Procalcitonin utilization in the real world: An observational study of antibiotic prescribing practices.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to better understand and describe antibiotic prescribing practices and adherence to a procalcitonin (PCT)-guided algorithm in patients undergoing serum PCT testing in adult hospitalized patients. METHODS: We performed an observational, retrospective study of 201 randomly selected patients who are aged ≥18 years, admitted to the general medicine floors or step-down unit between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2017, and had serum PCT testing. Physician adherence to a PCT-guided algorithm was assessed through chart review. RESULTS: We found an overall adherence of 64.7%. Adherence was highest for PCT values above 0.25 ng/mL (82.8% for 0.25-0.50 ng/mL and 83.6% for >0.50 ng/mL). Adherence was lower for PCT values less than 0.25 ng/mL (59% for <0.1 ng/mL and 38% for 0.1-0.24 ng/mL). Serial testing was performed in 10% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital-based providers are more likely to overrule the algorithm and either initiate or continue antibiotics when guidelines encourage discontinuing antibiotics. These findings have important implications for antimicrobial stewardship and patient care and suggest that hospital-based providers may benefit from targeted didactics regarding the interpretation of the serum PCT assay.

A Computerized Method for Measuring Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography Yield in the Emergency Department: Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Use of computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in the assessment of pulmonary embolism (PE) has markedly increased over the past two decades. While this technology has improved the accuracy of radiological testing for PE, CTPA also carries the risk of substantial iatrogenic harm. Each CTPA carries a 14% risk of contrast-induced nephropathy and a lifetime malignancy risk that can be as high as 2.76%. The appropriate use of CTPA can be estimated by monitoring the CTPA yield, the percentage of tests positive for PE. This is the first study to propose and validate a computerized method for measuring the CTPA yield in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to assess the validity of a novel computerized method of calculating the CTPA yield in the ED. METHODS: The electronic health record databases at two tertiary care academic hospitals were queried for CTPA orders completed in the ED over 1-month periods. These visits were linked with an inpatient admission with a discharge diagnosis of PE based on the International Classification of Diseases codes. The computerized the CTPA yield was calculated as the number of CTPA orders with an associated inpatient discharge diagnosis of PE divided by the total number of orders for completed CTPA. This computerized method was then validated by 2 independent reviewers performing a manual chart review, which included reading the free-text radiology reports for each CTPA. RESULTS: A total of 349 CTPA orders were completed during the 1-month periods at the two institutions. Of them, acute PE was diagnosed on CTPA in 28 studies, with a CTPA yield of 7.7%. The computerized method correctly identified 27 of 28 scans positive for PE. The one discordant scan was tied to a patient who was discharged directly from the ED and, as a result, never received an inpatient discharge diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first successful validation study of a computerized method for calculating the CTPA yield in the ED. This method for data extraction allows for an accurate determination of the CTPA yield and is more efficient than manual chart review. With this ability, health care systems can monitor the appropriate use of CTPA and the effect of interventions to reduce overuse and decrease preventable iatrogenic harm.

"Think aloud" and "Near live" usability testing of two complex clinical decision support tools.

OBJECTIVES: Low provider adoption continues to be a significant barrier to realizing the potential of clinical decision support. "Think Aloud" and "Near Live" usability testing were conducted on two clinical decision support tools. Each was composed of an alert, a clinical prediction rule which estimated risk of either group A Streptococcus pharyngitis or pneumonia and an automatic order set based on risk. The objective of this study was to further understanding of the facilitators of usability and to evaluate the types of additional information gained from proceeding to "Near Live" testing after completing "Think Aloud". METHODS: This was a qualitative observational study conducted at a large academic health care system with 12 primary care providers. During "Think Aloud" testing, participants were provided with written clinical scenarios and asked to verbalize their thought process while interacting with the tool. During "Near Live" testing participants interacted with a mock patient. Morae usability software was used to record full screen capture and audio during every session. Participant comments were placed into coding categories and analyzed for generalizable themes. Themes were compared across usability methods. RESULTS: "Think Aloud" and "Near Live" usability testing generated similar themes under the coding categories visibility, workflow, content, understand-ability and navigation. However, they generated significantly different themes under the coding categories usability, practical usefulness and medical usefulness. During both types of testing participants found the tool easier to use when important text was distinct in its appearance, alerts were passive and appropriately timed, content was up to date, language was clear and simple, and each component of the tool included obvious indicators of next steps. Participant comments reflected higher expectations for usability and usefulness during "Near Live" testing. For example, visit aids, such as automatically generated order sets, were felt to be less useful during "Near-Live" testing because they would not be all inclusive for the visit. CONCLUSIONS: These complementary types of usability testing generated unique and generalizable insights. Feedback during "Think Aloud" testing primarily helped to improve the tools' ease of use. The additional feedback from "Near Live" testing, which mimics a real clinical encounter, was helpful for eliciting key barriers and facilitators to provider workflow and adoption.