Leveraging diagnostic stewardship within antimicrobial stewardship programmes

Expanding antibiotic, vaccine, and diagnostics development and access to tackle antimicrobial resistance

The increasing number of bacterial infections globally that do not respond to any available antibiotics indicates a need to invest in-and ensure access to-new antibiotics, vaccines, and diagnostics. The traditional model of drug development, which depends on substantial revenues to motivate investment, is no longer economically viable without push and pull incentives. Moreover, drugs developed through these mechanisms are unlikely to be affordable for all patients in need, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. New, publicly funded models based on public-private partnerships could support investment in antibiotics and novel alternatives, and lower patients' out-of-pocket costs, making drugs more accessible. Cost reductions can be achieved with public goods, such as clinical trial networks and platform-based quality assurance, manufacturing, and product development support. Preserving antibiotic effectiveness relies on accurate and timely diagnosis; however scaling up diagnostics faces technological, economic, and behavioural challenges. New technologies appeared during the COVID-19 pandemic, but there is a need for a deeper understanding of market, physician, and consumer behaviour to improve the use of diagnostics in patient management. Ensuring sustainable access to antibiotics also requires infection prevention. Vaccines offer the potential to prevent infections from drug-resistant pathogens, but funding for vaccine development has been scarce in this context. The High-Level Meeting of the UN General Assembly in 2024 offers an opportunity to rethink how research and development can be reoriented to serve disease management, prevention, patient access, and antibiotic stewardship.

Lack of microbiological awareness on the ward as a key factor for inappropriate use of anti-infectives: results of a point prevalence study and user satisfaction survey in a large university hospital in Austria

PURPOSE

Although diagnostic stewardship issues in clinical microbiology harbor an optimization potential for anti-infective consumption, they are only marginally addressed in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs. As part of an AMS point prevalence (PPS) survey we therefore aimed to gain a more dynamic view on the microbiological awareness within therapeutic regimens. By examining whether initial microbiological sampling was performed and in which way microbiological results were incorporated into further treatment considerations we sought to find out to what extent these points determine the appropriateness of treatment regimens.

METHODS

PPS was performed at the University Hospital Salzburg (1524 beds) in May 2021. Relevant data was determined from the patient charts and the appropriateness of anti-infective use was assessed using predefined quality indicators. Six months after the PPS, a questionnaire was administered to clinicians to obtain information on the use of microbiological findings and their relevance in the clinic.

RESULTS

Lack of microbiological awareness in the clinical setting proved to be the key reason for an overall inadequate use of anti-infectives (35.4% of cases rated as inadequate), ahead of the aspects of dose (24.1%), empirical therapy (20.3%) and treatment duration (20.2%). This was particularly the case for broad-acting agents and was most evident in urinary tract infections, skin and soft tissue infections, and pneumonia. The results of the questionnaire indicate a discrepancy between the physicians surveyed and the routine clinical setting.

CONCLUSION

A high potential in improving the use of anti-infectives in hospitals seems to lie in a strong emphasis on microbiological diagnostic stewardship measures.

Current and emerging strategies to curb antibiotic-resistant urinary tract infections

Rising rates of antibiotic resistance in uropathogenic bacteria compromise patient outcomes and prolong hospital stays. Consequently, new strategies are needed to prevent and control the spread of antibiotic resistance in uropathogenic bacteria. Over the past two decades, sizeable clinical efforts and research advances have changed urinary tract infection (UTI) treatment and prevention strategies to conserve antibiotic use. The emergence of antimicrobial stewardship, policies from national societies, and the development of new antimicrobials have shaped modern UTI practices. Future UTI management practices could be driven by the evolution of antimicrobial stewardship, improved and readily available diagnostics, and an improved understanding of how the microbiome affects UTI. Forthcoming UTI treatment and prevention strategies could employ novel bactericidal compounds, combinations of new and classic antimicrobials that enhance bacterial killing, medications that prevent bacterial attachment to uroepithelial cells, repurposing drugs, and vaccines to curtail the rising rates of antibiotic resistance in uropathogenic bacteria and improve outcomes in people with UTI.

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.

Optimizing Antimicrobial Stewardship in the Emergency Department

Antibiotic stewardship is a core component of emergency department (ED) practice and impacts patient safety, clinical outcomes, and public health. The unique characteristics of ED practice, including crowding, time pressure, and diagnostic uncertainty, need to be considered when implementing antibiotic stewardship interventions in this setting. Rapid advances in pathogen detection and host response biomarkers promise to revolutionize the diagnosis of infectious diseases in the ED, but such tests are not yet considered standard of care. Presently, clinical decision support embedded in the electronic health record and pharmacist-led interventions are the most effective ways to improve antibiotic prescribing in the ED.

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.

Point of Care Molecular Testing: Current State and Opportunities for Diagnostic Stewardship

Inappropriate ordering practices, either under or over ordering of diagnostic tests, are recognized problems with possible negative downstream consequences. As the menu of clinical tests, especially molecular tests grows, it is becoming increasingly important to provide guidance to providers on the appropriate utilization. Diagnostic stewardship programs have been established at many institutions to help direct the appropriate utilization of laboratory testing to ultimately guide patient management and treatment decisions. Many molecular tests have now received Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-waived status for use in a point-of-care (POC) setting; however, parallel diagnostic stewardship programs have not been established to help guide providers on how best to use these tests. In this article, we will discuss the available molecular POC tests and opportunities and challenges for establishing diagnostic stewardship programs for molecular testing performed in the POC setting.

Improving diagnostic accuracy of blood culture-positive cases in a cancer center via an antimicrobial stewardship program and infectious disease consultations

The direct impact of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) and infectious disease (ID) consultations on patients' clinical diagnoses remains unknown. We assessed their influence on improving the diagnostic accuracy of blood culture-positive inpatients at a Japanese cancer center. Our single-center, retrospective observational study was conducted from April 1, 2018 to March 31, 2022 to evaluate two phases: pre-intervention (notification of antimicrobials by the infection control team) and post-intervention (ASP implementation and ID consultation service establishment). There were 42,514 inpatients: 22,096 during the pre-intervention and 20,418 during the intervention periods. A total of 939 blood culture-positive episodes (pre-intervention, n = 434; post-intervention, n = 505) were analyzed. During the pre-intervention period, 28.1% of the patients had an unknown diagnosis, which decreased significantly to 1.2% post-intervention. Furthermore, hepatobiliary tract and other infections increased significantly post-intervention, and the mortality rate due to Staphylococcus aureus infection decreased from 28.6% pre-intervention to 10.4% post-intervention. The trend and level of the total number of culture specimens submitted per 1000 patient days for all culture specimens increased significantly post-intervention. Notably, the two-set rate of monthly blood cultures increased significantly. In conclusion, improving the overall diagnostic process with ASP and ID consultations at cancer centers could lead to the optimization of patient care.

A decade of clinical microbiology: top 10 advances in 10 years: what every infection preventionist and antimicrobial steward should know

The past 10 years have brought paradigm-shifting changes to clinical microbiology. This paper explores the top 10 transformative innovations across the diagnostic spectrum, including not only state of the art technologies but also preanalytic and post-analytic advances. Clinical decision support tools have reshaped testing practices, curbing unnecessary tests. Innovations like broad-range polymerase chain reaction and metagenomic sequencing, whole genome sequencing, multiplex molecular panels, rapid phenotypic susceptibility testing, and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry have all expanded our diagnostic armamentarium. Rapid home-based testing has made diagnostic testing more accessible than ever. Enhancements to clinician-laboratory interfaces allow for automated stewardship interventions and education. Laboratory restructuring and consolidation efforts are reshaping the field of microbiology, presenting both opportunities and challenges for the future of clinical microbiology laboratories. Here, we review key innovations of the last decade.

[Diagnostic Stewardship - The right test for the right patient with the right consequences]

In 2023, the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) Task Force issued a practice recommendation on the integration of diagnostic stewardship into antibiotic stewardship (ABS) programs, which focuses on optimizing sample collection, processing, and reporting to ensure a correct test result on the one hand, and on the justifying indication to perform diagnostics on the other.Unnecessary microbiological or serological tests produce results that can then lead to unnecessary further tests for clarification or unnecessary antibiotic administration. A classic example is "routine" urine cultures before non-urological, surgical interventions, which often lead to the treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria. Every microbiological diagnosis must therefore be preceded by a specific question, whereby screening examinations from epidemiological questions must be clearly distinguished from clinical requirements. A particular problem is the distinction between contamination, colonization and infection, especially when samples are taken from catheters or drains. These materials should always be evaluated with extreme caution and may only be accepted at all if the clinical question is clear and subject to this very reservation. This article summarizes the existing evidence on diagnostic stewardship interventions and recommendations on their implementation, extrapolating the international literature to the specifications of the German health care system.

Understanding and Implementing Diagnostic Stewardship: A Guide for Resident Physicians in the Era of Antimicrobial Resistance

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a significant global health challenge, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are crucial in managing this crisis, with diagnostic stewardship (DS) emerging as a key component. DS refers to the appropriate use of diagnostic tests to optimize patient outcomes, improve antimicrobial use, and combat multi-drug-resistant (MDR) organisms. Despite its potential, understanding and application of DS remain ambiguous in multiple respects, which, however, do not directly implicate the implementation of such initiatives. DS is particularly important for resident physicians who are often at the forefront of patient care and can significantly influence future AMR strategies. This review provides a comprehensive overview of DS, discussing its importance, potential challenges, and future directions. It emphasizes the need for resident physicians to understand DS principles and integrate them into their clinical practice from the beginning of their careers. The review also highlights the role of various stakeholders in implementing DS and the importance of continuous education and training. Ultimately, DS is not just a clinical tool but a philosophy of care, essential for a more responsive, humane, and effective healthcare system.