Brandon J Tritle1, Robert Watteyne2, Abby Hickman1, Todd J Vento3,4, Bert K Lopansri4, Dave S Collingridge5, John J Veillette1,3. 1. Department of Pharmacy, Intermountain Healthcare, Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, UT, USA. 2. Department of Pharmacy, Intermountain Healthcare, Logan Regional Hospital, Logan, UT, USA. 3. Infectious Diseases Telehealth Service, Intermountain Healthcare, Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, UT, USA. 4. Division of Infectious Diseases and Epidemiology, Intermountain Healthcare, Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, UT, USA. 5. Office of Research, Intermountain Healthcare, Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, UT, USA.
Abstract
Background: Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for bacteremia allow for early antimicrobial therapy modification based on organism and resistance gene identification. Studies suggest patient outcomes are optimized when infectious disease (ID)-trained antimicrobial stewardship personnel intervene on RDT results. However, data are limited regarding RDT implementation at small community hospitals, which often lack access to on-site ID clinicians. Methods: This study evaluated the impact of RDTs with and without real-time pharmacist intervention (RTPI) at a small community hospital with local pharmacist training and asynchronous support from a remote ID Telehealth pharmacist. Time to targeted therapy (TTT) in patients with bacteremia was compared retrospectively across 3 different time periods: a control without RDT, RDT-only, and RDT with RTPI. Results: Median TTT was significantly faster in both the RDT with RTPI and RDT-only groups compared with the control group (2 vs 25 vs 51 hours respectively; P < .001). TTT was numerically faster for RDT with RTPI compared with RDT-only but did not reach statistical significance (P = .078). Median time to any de-escalation was significantly shorter for RDT with RTPI compared with both RDT-only (14 vs 33 hours; P = .012) and the control group (14 vs 45 hours; P < .001). Median length of stay was also significantly shorter in both RDT groups compared with the control group (4.0 vs 4.1 vs 5.5 hours; P = .013). Conclusion: This study supports RDT use for bacteremia in a small community hospital with ID Telehealth support, suggesting additional benefit with RTPI.
Background: Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for bacteremia allow for early antimicrobial therapy modification based on organism and resistance gene identification. Studies suggest patient outcomes are optimized when infectious disease (ID)-trained antimicrobial stewardship personnel intervene on RDT results. However, data are limited regarding RDT implementation at small community hospitals, which often lack access to on-site ID clinicians. Methods: This study evaluated the impact of RDTs with and without real-time pharmacist intervention (RTPI) at a small community hospital with local pharmacist training and asynchronous support from a remote ID Telehealth pharmacist. Time to targeted therapy (TTT) in patients with bacteremia was compared retrospectively across 3 different time periods: a control without RDT, RDT-only, and RDT with RTPI. Results: Median TTT was significantly faster in both the RDT with RTPI and RDT-only groups compared with the control group (2 vs 25 vs 51 hours respectively; P < .001). TTT was numerically faster for RDT with RTPI compared with RDT-only but did not reach statistical significance (P = .078). Median time to any de-escalation was significantly shorter for RDT with RTPI compared with both RDT-only (14 vs 33 hours; P = .012) and the control group (14 vs 45 hours; P < .001). Median length of stay was also significantly shorter in both RDT groups compared with the control group (4.0 vs 4.1 vs 5.5 hours; P = .013). Conclusion: This study supports RDT use for bacteremia in a small community hospital with ID Telehealth support, suggesting additional benefit with RTPI.
Authors: Anand Kumar; Daniel Roberts; Kenneth E Wood; Bruce Light; Joseph E Parrillo; Satendra Sharma; Robert Suppes; Daniel Feinstein; Sergio Zanotti; Leo Taiberg; David Gurka; Aseem Kumar; Mary Cheang Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: C Ward; K Stocker; J Begum; P Wade; U Ebrahimsa; S D Goldenberg Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2014-10-14 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Ritu Banerjee; Christine B Teng; Scott A Cunningham; Sherry M Ihde; James M Steckelberg; James P Moriarty; Nilay D Shah; Jayawant N Mandrekar; Robin Patel Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2015-07-20 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Maggie J Box; Eva L Sullivan; Kristine N Ortwine; Mark A Parmenter; Michael M Quigley; Louise M Aguilar-Higgins; Cynthia L MacIntosh; Kristina F Goerke; Rachel A Lim Journal: Pharmacotherapy Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 4.705
Authors: Allison M Porter; Christopher M Bland; Henry N Young; David R Allen; Sabrina R Croft; R Ellen Gayheart; Parks W Miller; Rachel J Musgrove; Emilee M Robertson; Geneen M Gibson Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Maya Beganovic; Erin K McCreary; Monica V Mahoney; Brandon Dionne; Daniel A Green; Tristan T Timbrook Journal: J Appl Lab Med Date: 2018-11-20
Authors: Kelly A Cairns; Joseph S Doyle; Janine M Trevillyan; Kylie Horne; Rhonda L Stuart; Nicole Bushett; Michelle K Yong; Peter G Kelley; Michael J Dooley; Allen C Cheng Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Tristan T Timbrook; Jacob B Morton; Kevin W McConeghy; Aisling R Caffrey; Eleftherios Mylonakis; Kerry L LaPlante Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2016-09-26 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Brian A Buss; Timothy J Baures; Minkyoung Yoo; Kimberly E Hanson; Donald P Alexander; Russell J Benefield; Emily S Spivak Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2018-10-10 Impact factor: 3.835