Clostridium difficile multidisciplinary team root cause analysis: impact on clinical care and circumvention of financial penalties posed by clinical commissioning groups, but at what cost?

BACKGROUND: In Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, in addition to an on-the-spot investigation into hospital-onset Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) by the infection prevention team, a multidisciplinary team root cause analysis (MDT-RCA) forum has been developed. The MDT-RCA aims to deliver a more thorough investigation into individual cases and the recommendation of cases to the clinical commissioning groups (CCG) appeals panel against potential financial penalties (£10,000 per breached case). We mainly aimed to investigate the financial impact of MDT-RCAs to the Trust. METHODOLOGY: Over two years, 84 cases of hospital-onset CDI cases were reviewed by the MDT-RCA forum. RESULTS: Among this cohort, no additional learning outcomes were identified by the MDT-RCAs over those that were found by on-the-spot investigations. In total, 543 staff members attended the MDT-RCAs at a potential cost to the Trust of £23,795.74-£51,670.10. The Trust appealed against financial penalties for 27 cases and 14 were successful, i.e. £140,000 would have been avoided had targets been breached by 14 cases. However, targets were only breached by two cases, meaning only £20,000 in fines was avoided. Deducting this from the total costs of the MDT-RCA meant the Trust lost £3,795.74-£31,670.10. CONCLUSION: Over the two years reviewed, the MDT-RCA proved to be costly to the Trust, with no additional learning or quality improvement measures identified.

Can rapid negative exclusion of blood cultures by a molecular method, enzyme template generation and amplification technique (Cognitor® Minus), aid antimicrobial stewardship?

OBJECTIVES: Antimicrobial review is an important part of antimicrobial stewardship. A novel enzyme template generation and amplification technique (ETGA), the Cognitor® Minus (Momentum Bioscience, Long Hanborough, UK) test, has a 99.5% negative predictive value for bacteraemia and fungaemia. This observational study asked two questions: (1) Does a negative ETGA, indicating no bacteraemia or fungaemia, aid antimicrobial review within 48 h of admission; (2) In this real-life clinical setting, does a negative ETGA mean no bacteraemia or fungaemia? METHODS: Consecutive blood cultures in patients with clinical infection were tested by ETGA. Negative results indicating an absence of bacteraemia or fungaemia were reviewed by the clinical infection team. Antibiotics were reviewed in these patients, and the role of the ETGA result in antibiotic change was recorded. Patients were followed up for a week. KEY FINDINGS: A total of 197 of 246 samples gave a negative result by ETGA. This led to a positive stewardship outcome (antimicrobials changed) in 145 (73.6%) and negative stewardship outcome (empirical antimicrobials continued) in 47 (23.9%). Of the positive stewardship outcomes, the ETGA result supported the decision not to start antimicrobials in 21 (10.7%) patients, to stop antimicrobials in 21 (10.7%), to switch from IV to oral antimicrobials in 103 (52.2%) or to discharge or leave the patient at home in 58 cases (29.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Enzyme template generation and amplification supports antimicrobial stewardship decisions and may have cost advantages in reducing unnecessary empirical antibiotics and antifungal agents and in discharging patients from hospital earlier. ETGA result was consistent with blood culture findings and gave an earlier negative result.

Electronic prescribing system design priorities for antimicrobial stewardship: a cross-sectional survey of 142 UK infection specialists.

Background: The implementation of electronic prescribing and medication administration (EPMA) systems is a priority for hospitals and a potential component of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). Objectives: To identify software features within EPMA systems that could potentially facilitate AMS and to survey practising UK infection specialist healthcare professionals in order to assign priority to these software features. Methods: A questionnaire was developed using nominal group technique and transmitted via email links through professional networks. The questionnaire collected demographic data, information on priority areas and anticipated impact of EPMA. Responses from different respondent groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U -test. Results: Responses were received from 164 individuals (142 analysable). Respondents were predominantly specialist infection pharmacists (48%) or medical microbiologists (37%). Of the pharmacists, 59% had experience of EPMA in their hospitals compared with 35% of microbiologists. Pharmacists assigned higher priority to indication prompt ( P < 0.001), allergy checker ( P = 0.003), treatment protocols ( P = 0.003), drug-indication mismatch alerts ( P = 0.031) and prolonged course alerts ( P = 0.041) and lower priority to a dose checker for adults ( P = 0.02) and an interaction checker ( P < 0.05) than microbiologists. A 'soft stop' functionality was rated essential or high priority by 89% of respondents. Potential EPMA software features were expected to have the greatest impact on stewardship, treatment efficacy and patient safety outcomes with lowest impact on Clostridium difficile infection, antimicrobial resistance and drug expenditure. Conclusions: The survey demonstrates key differences in health professionals' opinions of potential healthcare benefits of EPMA, but a consensus of anticipated positive impact on patient safety and AMS.