An exception-reporting approach for wound swab culture: effect on post-report antibiotic initiation.

A prior analysis suggested that wound swab culture (WSC) results were driving unnecessary antibiotic use in patients who were not already receiving treatment. As a quality-improvement initiative, our laboratory introduced an "exception-reporting" protocol on 1 March 2023, whereby typical wound pathogens susceptible to recommended empiric therapy (flucloxacillin/cefalexin) were not reported, and a comment was provided, stating no significant resistant organisms had been detected. Full results were available to clinicians on request. Cultures falling outside protocol criteria were reported in the standard fashion. This analysis sought to assess the effect of exception-reporting on post-report antibiotic initiation (PRAI). All community WSC results were matched to antibiotic dispensing records from October 2021 to December 2023. Sampling without treatment pre-report was termed "test and wait" (TaW). Following TaW, PRAI was identified if antibiotics were started within 5 days post-report. There were 1,819 and 764 WSCs received in the pre-change and post-change periods, respectively, where an initial TaW approach had been taken and an organism eligible for exception-reporting had been isolated. In the post-change period, 407 (53.3%) met the criteria and were exception-reported. PRAI occurred in 901 (49.5%) pre-change samples, compared to 102 (25.1%, P < 0.01) with exception-reporting. There was no detectable increase in hospitalization or repeat WSC collection in the 30 days following exception-reporting. Exception-reporting was associated with a markedly reduced proportion of patients being initiated on antibiotics following WSC where an organism had been isolated. The naming of organisms in reports appears to drive unnecessary antibiotic prescribing in many patients. These results require confirmation in other jurisdictions. IMPORTANCE: Wound swab culture is a high-volume test performed in clinical microbiology laboratories. In this analysis, we have shown that an alternative approach to reporting positive wound swab cultures has resulted in a large reduction in post-report antibiotic initiation, suggesting that the current standard method of reporting generates considerable unnecessary antibiotic use. If these findings are replicated elsewhere, wider adoption of this reporting would represent an opportunity for many clinical microbiology laboratories to have a significant impact on community antimicrobial stewardship.

Effect of directive laboratory comments on prescribing response to positive throat swab cultures.

BACKGROUND: In patients without ethnicity risk factors for acute rheumatic fever (ARF), our local guidelines recommend limiting antibiotic use following a positive throat swab culture (TSC). If symptoms are severe, a 5-7 day course is recommended. Despite this, most local patients with a positive TSC for group A Streptococcus (GAS) or Streptococcus dysgalactiae subsp. equisimilis (SDSE) were being prescribed 10 days of antibiotics. In response, we added comments to positive TSC reports recommending shorter treatment durations in those without ARF risk factors. No other antimicrobial stewardship initiatives were implemented. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of these comments on antibiotic course duration after positive TSC. METHODS: All community TSC results from 1 October 2021 to 31 March 2023 (1 year pre- to 6 months post-change) were matched to antibiotic dispensing data. Patients who had been empirically dispensed an antibiotic prior to the culture report were excluded. The outcome of interest was the antibiotic duration dispensed in the 5 day period after the TSC report. RESULTS: Following introduction of the comments, median course duration reduced from 10 (IQR 5-10) to 7 days (IQR 0-10; P < 0.01) and from 7 (IQR 0-10) to 0 days (IQR 0-5; P < 0.01) following GAS- and SDSE-positive TSC, respectively, in those without ARF risk factors. The percentage of people receiving 10 days of antibiotics decreased from 63.0% to 37.0% (P < 0.01) and 41.2% to 14.6% (P < 0.01) for GAS and SDSE, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of comments providing direct prescribing advice to requestors appears to have been highly effective at improving guideline-compliant prescribing following positive TSC report.