OBJECTIVES: Public health surveillance is often dependent on sentinel testing performed in clinical microbiology laboratories, and recognition of emerging/ unusual antimicrobial resistance is especially challenging. We obtained cumulative antibiograms from hospitals to determine whether clinical laboratories recognized unusual resistance or reported antimicrobials inappropriate for various bacterial species, as measured before and after public health laboratory (PHL) educational and technical-support interventions. METHODS: We compared cumulative antibiogram data from 81 clinical laboratories servicing 86 hospitals in Michigan from 2000 through 2005 with a standardized checklist derived from Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) documents. We considered the reporting of unlikely percent-susceptible results and/or inappropriate antimicrobials serious errors, and we calculated error rates for each data year. We used CLSI-recommendation compliance as a measure to determine whether laboratories were implementing changes. RESULTS: Ninety-five of 239 (28%) cumulative antibiograms examined had one or more serious errors. The annual number of cumulative antibiograms with serious errors did not change radically (range: 10-13); however, when expressed as a percentage of cumulative antibiograms received, the occurrence of these errors declined from 59% in 2000 to 19% in 2005. The reporting of misleading or dangerous antimicrobial-organism combinations occurred less frequently than the reporting of unlikely percent-susceptible results. Compliance with new CLSI recommendations did not improve significantly. CONCLUSIONS: AST is complex and nuanced. PHL programs can provide resources, guidance, and technical support to help clinical microbiologists differentiate questionable AST results from true emerging antimicrobial resistance.
OBJECTIVES: Public health surveillance is often dependent on sentinel testing performed in clinical microbiology laboratories, and recognition of emerging/ unusual antimicrobial resistance is especially challenging. We obtained cumulative antibiograms from hospitals to determine whether clinical laboratories recognized unusual resistance or reported antimicrobials inappropriate for various bacterial species, as measured before and after public health laboratory (PHL) educational and technical-support interventions. METHODS: We compared cumulative antibiogram data from 81 clinical laboratories servicing 86 hospitals in Michigan from 2000 through 2005 with a standardized checklist derived from Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) documents. We considered the reporting of unlikely percent-susceptible results and/or inappropriate antimicrobials serious errors, and we calculated error rates for each data year. We used CLSI-recommendation compliance as a measure to determine whether laboratories were implementing changes. RESULTS: Ninety-five of 239 (28%) cumulative antibiograms examined had one or more serious errors. The annual number of cumulative antibiograms with serious errors did not change radically (range: 10-13); however, when expressed as a percentage of cumulative antibiograms received, the occurrence of these errors declined from 59% in 2000 to 19% in 2005. The reporting of misleading or dangerous antimicrobial-organism combinations occurred less frequently than the reporting of unlikely percent-susceptible results. Compliance with new CLSI recommendations did not improve significantly. CONCLUSIONS: AST is complex and nuanced. PHL programs can provide resources, guidance, and technical support to help clinical microbiologists differentiate questionable AST results from true emerging antimicrobial resistance.
Authors: Joyce Witt-Kushner; J Rex Astles; John C Ridderhof; Robert A Martin; Burton Wilcke; Frances P Downes; Stanley L Inhorn; H Peter Kelley; Paul B Kimsey; David E Mills; Max Salfinger; Peter A Shult; Mahadeo P Verma; Scott J Becker; Doug J Drabkowski Journal: MMWR Recomm Rep Date: 2002-09-20
Authors: Daniel J Diekema; Kathleen Lee; Patti Raney; Loreen A Herwaldt; Gary V Doern; Fred C Tenover Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Antonia Zapantis; Melinda K Lacy; Rebecca T Horvat; Dennis Grauer; Brian J Barnes; Brian O'Neal; Rick Couldry Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Rebekah W Moehring; Kevin C Hazen; Myra R Hawkins; Richard H Drew; Daniel J Sexton; Deverick J Anderson Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2015-07-15 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Allen C Bateman; Erin J Bowles; Erik Munson; Raymond P Podzorski; Eric T Beck; Richard Dern; Alana K Sterkel; David M Warshauer; Peter A Shult Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2019 Nov/Dec Impact factor: 2.792