Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:58:58.468Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Applying a Standard of Care to the Quality Assessment of Bacteremia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

Peter A. Gross ,
Zane K. Saul  and
Arpi Kuyumcu
Peter A. Gross*
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine and Pharmacy, Hackensack Medical Center, Hackensack, New Jersey, and New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey
Zane K. Saul
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine and Pharmacy, Hackensack Medical Center, Hackensack, New Jersey, and New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey
Arpi Kuyumcu
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine and Pharmacy, Hackensack Medical Center, Hackensack, New Jersey, and New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey
*
Dept. of Internal Medicine, Hackensack Medical Ctr., Hackensack, NJ 07601
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To identify an indicator of appropriate antibiotic use for bacteremia that is scientifically sound, that is noncontroversial, and that can be broadly applied as an index of the quality of care.

Design:

Retrospective review of consecutive cases of significant documented bacteremias.

Setting:

Suburban tertiary-care hospital.

Results:

Two hundred ninety-one of 300 (97%) patients received appropriate antibiotics within 48 hours after the final antibiotic sensitivity report was placed on the hospital chart. Therapy was not appropriate in 6 patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and in 3 patients with enterococcal bacteremia.

Interventions:

Following this study, we instituted a program to prospectively monitor antibiotic use in bacteremias. During the most recent 1-year period, the infectious disease fellow or pharmacist called the attending physician to change antibiotics in 84 of 731 (11.5%) patients with bacteremia. The program was well-accepted by attending physicians.

Conclusions:

A scientifically sound, non-controversial standard of care was identified and used to evaluate the appropriateness of antibiotic use. When this standard was applied prospectively and incorporated into the hospital's routine operations, the quality of care was improved.

Type
Brief Report
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 13 , Issue 7 , July 1992 , pp. 403 - 406
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Sanazaro, PJ, Mills, DH. A critique of the use of generic screening in quality assessment. JAMA. 1991;15:1977–1981.Google Scholar
2. Bryan, CS. Clinical implications of positive blood cultures. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1989;2:329–353.Google Scholar
3. Setia, U, Gross, PA Bacteremia in a community hospital. Arch Intern Med. 1977;137:1698–1701.Google Scholar
4. Matsen, JM. Means to facilitate physician acceptance and use of rapid test results. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1985;3:S73–S78.Google Scholar
5. Pestotnik, SL, Evans, RS, Burke, JP, Gardner, RM, Classen, DC. Therapeutic antibiotic monitoring: surveillance using a computerized expert system. Am J Med. 1990;88:43–47.Google Scholar
6. Lohr, KN. Medical practice guidelines: emerging issues and approaches-an overview. In: Medical Practice Guidelines Workshop: Issues in Internal Medicine, June 8-9, 1990. Washington, DC: Internal Medicine Center to Advance Research and Education; 1990:26–38.Google Scholar
7. Weinstein, MP, Murphy, JR, Reller, LB, Lichenstein, KA. The clinical significance of positive blood cultures: a comprehensive analysis of 500 episodes of bacteremia and fungemia in adults. Rev Infect Dis. 1983;5:54–70.Google Scholar
8. Kunin, CM, Tupasi, T, Craig, WA Use of antimicrobials: a brief exposition of the problem and some tentative solutions. Ann Intern Med. 1973;79:555–560.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Castle, M, Wilfert, CN, Cate, TR, Osterhout, S. Antimicrobial use at Duke University Medical Center. JAMA. 1977;237:2819–2833.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Maki, DG, Shuna, AA. A study of antimicrobial misuse in a university hospital. Am J Med Sci. 1978;275:271–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Dunagan, WC, Woodword, RS, Medoff, G, et al. Antimicrobial misuse in patients with positive blood cultures. Am J Med. 1989;87:253–259.Google Scholar
12. Washington, JA. Antibacterial agents: pharmacodynamics, pharmacology, new agents. Znfect Dis Clin North Am. 1989;3:375–387.Google Scholar
13. Crede, WB, Hierholzer, WJ Jr. Surveillance for quality assessment, III: the critical assessment of quality indicators. Znfect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1990;11:197–201.Google Scholar
14. Laffel, G, Blumenthal, D. The case for using industrial quality management science in health care organizations. JAMA. 1989;262:2869–2873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Deming, WE. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, Mass: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Advanced Engineering Study; 1986.Google Scholar