MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763121727 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofx163.1658

Direct Disk Diffusion Susceptibility Testing for Staphylococcus aureus from Blood Cultures: Diagnostic Accuracy and Impact on Antimicrobial Stewardship

2017· article· en· W2763121727 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Payne, Christopher F. Lowe, Victor C. M. Leung, Marc G. Romney, Sylvie Champagne

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaProvidence Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCefoxitinMedicineStaphylococcus aureusBlood cultureMicrobiologyBacteremiaPenicillinAntimicrobial stewardshipMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusAntibioticsPenicillin binding proteinsInternal medicineAntibiotic resistanceBiologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to detect multidrug resistant strains of bacteria, our laboratory routinely performs direct susceptibility (DS), in addition to standardized susceptibilities (SS), testing from positive blood cultures. We conducted a prospective study to determine the accuracy, reporting time (RT), and antimicrobial stewardship impact of DS testing for Staphylococcus aureus positive blood cultures. From March–December 2016, first time positive blood cultures for S. aureus were included. Broth from positive blood culture bottles was inoculated to standard media, as well as to Mueller–Hinton agar with a cefoxitin disk. CLSI breakpoints for S. aureus were used to guide interpretation. If DS results were to be reported to clinicians, a penicillin-binding protein 2a (PBP2a) Alere™ test was performed. When the PBP2a result was concordant with the CLSI interpretation, the isolate was reported as either Methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) or Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Antibiotic therapy changes made based on reporting of DS results were recorded. In order to determine RT, the following time points were recorded: blood culture positivity, reading of DS, and reporting of SS Of the 100 patients with S. aureus bacteremia, 97 showed pure growth of MSSA or MRSA; 3 patients had mixed infections, all of which were only detected using the DS plates. Average RT was 23 hours and 36h for DS and SS, respectively. There were 32 MRSA isolates, with a cefoxitin zone size range of 6–15 mm (median = 8 mm). PBP2a was performed on 11 isolates; all were positive. Of the 69 MSSA isolates, the cefoxitin range was 22 to 32 mm (median = 27 mm). PBP2a was performed on 26 isolates; all were negative. Direct susceptibility results were reported on 31 patients. Of the 21 patients with MSSA bacteremia, 15 changed therapy from vancomycin/daptomycin to cloxacillin/cefazolin. These results were reported an average of 23 hours prior to SS. DS testing is an accurate and rapid method to determine whether isolates are MSSA or MRSA. We had no major or minor errors. PBP2a testing was concordant for all isolates tested. DS also has the added benefit of detecting mixed S. aureus infections. Clinicians acted on the reported results of DS testing, with 15/21 (71%) of our patients narrowed to a cloxacillin/cefazolin 23 hours before the availability of SS. All authors: No reported disclosures.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207