Biomedical subjects

Harold C Standiford

Publications and source records attributed to Harold C Standiford.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Impact of a computerized clinical decision support system on reducing inappropriate antimicrobial use: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Many hospitals utilize antimicrobial management teams (AMTs) to improve patient care. However, most function with minimal computer support. We evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a computerized clinical decision support system for the management of antimicrobial utilization. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial in adult inpatients between May 10 and August 3, 2004. Antimicrobial utilization was managed by an existing AMT using the system in the intervention arm and without the system in the control arm. The system was developed to alert the AMT of potentially inadequate antimicrobial therapy. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes assessed were hospital antimicrobial expenditures, mortality, length of hospitalization, and time spent managing antimicrobial utilization. RESULTS: The AMT intervened on 359 (16%) of 2,237 patients in the intervention arm and 180 (8%) of 2,270 in the control arm, while spending approximately one hour less each day on the intervention arm. Hospital antimicrobial expenditures were $285,812 in the intervention arm and $370,006 in the control arm, for a savings of $84,194 (23%), or $37.64 per patient. No significant difference was observed in mortality (3.26% vs. 2.95%, p = 0.55) or length of hospitalization (3.84 vs. 3.99 days, p = 0.38). CONCLUSION: Use of the system facilitated the management of antimicrobial utilization by allowing the AMT to intervene on more patients receiving inadequate antimicrobial therapy and to achieve substantial time and cost savings for the hospital. This is the first study that demonstrates in a patient-randomized controlled trial that computerized clinical decision support systems can improve existing antimicrobial management programs.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococci co-colonization.

We assessed the prevalence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of patients co-colonized with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) upon admission to the medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs) of a tertiary-care facility between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2003. Co-colonization was defined as a VRE-positive perirectal surveillance culture with an MRSA-positive anterior nares surveillance culture collected concurrently. Among 2,440 patients, 65 (2.7%) were co-colonized. Independent risk factors included age (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.05), admission to the medical ICU (OR 4.38, 95% CI 2.46-7.81), male sex (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.14-3.30), and receiving antimicrobial drugs on a previous admission within 1 year (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.85-5.07). None of the co-colonized patients would have been identified with clinical cultures alone. We report a high prevalence of VRE/MRSA co-colonization upon admission to ICUs at a tertiary-care hospital.

Aged↗

PubMed2004

Aggressive control measures for resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and the impact on acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus in a medical intensive care unit.

The medical ICU implemented aggressive control measures following an outbreak of multidrug-resistant, clonal Acinetobacter baumannii. Multivariable regression analyses comparing acquisition (6 months preceding to 6 months during or following the outbreak) revealed decreased VRE and MRSA acquisition. Aggressive control measures can reduce VRE, and perhaps MRSA, transmission.

Acinetobacter↗

PubMed2004

Preliminary assessment of an automated surveillance system for infection control.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Rapid identification and investigation of potential outbreaks is key to limiting transmission in the healthcare setting. Manual review of laboratory results remains a cumbersome, time-consuming task for infection control practitioners (ICPs). Computer-automated techniques have shown promise for improving the efficiency and accuracy of surveillance. We examined the use of automated control charts, provided by an automated surveillance system, for detection of potential outbreaks. SETTING: A 656-bed academic medical center. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 13 months (November 2001 through November 2002) of laboratory-patient data, comparing an automated surveillance application with standard infection control practices. We evaluated positive predictive value, sensitivity, and time required to investigate the alerts. An ICP created 75 control charts. A standardized case investigation form was developed to evaluate each alert for the likelihood of nosocomial transmission based on temporal and spatial overlap and culture results. RESULTS: The 75 control charts were created in 75 minutes and 18 alerts fired above the 3-sigma level. These were independently reviewed by an ICP and associate hospital epidemiologist. The review process required an average of 20 minutes per alert and the kappa score between the reviewers was 0.82. Eleven of the 18 alerts were determined to be potential outbreaks, yielding a positive predictive value of 0.61. Routine surveillance identified 5 of these 11 alerts during this time period. CONCLUSION: Automated surveillance with user-definable control charts for cluster identification was more sensitive than routine methods and is capable of operating with high specificity and positive predictive value in a time-efficient manner.

Cross Infection↗

PubMed2003

Worldwide assessment of linezolid's clinical safety and tolerability: comparator-controlled phase III studies.

Linezolid, an oxazolidinone antibiotic, has 100% oral bioavailability and favorable activities against gram-positive pathogens including multidrug-resistant staphylococci, enterococci, and pneumococci. Safety assessments were conducted for 2,046 linezolid-treated patients and 2,001 comparator drug-treated patients from seven controlled clinical trials comparing the activities of linezolid and comparator drugs against nosocomial and community-acquired pneumonia, skin and skin structure infections, and methicillin-resistant staphylococcal infections. Drug-related adverse events were primarily transient. The most frequent (> or = 2%) adverse events caused by linezolid and the comparator drugs were diarrhea (4.3 and 3.2%, respectively; P = 0.074), nausea (3.4 and 2.3%, respectively; P = 0.036), and headache (2.2 and 1.3%, respectively; P = 0.047). Treatment discontinuations due to drug-related events (2.4 and 1.9%, respectively), serious adverse events (11.4 and 10.6%, respectively), and deaths (4.8 and 4.9%, respectively) were similar. No clinically significant drug-related hematologic events were reported, and laboratory safety data were comparable. In the first 6 months of postmarketing surveillance, hematologic abnormalities were reported in 0.1% of linezolid-treated patients, but no irreversible blood dyscrasias were documented. The risk for transient, reversible hematologic effects from treatment with linezolid should be considered together with the clinical benefits associated with its use.

Acetamides↗