John A Bosso1, Adam Sieg2, Patrick D Mauldin1. 1. Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Outcome Sciences, South Carolina College of Pharmacy, Charleston, South Carolina ; Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina College of Medicine, Charleston, South Carolina. Corresponding author: John A. Bosso, PharmD, South Carolina College of Pharmacy, 280 Calhoun Street, Charleston, SC 29435; phone: 843-792-8501; fax: 843-884-2929; e-mail: bossoja@musc.edu. 2. Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Outcome Sciences, South Carolina College of Pharmacy, Charleston, South Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hospital antibiograms, which are commonly used to determine empiric antibiotic therapy and as a tool in stewardship in a given institution, are open to bias when combining susceptibility results from various sources, hospital locations, and patient groups. METHODS: We assessed such differences, using Pseudomonas aeruginosa as a test case, with susceptibility data from 2008 through 2010 in our institution. Each year's data were analyzed separately. A variety of specific or subcategorical antibiograms were compared with each other as well as with versions including all tested isolates and those with results from inpatients and outpatients only. Statistical significance was determined at the .01 level using either chi-square or Fisher exact test, and clinical significance was defined as ≥10 percentage points. RESULTS: A variety of clinically significant differences were found that illustrated important differences within the intensive care unit environment and based on population, specifically adult versus pediatric. Concordance between statistically significant and clinically significant differences was poor. CONCLUSION: These results corroborate and extend previous similar observations and point to the potential importance of subanalyses in preparing the annual hospital antibiogram.
BACKGROUND: Hospital antibiograms, which are commonly used to determine empiric antibiotic therapy and as a tool in stewardship in a given institution, are open to bias when combining susceptibility results from various sources, hospital locations, and patient groups. METHODS: We assessed such differences, using Pseudomonas aeruginosa as a test case, with susceptibility data from 2008 through 2010 in our institution. Each year's data were analyzed separately. A variety of specific or subcategorical antibiograms were compared with each other as well as with versions including all tested isolates and those with results from inpatients and outpatients only. Statistical significance was determined at the .01 level using either chi-square or Fisher exact test, and clinical significance was defined as ≥10 percentage points. RESULTS: A variety of clinically significant differences were found that illustrated important differences within the intensive care unit environment and based on population, specifically adult versus pediatric. Concordance between statistically significant and clinically significant differences was poor. CONCLUSION: These results corroborate and extend previous similar observations and point to the potential importance of subanalyses in preparing the annual hospital antibiogram.
Authors: S K Fridkin; C D Steward; J R Edwards; E R Pryor; J E McGowan; L K Archibald; R P Gaynes; F C Tenover Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Thomas P Lodise; Nimish Patel; Andrea Kwa; Jeffrey Graves; Jon P Furuno; Eileen Graffunder; Ben Lomaestro; Jessina C McGregor Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2007-07-23 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Maria-Stephanie A Hughes; David M Dosa; Aisling R Caffrey; Haley J Appaneal; Robin L P Jump; Vrishali Lopes; Kerry L LaPlante Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2019-09-16 Impact factor: 4.669