unstemmed 181. Impact of Rapid Diagnostic Technology on Patients with Candidemia
title_short 181. Impact of Rapid Diagnostic Technology on Patients with Candidemia
title_sort 181. impact of rapid diagnostic technology on patients with candidemia
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9752172/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac492.259
work_keys_str_mv AT funderburkpatrick 181impactofrapiddiagnostictechnologyonpatientswithcandidemia
AT carramyl 181impactofrapiddiagnostictechnologyonpatientswithcandidemia
AT hayesjilliane 181impactofrapiddiagnostictechnologyonpatientswithcandidemia