The clinical impact of a urinary tract infection management bundle in a tertiary-care teaching hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a urinary tract infection (UTI) management bundle to reduce the treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria (AB) and to improve the management of symptomatic UTIs. DESIGN: Before-and-after intervention study.SettingsTertiary-care hospital.PatientsConsecutive sample of inpatients with positive single or mixed-predominant urine cultures collected and reported while admitted to the hospital. METHODS: The UTI management bundle consisted of nursing and prescriber education, modification of the reporting of positive urine cultures, and pharmacists' prospective audit and feedback. A retrospective chart review of consecutive inpatients with positive urinary cultures was performed before and after implementation of the management bundle. RESULTS: Prior to the implementation of the management bundle, 276 patients were eligible criteria for chart review. Of these 276 patients, 165 (59·8%) were found to have AB; of these 165 patients with AB, 111 (67·3%) were treated with antimicrobials. Moreover, 268 patients met eligibility criteria for postintervention review. Of these 268, 133 patients (49·6%) were found to have AB; of these 133 with AB, 22 (16·5%) were treated with antimicrobials. Thus, a 75·5% reduction of AB treatment was achieved. Educational components of the bundle resulted in a substantial decrease in nonphysician-directed urine sample submission. Adherence to a UTI management algorithm improved substantially in the intervention period, with a notable decrease in fluoroquinolone prescription for empiric UTI treatment. CONCLUSIONS: A UTI management bundle resulted in a dramatic improvement in the management of urinary tract infection, particularly a reduction in the treatment of AB and improved management of symptomatic UTI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".