Incorporating preauthorization into antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist workflow reduces Clostridioides difficile and gastrointestinal panel testing

Approaches to developing and implementing a molecular diagnostics stewardship program for infectious diseases: an ASM Laboratory Practices Subcommittee report

Diagnostic stewardship (DxS) for infectious disease testing requires a multi-disciplinary approach to optimize test selection, performance, interpretation and patient treatment. Nucleic acid amplification-based tests for the diagnosis of infectious diseases, or "molecular microbiology tests," have rapidly expanded over the past two decades. With the increased availability and complexity of these tests, there is also an increased need for collaborative approaches to optimize test use to promote positive impacts on patient care, while mitigating potential negative impact or resource waste. In this review, we provide recommendations on building collaborative DxS teams, including microbiologists and the diverse stakeholders that use and interpret molecular microbiology tests. We then detail approaches to identify high-priority molecular microbiology tests that may need utilization assessment, select appropriate diagnostic stewardship interventions, and monitor the impact of implemented interventions. This strategic process may be employed by laboratories to realize optimal testing for selected tests at their institution.

Diagnostic stewardship in infectious diseases: a scoping review

Introduction. The term 'diagnostic stewardship' is relatively new, with a recent surge in its use within the literature. Despite its increasing popularity, a precise definition remains elusive. Various attempts have been made to define it, with some viewing it as an integral part of antimicrobial stewardship. The World Health Organization offers a broad definition, emphasizing the importance of timely, accurate diagnostics. However, inconsistencies in the use of this term still persist, necessitating further clarification.Gap Statement. There are currently inconsistencies in the definition of diagnostic stewardship used within the academic literature.Aim. This scoping review aims to categorize the use of diagnostic stewardship approaches and define this approach by identifying common characteristics and factors of its use within the literature.Methodology. This scoping review undertook a multi-database search from date of inception until October 2022. Any observational or experimental study where the authors define the intervention to be diagnostic stewardship from any clinical area was included. Screening of all papers was undertaken by a single reviewer with 10% verification by a second reviewer. Data extraction was undertaken by a single reviewer using a pre-piloted form. Given the wide variation in study design and intervention outcomes, a narrative synthesis approach was applied. Studies were clustered around common diagnostic stewardship interventions where appropriate.Results. After duplicate removal, a total of 1310 citations were identified, of which, after full-paper screening, 105 studies were included in this scoping review. The classification of an intervention as taking a diagnostic stewardship approach is a relatively recent development, with the first publication in this field dating back to 2017. The majority of research in this area has been conducted within the USA, with very few studies undertaken outside this region. Visual inspection of the citation map reveals that the current evidence base is interconnected, with frequent references to each other's work. The interventions commonly adopt a restrictive approach, utilizing hard and soft stops within the pre-analytical phase to restrict access to testing. Upon closer examination of the outcomes, it becomes evident that there is a predominant focus on reducing the number of tests rather than enhancing the current test protocol. This is further reflected in the limited number of studies that report on test performance (including protocol improvements, specificity and sensitivity).Conclusion. Diagnostic stewardship seems to have deviated from its intended course, morphing into a rather rudimentary instrument wielded not to enhance but to constrict the scope of testing. Despite the World Health Organization's advocacy for an ideology that promotes a more comprehensive approach to quality improvement, it may be more appropriate to consider alternative regional narratives when categorizing these types of quality improvement interventions.

The importance of pharmacist engagement in diagnostic stewardship

Diagnostic stewardship is increasingly recognized as a powerful tool to improve patient safety. Given the close relationship between diagnostic testing and antimicrobial misuse, antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) pharmacists should be key members of the diagnostic team. Pharmacists practicing in AMS already frequently engage with clinicians to improve the diagnostic process and have many skills needed for the implementation of diagnostic stewardship initiatives. As diagnostic stewardship becomes more broadly used, all infectious disease clinicians, including pharmacists, must collaborate to optimize patient care.

Impact of mandatory nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) testing approval on hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile infection (HO-CDI) rates: A diagnostic stewardship intervention

Misclassification of Clostridioides difficile colonization as hospital-onset C. difficile infection (HO-CDI) can lead to unnecessary treatment of patients and substantial financial penalties for hospitals. We successfully implemented mandatory C. difficile PCR testing approval as a strategy to optimize testing, which was associated with a significant decline in the monthly incidence of HO-CDI rates and lowering of our standardized infection ratio to 0.77 (from 1.03) 18 months after this intervention. Approval request served as an educational opportunity to promote mindful testing and accurate diagnosis of HO-CDI.

Clostridioides difficile Infection in Children: Recent Updates on Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Therapy

Clostridioides (formerly Clostridium) difficile is the most important infectious cause of antibiotic-associated diarrhea worldwide and a leading cause of healthcare-associated infection in the United States. The incidence of C. difficile infection (CDI) in children has increased, with 20 000 cases now reported annually, also posing indirect educational and economic consequences. In contrast to infection in adults, CDI in children is more commonly community-associated, accounting for three-quarters of all cases. A wide spectrum of disease severity ranging from asymptomatic carriage to severe diarrhea can occur, varying by age. Fulminant disease, although rare in children, is associated with high morbidity and even fatality. Diagnosis of CDI can be challenging as currently available tests detect either the presence of organism or disease-causing toxin but cannot distinguish colonization from infection. Since colonization can be high in specific pediatric groups, such as infants and young children, biomarkers to aid in accurate diagnosis are urgently needed. Similar to disease in adults, recurrence of CDI in children is common, affecting 20% to 30% of incident cases. Metronidazole has long been considered the mainstay therapy for CDI in children. However, new evidence supports the safety and efficacy of oral vancomycin and fidaxomicin as additional treatment options, whereas fecal microbiota transplantation is gaining popularity for recurrent infection. Recent advancements in our understanding of emerging epidemiologic trends and management of CDI unique to children are highlighted in this review. Despite encouraging therapeutic advancements, there remains a pressing need to optimize CDI therapy in children, particularly as it pertains to severe and recurrent disease.

Diagnostic stewardship for Clostridioides difficile testing in an acute care hospital: A quality improvement intervention

Objective:

To evaluate the impact of a diagnostic stewardship intervention on Clostridioides difficile healthcare-associated infections (HAI).

Design:

Quality improvement study.

Setting:

Two urban acute care hospitals.

Interventions:

All inpatient stool testing for C. difficile required review and approval prior to specimen processing in the laboratory. An infection preventionist reviewed all orders daily through chart review and conversations with nursing; orders meeting clinical criteria for testing were approved, orders not meeting clinical criteria were discussed with the ordering provider. The proportion of completed tests meeting clinical criteria for testing and the primary outcome of C. difficile HAI were compared before and after the intervention.

Results:

The frequency of completed C. difficile orders not meeting criteria was lower [146 (7.5%) of 1,958] in the intervention period (January 10, 2022–October 14, 2022) than in the sampled 3-month preintervention period [26 (21.0%) of 124; P < .001]. C. difficile HAI rates were 8.80 per 10,000 patient days prior to the intervention (March 1, 2021–January 9, 2022) and 7.69 per 10,000 patient days during the intervention period (incidence rate ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.73–1.05; P = .13).

Conclusions:

A stringent order-approval process reduced clinically nonindicated testing for C. difficile but did not significantly decrease HAIs.

Diagnostic Stewardship in Clinical Microbiology, Essential Partner to Antimicrobial Stewardship

Background

Diagnostic stewardship is an important partner to antimicrobial stewardship.

Content

Diagnostic stewardship focuses on ensuring correct diagnosis of infectious diseases while antimicrobial stewardship aims to optimize antimicrobial treatment. Both aim to improve patient outcomes. Diagnostic stewardship involves interventions that reduce testing in patients with low pretest probability, optimize a test’s likelihood ratio, and seek to warn providers when suboptimal test results might have been reported.

Conclusion

Diagnostic stewardship interventions have been described primarily in the areas of urinary tract infection, Clostridioides difficile infection, and bloodstream infection diagnosis. However, emerging areas include pneumonia and wound infections in addition to optimization of multiplexed panel-based testing.

Antimicrobial Stewardship and the Infection Control Practitioner: A Natural Alliance

Antibiotic overuse and misuse has contributed to rising rates of multidrug-resistant organisms and Clostridioides difficile. Decreasing antibiotic misuse has become a national public health priority. This review outlines the goals of antimicrobial stewardship, essential members of the program, implementation strategies, approaches to measuring the program's impact, and steps needed to build a program. Highlighted is the alliance between antimicrobial stewardship programs and infection prevention programs in their efforts to improve antibiotic use, improve diagnostic stewardship for C difficile and asymptomatic bacteriuria, and decrease health care-associated infections and the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms.

Advances and required improvements in methods to diagnosing Clostridioides difficile infections in the healthcare setting

INTRODUCTION

Clostrididioides difficile is associated with adverse clinical outcomes and increased morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, and health-care costs.Areas Covered: We searched relevant papers in PubMed for the last 10 years. In major papers, we scanned the bibliographies to ensure that important articles were included. This review addresses the evolving epidemiology of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and discusses novel methods/approaches for improving the diagnosis of this important disease.

EXPERT OPINION

No single diagnostic test to date has demonstrated optimum sensitivity and specificity for detection of CDI. Many institutions have developed multi-step algorithms consistent with guidelines established by various professional societies. Some institutions have successfully tried to improve the pretest probability of molecular assays by implementing appropriate sample rejection criteria and establishing best practice alerts at the time of electronic order entry. Others have established PCR cycle threshold cutoffs to attempt to differentiate symptomatic patients from asymptomatic carriers or to make predictions about severity of disease with variable success. As research advances our understanding of C. difficile pathogenesis and pathophysiology, more information on CDI specific biomarkers is emerging. Finally, assessments of the microbiome and metabolome may expand the diagnostic armamentarium with advances in mass spectrometry and sequencing technologies.