Clinical decision making in the emergency department setting using rapid PCR: Results of the CLADE study group.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Departments (ED) are challenged during influenza season by patients who present acutely during sporadic ED visits. ED management is largely empiric, often occurring without reliable diagnostics needed for targeted therapies, safe outpatient discharge, or hospital admissions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the influenza diagnosis on physician decision making during ED visits using the Cobas Liat® influenza A + B assay. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study assessing the impact of rapid (<30 min), reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) influenza testing on physician decision making in the ED. Physician responses established pre-and post-diagnosis management courses which required confirmation via secondary documentation in the medical record. Changes in physician decision making were analyzed across four clinical touchpoints: (i) admission/discharge status, (ii) medical procedures, (iii) antiviral and antibiotic prescribing, and (iv) laboratory studies. RESULTS: An influenza diagnosis changed patient management courses, relative to empiric, pre-diagnosis plans, in in 61% of the cases resulting in cost savings of $49,420-to-$42,270 over 143 patients and 104 days during influenza season resulting in a cost savings of $200.40/ED visit. Evaluation over 2000 ED patient visits projects cost savings > $578,000 due to deferred admissions, and reduction in antiviral prescribing. Sensitivity of ED-based influenza testing using the Cobas Liat® assay was equivalent to centralized lab testing at 98.8% sensitivity and 98.5% specificity respectively. CONCLUSION: Providing rapid, RT-PCR influenza testing to ED settings is actionable and used to guide patient care decisions. Understanding the cascade of events linked to the influenza diagnosis in the ED provides overall cost savings which offset the cost of providing ED-based testing.

Comparison of 2 blood culture media shows significant differences in bacterial recovery for patients on antimicrobial therapy.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial removal devices in blood culture media are designed to remove antibiotics from the blood culture solution, thereby facilitating bacterial growth. How well these devices function clinically has not been established. METHODS: All blood drawn for culture from adult inpatients and emergency department visitors in a level I trauma center was placed in paired BACTEC Plus and BacT/Alert FAN culture media and studied simultaneously, consecutively, and prospectively between 1 February and 30 September 2011. All cultures were processed per standard laboratory protocols. RESULTS: Of 9395 total cultures collected, 1219 (13%) were positive, 831 were included, and 524 (33%) contained pathogens. BACTEC had a 4.5-hour faster detection time (P < .0001), and isolated exclusively 182 of 524 (35%; P < .001) pathogens, 136 of 345 (39%) of the gram-positive cocci (P < .001), 48 of 175 (27%; P = .02) of the gram-negative rods, 101 of 195 (52%) of Staphylococcus aureus (P < .001), and 59 of 120 (49%; P = .004) septic events. If active antibiotics had been dosed 0-4 or 4-48 hours prior to culture collection, the odds of that culture growing in BACTEC were 4.8- and 5.2-fold greater, respectively, than of growing in BacT/Alert (P < .0001). Both were equivalent in the recovery of yeast and when no antimicrobials were dosed. CONCLUSIONS: BACTEC media has faster time to detection and increased bacterial recovery over the BacT/Alert media in the following categories: overall growth, pathogens, septic events, gram-positive cocci, gram-negative rods, Staphylococcus aureus, and cultures where antimicrobials were dosed up to 48 hours before culture collection.