Search

Rates of fluoroquinolone resistance among Pseudomonas aeruginosa in hospitals are increasing, but interhospital variability is great. We sought to determine whether this variability correlated to fluoroquinolone use in hospitals and in the surrounding community. Hospital quinolone use in 1999 (24 hospitals) through 2001 (35 hospitals) was determined from billing records. The number of fluoroquinolone prescriptions within a 10-mile (approximately 16-km) radius of each hospital was determined for 1999 and 2000. Hospital fluoroquinolone use increased from 1999 through 2001, from 137 to 163 defined daily doses (DDD)/1000 patient-days (P=.01). The rate of community fluoroquinolone use also increased, from 2.3 to 2.8 DDD/1000 inhabitant-days (P

Nosocomial bloodstream infections are important causes of morbidity and mortality. In this study, concurrent surveillance for nosocomial bloodstream infections at 49 hospitals over a 3-year period detected >10,000 infections. Gram-positive organisms accounted for 64% of cases, gram-negative organisms accounted for 27%, and 8% were caused by fungi. The most common organisms were coagulase-negative staphylococci (32%), Staphylococcus aureus (16%), and enterococci (11%). Enterobacter, Serratia, coagulase-negative staphylococci, and Candida were more likely to cause infections in patients in critical care units. In patients with neutropenia, viridans streptococci were significantly more common. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most common pathogens on all clinical services except obstetrics, where Escherichia coli was most common. Methicillin resistance was detected in 29% of S. aureus isolates and 80% of coagulase-negative staphylococci. Vancomycin resistance in enterococci was species-dependent-3% of Enterococcus faecalis strains and 50% of Enterococcus faecium isolates displayed resistance. These data may allow clinicians to better target empirical therapy for hospital-acquired cases of bacteremia.

The objective of this study is to compare the ability of Medicare and cancer registry data to identify incident cancer cases and initial surgical therapy both singly and in combination. Data from the Virginia Cancer Registry (VCR) were linked to Medicare claims files (Medical Provider Analysis and Review File (MEDPAR)) for Virginia residents aged 65 years and over with breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer diagnosed between 1986 and 1989. MEDPAR found 73-83% of cancer cases identified by VCR. Factors significantly associated with MEDPAR missing a case that was reported to VCR included younger age, male gender, living in an urban area, higher social class, in situ disease, and lack of cancer treatment. A total of 70-82% of cancer cases identified through Medicare claims were reported to the VCR. Older age, female gender, nonwhite race, comorbid conditions, no surgical procedures, multiple cancer admissions, and the position of the cancer diagnostic code on the MEDPAR record were factors significantly related to being missed by the VCR. The rate of capturing initial surgical therapies was similar to that of identifying cases. Combining information from VCR and MEDPAR resulted in increasing sensitivity for identifying incident cases to 92-97%. Using combined data from independent sources may improve reporting, increase the accuracy of cancer incidence estimates, and provide an opportunity to identify reasons for missing data.

To measure the accuracy and consistency of a standardized method--retrospective chart review (RCR)--for estimating nosocomial infection rates (NIRs) in individual hospitals, the authors performed a series of pilot studies in four hospitals of different types. In comparison with a standard based on diagnoses made by physician-epidemiologists supervising intensive prospective data collection teams, the RCR method was found to have an average sensitivity of 0.74 (+/- 0.02 SE; range 0.69-0.78) and an average specificity of 0.964 (+/- 0.002; 0.945-0.991). These values were comparable to those of the physician-epidemiologists' diagnoses and varied less among the hospitals. Two independent teams of chart reviewers were found to have similar levels of sensitivity and specificity, and the reliability of diagnosis at the level of the individual chart reviewer averaged 0.94. In a restudy at one of the pilot hospitals at the midpoint of the actual Medical Records Survey (MRS), there was a substantial increase in sensitivityand a slight increase in specificity as a result of improvements made in the RCR method after the original pilot studies.