Impact of a bloodstream infection stewardship program in hospitalized patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) in hospitalized patients represent sentinel events requiring timely and responsive antimicrobial prescribing. These infections represent an attractive but seldom-evaluated stewardship opportunity. METHODS: Retrospective pre-post study design, with review of patient charts 18 months before and after initiation of a hospital Bloodstream Infection Stewardship Program (BSISP). Pre-intervention, the ward and attending physician were notified of all positive blood cultures. Post-intervention, an infectious disease (ID) pharmacist collaborating with an ID consultant was also notified. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-six eligible BSIs were identified pre-intervention and 195 post-intervention. The urinary tract was the most common source of infection; most common bloodstream isolates were Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, beta-hemolytic streptococci, and Klebsiella pneumoniae; 71.7% of infections were community acquired. Empiric therapy was not given in 17.3% of cases and inadequate in 16.4% of patients. Therapy was altered on the basis of Gram stain results (‘directed therapy’) in 54.6% of episodes and was inadequate in 3.5%. Compared to pre-intervention, the post-intervention cohort received directed therapy on average 4.36 hours earlier ( p = 0.003), was more likely to receive appropriate definitive therapy (99.0% post versus 79.1% pre, p <0.001), stepped down to oral therapy earlier (6.0 versus 8.0 days, p = 0.031), and received fewer directed prescriptions (214 per 100 cases post versus 260 per 100 cases pre; p = 0.001), including fewer prescriptions of quinolones and clindamycin. CONCLUSIONS: A BSISP could be an effective strategy for improving antimicrobial prescribing in hospitalized patients with a BSI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".