Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical impact of a multiplex rapid diagnostic pneumonia panel in critically ill patients.
Esplund, Jayda N; Taylor, Alex D; Stone, Tyler J; Palavecino, Elizabeth L; Kilic, Abdullah; Luther, Vera P; Ohl, Christopher A; Beardsley, James R.
Afiliación
  • Esplund JN; Department of Pharmacy, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
  • Taylor AD; Department of Pharmacy, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
  • Stone TJ; Section on Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
  • Palavecino EL; Department of Pharmacy, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
  • Kilic A; Section on Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
  • Luther VP; Department of Pathology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
  • Ohl CA; Department of Pathology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
  • Beardsley JR; Section on Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36714280
ABSTRACT

Objective:

To evaluate the clinical impact of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (PNA panel) in critically ill patients.

Design:

Single-center, preintervention and postintervention retrospective cohort study.

Setting:

Tertiary-care academic medical center. Patients Adult ICU patients.

Methods:

Patients with quantitative bacterial cultures obtained by bronchoalveolar lavage or tracheal aspirate either before (January-March 2021, preintervention period) or after (January-March 2022, postintervention period) implementation of the PNA panel were randomly screened until 25 patients per study month (75 in each cohort) who met the study criteria were included. Antibiotic use from the day of culture collection through day 5 was compared.

Results:

The primary outcome of median time to first antibiotic change based on microbiologic data was 50 hours before the intervention versus 21 hours after the intervention (P = .0006). Also, 56 postintervention regimens (75%) were eligible for change based on PNA panel results; actual change occurred in 30 regimens (54%). Median antibiotic days of therapy (DOTs) were 8 before the intervention versus 6 after the intervention (P = .07). For the patients with antibiotic changes made based on PNA panel results, the median time to first antibiotic change was 10 hours. For patients who were initially on inadequate therapy, time to adequate therapy was 67 hours before the intervention versus 37 hours after the intervention (P = .27).

Conclusions:

The PNA panel was associated with decreased time to first antibiotic change and fewer antibiotic DOTs. Its impact may have been larger if a higher percentage of potential antibiotic changes had been implemented. The PNA panel is a promising tool to enhance antibiotic stewardship.

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article