160. Could Reducing Time to Bacterial Identification From Positive Blood Cultures Improve Outcomes in Bacteremic Patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Survival of patients with septic shock is dependent on the timing of effective antibiotic administration. The initial notification by the microbiology lab of a positive blood culture is a key factor in improving patient outcomes. It can take >24 hours to definitively identify bacteria from positive blood cultures. Accordingly, we employed rapid organism identification and studied the impact of this on patient management from a quality improvement perspective. Methods Rapid organism identification was performed for bacteremic patients admitted to an ICU at St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto, ON, by creating a pellet from positive blood culture bottles using a lysis centrifugation technique. MALDI-TOF was then used to obtain an organism identification. The microbiology lab verbally notified the ward clerk of the identification and surveys were conducted with treating physicians within 24–48 hours to evaluate the downstream impact of the rapid identification including changes to antibiotics, diagnostic testing, central line management and requests for specialty consultations. Results Between January 28 and April 28, 2019, 17 rapid blood culture results were included for study. When asked how physicians received the result, in 7 cases the physician did not remember; other responses included microbiology report (2), nurse (2), pharmacist (1), antimicrobial stewardship or lab (1), on-call team (1) and residents (1). Antibiotics were adjusted in 13 patients; 3 of which may have changed antibiotics for reasons other than the organism identification. Reasons for not changing therapy include: appropriate empiric treatment, likely contaminants, or physician not being notified of the result. In 5 cases, all antibiotics were discontinued, in another 2 cases the antibiotics were broadened and a further 5 narrowed to cover the organism; the remaining 5 continued the same empiric therapy. Repeat blood cultures were obtained for 5 cases, follow-up imaging in 5 cases and lines were changed/removed in 5 cases. Consultation was requested for 7 cases. Conclusion Based on preliminary data, rapid organism identification shows promise of improved patient management with line removal and antibiotics adjustments occurring 1 day sooner with rapid results. Disclosures 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".