Development and validation of a screening tool for early identification of bloodstream infection in older patients - a retrospective case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Delayed diagnosis of bloodstream infection (BSI) occurs in > 20% of older patients, with misdiagnosis in 35%. Our objective was to develop and validate a clinically useful screening tool to identify older patients with a high probability of having a BSI. METHODS: Hospitalized patients > 80 years old with BSI (n = 105/group) were evaluated for the tool development in this retrospective matched case-controlled study (learn cohort). The tool was validated in different retrospectively matched case and control patients > 80 years old (n = 120/group) and 65 to 79 years old (n = 250/group) (test cohort). Binary logistic regression was used to develop a screening tool using laboratory and clinical parameters that were significantly associated with BSI (P < 0.05; adjusted odds ratio (OR) > 1); and Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis was used to identify parameter breakpoints. Performance metrics were used to evaluate and validate the tool. RESULTS: The significant parameters associated with BSI were maximum temperature (Tmax)(> 37.55C)(OR = 42.575), neutrophils (> 7.95)(OR = 1.923), a change in level of consciousness (LOC) (Yes = 1, No = 0)(OR = 1.571), blood urea nitrogen (BUN)(> 10.05)(OR = 1.359), glucose (> 7.35)(OR = 1.167), albumin (< 33.5)(OR = 1.038) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (> 19.5)(OR = 1.005). The optimal screening tool [Ln (odds of BSI) = - 150.299 + 3.751(Tmax) + 0.654(neutrophils) + 0.452(change in LOC) + 0.307(BUN) + 0.154(glucose) + 0.038(albumin) + 0.005(ALT)] had favorable performance metrics in the learn and test cohorts (sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 95% in the learn cohort and 77, 89, and 81% in the total test cohort); and performed better than using only temperature and neutrophil count. CONCLUSIONS: The validated tool had high predictive value which may improve early identification and management of BSI in older patients.

Development of clinical pharmacy key performance indicators for hospital pharmacists using a modified Delphi approach.

BACKGROUND: Key performance indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures of quality. There are no published, systematically derived clinical pharmacy KPIs (cpKPIs). OBJECTIVE: A group of hospital pharmacists aimed to develop national cpKPIs to advance clinical pharmacy practice and improve patient care. METHODS: A cpKPI working group established a cpKPI definition, 8 evidence-derived cpKPI critical activity areas, 26 candidate cpKPIs, and 11 cpKPI ideal attributes in addition to 1 overall consensus criterion. Twenty-six clinical pharmacists and hospital pharmacy leaders participated in an internet-based 3-round modified Delphi survey. Panelists rated 26 candidate cpKPIs using 11 cpKPI ideal attributes and 1 overall consensus criterion on a 9-point Likert scale. A meeting was facilitated between rounds 2 and 3 to debate the merits and wording of candidate cpKPIs. Consensus was reached if 75% or more of panelists assigned a score of 7 to 9 on the consensus criterion during the third Delphi round. RESULTS: All panelists completed the 3 Delphi rounds, and 25/26 (96%) attended the meeting. Eight candidate cpKPIs met the consensus definition: (1) performing admission medication reconciliation (including best-possible medication history), (2) participating in interprofessional patient care rounds, (3) completing pharmaceutical care plans, (4) resolving drug therapy problems, (5) providing in-person disease and medication education to patients, (6) providing discharge patient medication education, (7) performing discharge medication reconciliation, and (8) providing bundled, proactive direct patient care activities. CONCLUSIONS: A Delphi panel of hospital pharmacists was successful in determining 8 consensus cpKPIs. Measurement and assessment of these cpKPIs will serve to advance clinical pharmacy practice and improve patient care.

Ultrasound vs Endoscopy, Surgery, or Pathology for the Diagnosis of Small Bowel Crohn's Disease and its Complications.

BACKGROUND: In patients with inflammatory bowel disease, we strive to achieve mucosal healing, as this has been shown to decrease the risk of disease flares, hospitalization, and surgery. For this reason, we must use objective measures of mucosal healing to inform our clinical decision-making and can no longer rely on patient symptoms alone. Assessment of small bowel Crohn's disease (SBCD) is particularly challenging given its lack of accessibility via standard endoscopic techniques. Ultrasound (US) represents a readily available, cost-effective, minimally invasive, radiation-free alternative for the assessment of small bowel disease. In this study, we performed a systematic review to determine the accuracy of ultrasound in diagnosing SBCD and its complications as compared with endoscopic visualization, surgery, and/or pathology. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL. Prospective cohort studies published up to March 2017 were reviewed. References meeting all eligibility criteria were assessed at the full-text level by 2 independent reviewers. Sensitivity and specificity were collected where available. RESULTS: A total of 2817 unique references were identified. Twenty-two studies were included. All studies were at low-moderate risk of bias based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria. Transabdominal US (TAUS) yielded moderately high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of SBCD and its postoperative recurrence. Detection was more accurate for severe postoperative recurrence. The diagnostic accuracy of US in stricture and abscess detection was high. Contrast enhancement improved the detection of abscess. Diagnostic detection of fistulas was of moderate accuracy. Entero-enteric fistulization and entero-mesenteric fistulization were most clearly identified. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound can be used to diagnose SBCD in those with known or suspected Crohn's disease. It can be used to detect postoperative recurrence and can accurately identify abscesses and fistulas, especially with the aid of contrast enhancement.

Evaluation of a Novel Audit Tool for Medication Reconciliation at Hospital Discharge.

BACKGROUND: Discharge medication reconciliation (MedRec) is designed to reduce medication errors and inform patients and key postdischarge providers, but it has been difficult to implement routinely in Canadian hospitals. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and optimize a new discharge MedRec quality audit tool and to use it at 3 urban teaching hospitals. METHODS: The discharge MedRec quality audit tool, developed by the Canadian Patient Safety Institute and the Institute for Safe Medication Practices Canada, was assessed and modified to improve comprehensiveness, clarity, and quality. The modified tool was then used to evaluate the quality of the discharge MedRec process for adult patients discharged to home from the general internal medicine service at 3 academic hospitals. Postdischarge telephone interviews were conducted with consenting patients, their community pharmacists, and their family doctors. RESULTS: The audit tool required modification to include aspects of admission MedRec, high-risk medication discrepancies, and direct communication of discharge MedRec to key follow-up providers. Thirty-five patients (mean age 67.7 years, standard deviation [SD] 18.0 years; 17 [49%] women), with a mean of 8.8 (SD 4.5) prescribed medications at discharge, participated in the discharge MedRec evaluation. Documentation of any discharge MedRec was found for only 1 patient (3%), and no discharge MedRec was carried out by pharmacists. Postdischarge follow-up interviews elicited major gaps in communication with community pharmacists and with family physicians, which could lead to serious medication errors. CONCLUSIONS: The modified audit tool was useful for identifying gaps in the quality of discharge MedRec.

CONTEXTE: Le bilan comparatif des médicaments (BCM) au moment du congé est conçu pour réduire les erreurs médicamenteuses et informer les patients ainsi que les principaux prestataires de soins de santé après le congé, mais sa mise en oeuvre systématique dans les hôpitaux canadiens s'est heurtée à de grandes difficultés. OBJECTIFS: Évaluer et optimiser un nouvel outil d'évaluation de la qualité du BCM au moment du congé et l'utiliser dans trois hôpitaux universitaires urbains. MÉTHODES: Cet outil développé par l'Institut canadien pour la sécurité des patients (ICSP) et l'Institut pour la sécurité des médicaments aux patients du Canada (ISMP) a fait l'objet d'une évaluation et d'une modification visant à améliorer son exhaustivité, sa clarté et sa qualité. L'outil modifié a ensuite servi à évaluer la qualité du processus du BCM pour des patients adultes ayant obtenu leur congé après un séjour dans un service général de médecine interne dans trois hôpitaux universitaires. Des entretiens téléphoniques après le congé ont été menés avec les patients consentants, leur pharmacien communautaire et leur médecin de famille. RÉSULTATS: L'outil d'évaluation a dû être modifié pour inclure le BCM au moment de l'admission, des écarts de médication à haut risque et une communication directe du BCM aux prestataires de soins de santé principaux chargés du suivi après le congé. Trente-cinq patients (âge moyen: 67,7 ans; écart type [ET] 18 ans; 17 [49 %] femmes), chacun ayant reçu en moyenne 8,8 (ET 4,5) médicaments prescrits, ont participé à l'évaluation du BCM au congé de l'hôpital. Au moment du congé, on n'a trouvé de renseignements relatifs au BCM que pour un seul patient (3 %) et aucun BCM n'avait été préparé par les pharmaciens. Le suivi après le congé a généré des écarts de communication importants entre les pharmaciens communautaires et les médecins de famille, ce qui pourrait entraîner des erreurs médicamenteuses importantes. CONCLUSIONS: L'outil d'évaluation modifié a été utile pour déterminer les écarts relatifs à la qualité du BCM au moment du congé.