Effectiveness of Practices To Increase Timeliness of Providing Targeted Therapy for Inpatients with Bloodstream Infections: a Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infection (BSI) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. Rapid identification of bloodstream pathogens is a laboratory practice that supports strategies for rapid transition to direct targeted therapy by providing for timely and effective patient care. In fact, the more rapidly that appropriate antimicrobials are prescribed, the lower the mortality for patients with sepsis. Rapid identification methods may have multiple positive impacts on patient outcomes, including reductions in mortality, morbidity, hospital lengths of stay, and antibiotic use. In addition, the strategy can reduce the cost of care for patients with BSIs. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review is to evaluate the evidence for the effectiveness of three rapid diagnostic practices in decreasing the time to targeted therapy for hospitalized patients with BSIs. The review was performed by applying the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Initiative (LMBP) systematic review methods for quality improvement (QI) practices and translating the results into evidence-based guidance (R. H. Christenson et al., Clin Chem 57:816-825, 2011, http://dx.doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.157131). SEARCH STRATEGY: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify studies with measurable outcomes. A search of three electronic bibliographic databases (PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL), databases containing "gray" literature (unpublished academic, government, or industry evidence not governed by commercial publishing) (CIHI, NIHR, SIGN, and other databases), and the Cochrane database for English-language articles published between 1990 and 2011 was conducted in July 2011. DATES OF SEARCH: The dates of our search were from 1990 to July 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Animal studies and non-English publications were excluded. The search contained the following medical subject headings: bacteremia; bloodstream infection; time factors; health care costs; length of stay; morbidity; mortality; antimicrobial therapy; rapid molecular techniques, polymerase chain reaction (PCR); in situ hybridization, fluorescence; treatment outcome; drug therapy; patient care team; pharmacy service, hospital; hospital information systems; Gram stain; pharmacy service; and spectrometry, mass, matrix-assisted laser desorption-ionization. Phenotypic as well as the following key words were searched: targeted therapy; rapid identification; rapid; Gram positive; Gram negative; reduce(ed); cost(s); pneumoslide; PBP2; tube coagulase; matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight; MALDI TOF; blood culture; EMR; electronic reporting; call to provider; collaboration; pharmacy; laboratory; bacteria; yeast; ICU; and others. In addition to the electronic search being performed, a request for unpublished quality improvement data was made to the clinical laboratory community. MAIN RESULTS: Rapid molecular testing with direct communication significantly improves timeliness compared to standard testing. Rapid phenotypic techniques with direct communication likely improve the timeliness of targeted therapy. Studies show a significant and homogeneous reduction in mortality associated with rapid molecular testing combined with direct communication. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No recommendation is made for or against the use of the three assessed practices of this review due to insufficient evidence. The overall strength of evidence is suggestive; the data suggest that each of these three practices has the potential to improve the time required to initiate targeted therapy and possibly improve other patient outcomes, such as mortality. The meta-analysis results suggest that the implementation of any of the three practices may be more effective at increasing timeliness to targeted therapy than routine microbiology techniques for identification of the microorganisms causing BSIs. Based on the included studies, results for all three practices appear applicable across multiple microorganisms, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA), Candida species, and Enterococcus species.

Effectiveness of practices for improving the diagnostic accuracy of Non ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the Emergency Department: A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices™ systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: This article is a systematic review of the effectiveness of four practices (assay selection, decision point cardiac troponin (cTn) threshold selection, serial testing, and point of care testing) for improving the diagnostic accuracy Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI) in the Emergency Department. DESIGN AND METHODS: The CDC-funded Laboratory Medicine Best Practices (LMBP) Initiative systematic review method for quality improvement practices was used. RESULTS: The current ACC/AHA guidelines recommend using cardiac troponin assays with a 99th percentile upper reference limit (URL) diagnostic threshold to diagnose NSTEMI. The evidence in this systematic review indicates that contemporary sensitive cTn assays meet the assay profile requirements (sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV) to more accurately diagnose NSTEMI than alternate tests. Additional biomarkers did not increase diagnostic effectiveness of cTn assays. Sensitivity, specificity, and NPV were consistently high and low PPV improved with serial sampling. Evidence for use of point of care cTn testing was insufficient to make recommendation, though some evidence suggests that use may result in reduction to patient length of stay and costs. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the review of and the LMBP(TM) A-6 Method criteria, we recommend the use of cardiac troponin assays without additional biomarkers using the 99th percentile URL as the clinical diagnostic threshold for the diagnosis of NSTEMI. We recommend serial sampling with one sample at presentation and at least one additional second sample taken at least 6h later to identify a rise or fall in the troponin level. No recommendation is made either for or against the use of point of care tests. DISCLAIMER: The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR).

Effectiveness of practices to reduce blood sample hemolysis in EDs: a laboratory medicine best practices systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To complete a systematic review of emergency department (ED) practices for reducing hemolysis in blood samples sent to the clinical laboratory for testing. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies met the review inclusion criteria (12 published and 4 unpublished). All 11 studies comparing new straight needle venipuncture with IV starts found a reduction in hemolysis rates, [average risk ratio of 0.16 (95% CI=0.11-0.24)]. Four studies on the effect of venipuncture location showed reduced hemolysis rates for the antecubital site [average risk ratio of 0.45 (95% CI=0.35-0.57]. CONCLUSIONS: Use of new straight needle venipuncture instead of IV starts is effective at reducing hemolysis rates in EDs, and is recommended as an evidence-based best practice. The overall strength of evidence rating is high and the effect size is substantial. Unpublished studies made an important contribution to the body of evidence. When IV starts must be used, observed rates of hemolysis may be substantially reduced by placing the IV at the antecubital site.

Effectiveness of barcoding for reducing patient specimen and laboratory testing identification errors: a Laboratory Medicine Best Practices systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This is the first systematic review of the effectiveness of barcoding practices for reducing patient specimen and laboratory testing identification errors. DESIGN AND METHODS: The CDC-funded Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Initiative systematic review methods for quality improvement practices were used. RESULTS: A total of 17 observational studies reporting on barcoding systems are included in the body of evidence; 10 for patient specimens and 7 for point-of-care testing. All 17 studies favored barcoding, with meta-analysis mean odds ratios for barcoding systems of 4.39 (95% CI: 3.05-6.32) and for point-of-care testing of 5.93 (95% CI: 5.28-6.67). CONCLUSIONS: Barcoding is effective for reducing patient specimen and laboratory testing identification errors in diverse hospital settings and is recommended as an evidence-based "best practice." The overall strength of evidence rating is high and the effect size rating is substantial. Unpublished studies made an important contribution comprising almost half of the body of evidence.

Effectiveness of automated notification and customer service call centers for timely and accurate reporting of critical values: a laboratory medicine best practices systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the evidence available in support of automated notification methods and call centers and to acknowledge other considerations in making evidence-based recommendations for best practices in improving the timeliness and accuracy of critical value reporting. DESIGN AND METHODS: This review followed the Laboratory Medicine Best Practices (LMBP) review methods (Christenson, et al. 2011). A broad literature search and call for unpublished submissions returned 196 bibliographic records which were screened for eligibility. 41 studies were retrieved. Of these, 4 contained credible evidence for the timeliness and accuracy of automatic notification systems and 5 provided credible evidence for call centers for communicating critical value information in in-patient care settings. RESULTS: Studies reporting improvement from implementing automated notification findings report mean differences and were standardized using the standard difference in means (d=0.42; 95% CI=0.2-0.62) while studies reporting improvement from implementing call centers generally reported criterion referenced findings and were standardized using odds ratios (OR=22.1; 95% CI=17.1-28.6). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence, although suggestive, is not sufficient to make an LMBP recommendation for or against using automated notification systems as a best practice to improve the timeliness of critical value reporting in an in-patient care setting. Call centers, however, are effective in improving the timeliness of critical value reporting in an in-patient care setting, and meet LMBP criteria to be recommended as an "evidence-based best practice."

Effectiveness of practices to reduce blood culture contamination: a Laboratory Medicine Best Practices systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This article is a systematic review of the effectiveness of three practices for reducing blood culture contamination rates: venipuncture, phlebotomy teams, and prepackaged preparation/collection (prep) kits. DESIGN AND METHODS: The CDC-funded Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Initiative systematic review methods for quality improvement practices were used. RESULTS: Studies included as evidence were: 9 venipuncture (vs. versus intravenous catheter), 5 phlebotomy team; and 7 prep kit. All studies for venipuncture and phlebotomy teams favored these practices, with meta-analysis mean odds ratios for venipuncture of 2.69 and phlebotomy teams of 2.58. For prep kits 6 studies' effect sizes were not statistically significantly different from no effect (meta-analysis mean odds ratio 1.12). CONCLUSIONS: Venipuncture and the use of phlebotomy teams are effective practices for reducing blood culture contamination rates in diverse hospital settings and are recommended as evidence-based "best practices" with high overall strength of evidence and substantial effect size ratings. No recommendation is made for or against prep kits based on uncertain improvement.

Laboratory medicine best practices: systematic evidence review and evaluation methods for quality improvement.

OBJECTIVE: To develop methods for systematically reviewing evidence for identifying effective laboratory medicine (LM) practices associated with improved healthcare quality outcomes. RELEVANCE: Although many evidence-evaluation systems have been developed, none are designed to include and rate healthcare quality improvement studies to identify evidence-based practices that improve patient safety and LM quality. METHODS: Validated evidence-based medicine methods established by governmental agencies, the Guide to Community Preventive Services, and others were adapted for the LM field. Key methods modifications included (a) inclusion of quality improvement study designs; (b) mechanisms for inclusion of unpublished evidence, (c) combining of individual ratings of study quality, effect size, and relevance of outcome measures to evaluate consistency of practice evidence; and (d) deriving an overall strength rating to support evidence-based best practice recommendations. The methods follow the process steps of: ask; acquire; appraise; analyze; apply; and assess. Expert panels used the systematic evidence review results on practice effectiveness for improving healthcare quality outcomes consistent with the Institute of Medicine's healthcare quality aims (safe, timely, effective, equitable, efficient, and patient-centered). CONCLUSIONS: Adapting and developing methods from validated systems and applying them to systematically review and evaluate practices in LM by using published and unpublished studies is feasible. With these methods, evidence from quality improvement studies can be systematically synthesized and summarized to identify effective LM practices. Practical and scientifically validated demonstration of a positive impact on outcomes ensures that practitioners, policy makers, and decision makers at all levels have the evidence needed for improving healthcare quality and public health.

Strengthening the capacity of local health agencies through community-based assessment and planning.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the effectiveness of the Protocol for Assessing Community Excellence in Environmental Health (PACE EH) in building competency in essential environmental health services and renewing efforts to engage the community in problem solving. Competency and community engagement have been identified by environmental health practitioners as important to meet new threats to public health. METHODS: We conducted a national survey and 24 case studies of public health agencies. We invited 917 organizations to participate in the national survey because they had requested a copy of the protocol. RESULTS: We received 656 total responses: 354 had not considered implementation, 302 had considered implementation, and 66 had implemented PACE EH. For the 24 case studies, we interviewed 206 individuals in communities implementing PACE EH. We found that PACE EH has had a positive effect on building community and professional networks, enhancing leadership, developing workforce competence, and expanding definitions of environmental health practice. CONCLUSIONS: With appropriate investments, PACE EH can be an effective tool to meet the environmental health challenges identified by local environmental health practitioners and state, tribal, and federal agencies.

Toward the assessment of scientific and public health impacts of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Extramural Asthma Research Program using available data.

BACKGROUND: In the past 15 years, asthma prevalence has increased and is disproportionately distributed among children, minorities, and low-income persons. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Division of Extramural Research and Training developed a framework to measure the scientific and health impacts of its extramural asthma research to improve the scientific basis for reducing the health effects of asthma. OBJECTIVES: Here we apply the framework to characterize the NIEHS asthma portfolio's impact in terms of publications, clinical applications of findings, community interventions, and technology developments. METHODS: A logic model was tailored to inputs, outputs, and outcomes of the NIEHS asthma portfolio. Data from existing National Institutes of Health (NIH) databases are used, along with publicly available bibliometric data and structured elicitation of expert judgment. RESULTS: NIEHS is the third largest source of asthma-related research grant funding within the NIH between 1975 and 2005, after the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Much of NIEHS-funded asthma research focuses on basic research, but results are often published in journals focused on clinical investigation, increasing the likelihood that the work is moved into practice along the "bench to bedside" continuum. NIEHS support has led to key breakthroughs in scientific research concerning susceptibility to asthma, environmental conditions that heighten asthma symptoms, and cellular mechanisms that may be involved in treating asthma. CONCLUSIONS: If gaps and limitations in publicly available data receive adequate attention, further linkages can be demonstrated between research activities and public health improvements. This logic model approach to research impact assessment demonstrates that it is possible to conceptualize program components, mine existing databases, and begin to show longer-term impacts of program results. The next challenges will be to modify current data structures, improve the linkages among relevant databases, incorporate as much electronically available data as possible, and determine how to improve the quality and health impact of the science that we support.

Public education strategies for delivering breast and cervical cancer screening in American Indian and Alaska Native populations.

A 1993 amendment to the authorizing legislation for the Center of Disease Control and Prevention's National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program allows direct funding to tribal organizations and urban Native health centers. This study examined tribal programs' implementation of the public education and outreach component utilizing a multisite case study design implemented in partnership with tribal programs. Data were collected from 141 semistructured interviews with key informants and 16 focus groups with program-eligible women. Innovative strategies built on native iconography and personal encounters have encouraged participation and made the programs culturally relevant, providing insights for other communities with little experience in providing early detection services.

Implementing women's cancer screening programs in American Indian and Alaska Native populations.

The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program provides funding to tribes and tribal organizations to implement comprehensive cancer screening programs using a program model developed for state health departments. We conducted a multiple-site case study using a participatory research process to describe how 5 tribal programs implemented screening services, and to identify strategies used to address challenges in delivering services to American Indian and Alaska Native women. We analyzed data from semistructured interviews with 141 key informants, 16 focus groups with 132 program-eligible women, and program documents. Several challenges regarding the delivery of services were revealed, including implementing screening programs in busy acute-care environments, access to mammography, providing culturally sensitive care, and providing diagnostic/treatment services in rural and remote locations. Strategies perceived as successful in meeting program challenges included identifying a "champion" or main supporter of the program in each clinical setting, using mobile mammography, using female providers, and increasing the capacity to provide diagnostic services at screening sites. The results should be of interest to an international audience, including those who work with health-related programs targeting indigenous women or groups that are marginalized because of culture, geographic isolation, and/or socioeconomic position.