Search

Objective: We evaluated the impact of test-order frequency per diarrheal episodes on Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) incidence estimates in a sample of hospitals at 2 CDC Emerging Infections Program (EIP) sites., Design: Observational survey., Setting: Inpatients at 5 acute-care hospitals in Rochester, New York, and Atlanta, Georgia, during two 10-workday periods in 2020 and 2021., Outcomes: We calculated diarrhea incidence, testing frequency, and CDI positivity (defined as any positive NAAT test) across strata. Predictors of CDI testing and positivity were assessed using modified Poisson regression. Population estimates of incidence using modified Emerging Infections Program methodology were compared between sites using the Mantel-Hanzel summary rate ratio., Results: Surveillance of 38,365 patient days identified 860 diarrhea cases from 107 patient-care units mapped to 26 unique NHSN defined location types. Incidence of diarrhea was 22.4 of 1,000 patient days (medians, 25.8 for Rochester and 16.2 for Atlanta; P < .01). Similar proportions of diarrhea cases were hospital onset (66%) at both sites. Overall, 35% of patients with diarrhea were tested for CDI, but this differed by site: 21% in Rochester and 49% in Atlanta ( P < .01). Regression models identified location type (ie, oncology or critical care) and laxative use predictive of CDI test ordering. Adjusting for these factors, CDI testing was 49% less likely in Rochester than Atlanta (adjusted rate ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.63). Population estimates in Rochester had a 38% lower incidence of CDI than Atlanta (summary rate ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.54-0.71)., Conclusion: Accounting for patient-specific factors that influence CDI test ordering, differences in testing practices between sites remain and likely contribute to regional differences in surveillance estimates.

Objective: To determine the effect of an electronic medical record (EMR) nudge at reducing total and inappropriate orders testing for hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile infection (HO-CDI)., Design: An interrupted time series analysis of HO-CDI orders 2 years before and 2 years after the implementation of an EMR intervention designed to reduce inappropriate HO-CDI testing. Orders for C. difficile testing were considered inappropriate if the patient had received a laxative or stool softener in the previous 24 hours., Setting: Four hospitals in an academic healthcare network., Patients: All patients with a C. difficile order after hospital day 3., Intervention: Orders for C. difficile testing in patients administered a laxative or stool softener in <24 hours triggered an EMR alert defaulting to cancellation of the order ("nudge")., Results: Of the 17,694 HO-CDI orders, 7% were inappropriate (8% prentervention vs 6% postintervention; P < .001). Monthly HO-CDI orders decreased by 21% postintervention (level-change rate ratio [RR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.86), and the rate continued to decrease (postintervention trend change RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00). The intervention was not associated with a level change in inappropriate HO-CDI orders (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.61-1.05), but the postintervention inappropriate order rate decreased over time (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.97)., Conclusion: An EMR nudge to minimize inappropriate ordering for C. difficile was effective at reducing HO-CDI orders, and likely contributed to decreasing the inappropriate HO-CDI order rate after the intervention.

Background: The current methodology for calculating central-line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates, used for pay-for-performance measures, does not account for multiple concurrent central lines., Objective: To compare CLABSI rates using standard National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) denominators to rates accounting for multiple concurrent central lines., Design: Descriptive analysis and retrospective cohort analysis., Methods: We identified all adult patients with central lines at 2 academic medical centers over an 18-month period. CLABSI rates were calculated for intensive care units (ICUs) and non-ICUs using the standard NHSN methodology and denominator (a patient could only have 1 central-line day for a given patient day) and a modified denominator (number of central lines in 1 patient in 1 day count as number of line days). We also compared characteristics of patients with and without multiple concurrent central lines., Results: Among 18,521 hospital admissions, there were 156,574 central-line days and 239 CLABSIs (ICU, 105; non-ICU, 134). Our modified denominator reduced CLABSI rates by 25% in ICUs (1.95 vs 1.47 per 1,000 line days) and 6% (1.30 vs 1.22 per 1,000 line days) in non-ICUs. Patients with multiple concurrent central lines were more likely to be in an ICU, to have a longer admission, to have a dialysis catheter, and to have a CLABSI., Conclusions: Using the number of central lines as the denominator decreased CLABSI rates in ICUs by 25%. The presence of multiple concurrent central lines may be a marker of severity of illness. The risk of CLABSI per lumen of a central line is similar in ICUs compared to wards.