Optimal Urine Culture Diagnostic Stewardship Practice-Results from an Expert Modified-Delphi Procedure.

Kimberly C Claeys, Barbara W Trautner, Surbhi Leekha, K C Coffey, Christopher J Crnich, Dan J Diekema, Mohamad G Fakih, Matthew Bidwell Goetz, Kalpana Gupta, Makoto M Jones, Luci Leykum, Stephen Y Liang, Lisa Pineles, Ashley Pleiss, Emily S Spivak, Katie J Suda, Jennifer M Taylor, Chanu Rhee, Daniel J Morgan
{"title":"Optimal Urine Culture Diagnostic Stewardship Practice-Results from an Expert Modified-Delphi Procedure.","authors":"Kimberly C Claeys,&nbsp;Barbara W Trautner,&nbsp;Surbhi Leekha,&nbsp;K C Coffey,&nbsp;Christopher J Crnich,&nbsp;Dan J Diekema,&nbsp;Mohamad G Fakih,&nbsp;Matthew Bidwell Goetz,&nbsp;Kalpana Gupta,&nbsp;Makoto M Jones,&nbsp;Luci Leykum,&nbsp;Stephen Y Liang,&nbsp;Lisa Pineles,&nbsp;Ashley Pleiss,&nbsp;Emily S Spivak,&nbsp;Katie J Suda,&nbsp;Jennifer M Taylor,&nbsp;Chanu Rhee,&nbsp;Daniel J Morgan","doi":"10.1093/cid/ciab987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Urine cultures are nonspecific and often lead to misdiagnosis of urinary tract infection and unnecessary antibiotics. Diagnostic stewardship is a set of procedures that modifies test ordering, processing, and reporting in order to optimize diagnosis and downstream treatment. In this study, we aimed to develop expert guidance on best practices for urine culture diagnostic stewardship.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A RAND-modified Delphi approach with a multidisciplinary expert panel was used to ascertain diagnostic stewardship best practices. Clinical questions to guide recommendations were grouped into three thematic areas (ordering, processing, reporting) in practice settings of emergency department, inpatient, ambulatory, and long-term care. Fifteen experts ranked recommendations on a 9-point Likert scale. Recommendations on which the panel did not reach agreement were discussed during a virtual meeting, then a second round of ranking by email was completed. After secondary review of results and panel discussion, a series of guidance statements was developed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and sixty-five questions were reviewed. The panel reaching agreement on 104, leading to 18 overarching guidance statements. The following strategies were recommended to optimize ordering urine cultures: requiring documentation of symptoms, sending alerts to discourage ordering in the absence of symptoms, and cancelling repeat cultures. For urine culture processing, conditional urine cultures and urine white blood cell count as criteria were supported. For urine culture reporting, appropriate practices included nudges to discourage treatment under specific conditions and selective reporting of antibiotics to guide therapy decisions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These 18 guidance statements can optimize use of urine cultures for better patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":10421,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Infectious Diseases: An Official Publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America","volume":" ","pages":"382-389"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Infectious Diseases: An Official Publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciab987","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Background: Urine cultures are nonspecific and often lead to misdiagnosis of urinary tract infection and unnecessary antibiotics. Diagnostic stewardship is a set of procedures that modifies test ordering, processing, and reporting in order to optimize diagnosis and downstream treatment. In this study, we aimed to develop expert guidance on best practices for urine culture diagnostic stewardship.

Methods: A RAND-modified Delphi approach with a multidisciplinary expert panel was used to ascertain diagnostic stewardship best practices. Clinical questions to guide recommendations were grouped into three thematic areas (ordering, processing, reporting) in practice settings of emergency department, inpatient, ambulatory, and long-term care. Fifteen experts ranked recommendations on a 9-point Likert scale. Recommendations on which the panel did not reach agreement were discussed during a virtual meeting, then a second round of ranking by email was completed. After secondary review of results and panel discussion, a series of guidance statements was developed.

Results: One hundred and sixty-five questions were reviewed. The panel reaching agreement on 104, leading to 18 overarching guidance statements. The following strategies were recommended to optimize ordering urine cultures: requiring documentation of symptoms, sending alerts to discourage ordering in the absence of symptoms, and cancelling repeat cultures. For urine culture processing, conditional urine cultures and urine white blood cell count as criteria were supported. For urine culture reporting, appropriate practices included nudges to discourage treatment under specific conditions and selective reporting of antibiotics to guide therapy decisions.

Conclusions: These 18 guidance statements can optimize use of urine cultures for better patient outcomes.

最佳尿培养诊断管理实践-结果从专家修改德尔菲程序。
背景:尿培养是非特异性的,经常导致尿路感染的误诊和不必要的抗生素。诊断管理是一套程序,修改测试顺序,处理和报告,以优化诊断和下游治疗。在这项研究中,我们旨在为尿液培养诊断管理的最佳实践提供专家指导。方法:采用RAND-modified德尔菲法与多学科专家小组确定诊断管理的最佳做法。临床问题,以指导建议分为三个主题领域(订购,处理,报告)在实践设置急诊科,住院,门诊和长期护理。15位专家按照9分的李克特量表对建议进行排名。专家组在虚拟会议上讨论了未达成一致的建议,然后通过电子邮件完成了第二轮排名。经过对结果的二次审查和小组讨论,制定了一系列指导声明。结果:共审查了165个问题。专家组就104项达成了一致意见,包括18项总体指导声明。建议采用以下策略来优化尿培养的订购:要求记录症状,在没有症状的情况下发送警报以阻止订购,并取消重复培养。对于尿培养处理,条件尿培养和尿白细胞计数作为标准支持。对于尿培养报告,适当的做法包括在特定条件下推动不鼓励治疗和选择性报告抗生素以指导治疗决策。结论:这18条指导声明可以优化尿培养的使用,以获得更好的患者预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信