MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245416584 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofx163.1278

Impact of an Unsolicited, Simple Standardized Form Based Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention to Improve Guideline Adherence in the Management of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

2017· article· en· W4245416584 on OpenAlexaff
Shahileen Remtulla, Karen Zurek, Cristina Hernández, Carlos Cervera, Holly Hoang

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsCovenant HealthUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAntimicrobial stewardshipGuidelineBacteremiaStaphylococcus aureusIntervention (counseling)AntimicrobialIntensive care medicineMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusStewardship (theology)Family medicineNursingMicrobiologyAntibioticsAntibiotic resistancePathologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Staphylococcus aureusbacteremia (SAB) is associated with poor outcomes. The objective was to assess the impact of a pharmacist driven antimicrobial stewardship intervention on SAB management. A multicenter, pre-post quasi-experimental design was used to compare pre-intervention (Oct 2014 – Sep 2015) and intervention (Oct 2015 – Sep 2016) periods in hospitalized SAB patients. The antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) developed an evidence based SAB management bundle that included: Infectious Diseases (ID) consult, blood culture clearance, appropriate empiric and definitive antibiotics, echocardiography, adequate treatment duration, and infectious source removal if applicable. ASP pharmacists performed prospective audit and feedback (PAF) using a standardized form after review with the ASP medical director. The primary outcome was bundle component adherence. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, 30 day readmission, in-hospital mortality, and 30 day mortality. 127 patients were included (pre-intervention = 62, intervention = 65). The two groups had similar patient demographics. The intervention group had a higher rate of complicated SAB at diagnosis. Bundle implementation with PAF resulted in significant improvements in ID consultation (56.5% vs. 92.3%, P < 0.001), appropriate definitive antibiotic dosing (83.9% vs. 100%, P = 0.001), ordering echocardiography (72.6% vs. 93.8%, P = 0.001), and adequate treatment duration (87% vs. 100%, P = 0.009). Overall bundle adherence increased by 43.3% (P < 0.001). Readmission and 30 day mortality decreased but did not reach statistical significance. During the intervention, ASP pharmacists made 81 recommendations (93.8% accepted). A post hoc analysis was conducted due to the 35.8% increase in ID consults with the intervention. A significant decrease of 18.5% in in-hospital mortality (P = 0.041) and 21.7% in 30 day mortality (P = 0.009) with ID involvement was seen. SAB management bundle development with PAF by ASP pharmacists significantly improved adherence rates to evidence based recommendations in SAB inpatients. This simple yet effective ASP intervention can ensure consistent management of a highly morbid infection. C. Cervera, Sunovion: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 topicAntibiotic Use and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207