2446. Longitudinal Results and Cost Savings Using a Bundle of C. difficile Infection Prevention Strategies in a Long-Term Care Facility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Long-term care patients are at high risk of C. difficile infections (CDI) due to advanced age, high comorbid illness burden, and frequent antibiotic use. Primary infection prevention of CDI is challenging and not frequently studied. Following a period of high CDI incidence, the Long-Term Care facility at Sharp Coronado Hospital implemented a bundle of strategies. Methods Patient census, the incidence of CDI (primary and recurrent cases), transfers to acute care and length-of-stay were collected from Jul 2008 through December 2018. In the first phase, 2010, a bundle of CDI prevention strategies was initiated, including an Antimicrobial Stewardship Program (ASP), reduction of acid suppression, and L. acidophilus and S. boulardii probiotics with antibiotic use. From 2012, there was further refinement of the ASP and the probiotic was changed to capsules of a 3-species combination of Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285, L. casei LBC80R and L. rhamnosus CLR2, 100 Billion CFU daily. In October 2016, a protocol was put in place delegating authority to pharmacists to add probiotics to all antibiotic courses. The average CDI rates were calculated and compared for each time period. The net cost of CDI was calculated from the number of CDI cases, hospital length-of-stay and probiotic purchases. Results The incidence of facility-onset CDI cases decreased significantly with each policy change from 7.6 cases/10,000 patient-days (2008–09), to 2.8 (2010–11, p = 0.028), to 0.91 (2012-Q3 2016, p = 0.0015) and to the present incidence 0.24 (Q4 2016–2018, p = 0.048). The annual cost of facility-onset CDI was $214k initially. The annual cost, including the purchase of probiotic, decreased to $161k with introduction of the bundle, to $57k in switching probiotics, and to $18k with initiation of a probiotic policy. Conclusion Implementing a bundle of concurrent infection prevention strategies resulted in a significant reduction in CDI incidence. Refinements to the bundle led to significant reductions in CDI incidence, along with switching the type of probiotic, and delegating ordering authority to pharmacists to ensure probiotic compliance. Cumulatively, there was a 95% decrease in CDI incidence at the Long-Term Care facility and meaningful cost savings with each refinement. 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".