Objective

In the absence of pyuria, positive urine cultures are unlikely to represent infection. Conditional urine reflex culture policies have the potential to limit unnecessary urine culturing. We evaluated the impact of this diagnostic stewardship intervention.

Design

We conducted a retrospective, quasi-experimental (nonrandomized) study, with interrupted time series, from August 2013 to January 2018 to examine rates of urine cultures before versus after the policy intervention. We compared 3 intervention sites to 3 control sites in an aggregated series using segmented negative binomial regression.

Setting

The study included 6 acute-care hospitals within the Veterans' Health Administration across the United States.

Participants

Adult patients with at least 1 urinalysis ordered during acute-care admission, excluding pregnant patients or those undergoing urological procedures, were included.

Methods

At the intervention sites, urine cultures were performed if a preceding urinalysis met prespecified criteria. No such restrictions occurred at the control sites. The primary outcome was the rate of urine cultures performed per 1,000 patient days. The safety outcome was the rate of gram-negative bloodstream infection per 1,000 patient days.

Results

The study included 224,573 urine cultures from 50,901 admissions in 24,759 unique patients. Among the intervention sites, the overall average number of urine cultures performed did not significantly decrease relative to the preintervention period (5.9% decrease; P = 0.8) but did decrease by 21% relative to control sites (P < .01). We detected no significant difference in the rates of gram-negative bloodstream infection among intervention or control sites (P = .49).

Conclusions

Conditional urine reflex culture policies were associated with a decrease in urine culturing without a change in the incidence of gram-negative bloodstream infection.

BACKGROUND: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) may be misdiagnosed if testing is performed in the absence of signs or symptoms of disease. This study sought to support appropriate testing by estimating the impact of signs, symptoms, and healthcare exposures on pre-test likelihood of CDI. METHODS: A panel of fifteen experts in infectious diseases participated in a modified UCLA/RAND Delphi study to estimate likelihood of CDI. Consensus, defined as agreement by >70% of panelists, was assessed via a REDCap survey. Items without consensus were discussed in a virtual meeting followed by a second survey. RESULTS: All fifteen panelists completed both surveys (100% response rate). In the initial survey, consensus was present on 6 of 15 (40%) items related to risk of CDI. After panel discussion and clarification of questions, consensus (>70% agreement) was reached on all remaining items in the second survey. Antibiotics were identified as the primary risk factor for CDI and grouped into three categories: high-risk (likelihood ratio [LR] 7, 93% agreement among panelists in first survey), low-risk (LR 3, 87% agreement in first survey), and minimal-risk (LR 1, 71% agreement in first survey). Other major factors included new or unexplained severe diarrhea (e.g., ≥ 10 liquid bowel movements per day; LR 5, 100% agreement in second survey) and severe immunosuppression (LR 5, 87% agreement in second survey). CONCLUSION: Infectious disease experts concurred on the importance of signs, symptoms, and healthcare exposures for diagnosing CDI. The resulting risk estimates can be used by clinicians to optimize CDI testing and treatment.