Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-09T22:11:51.142Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of Telephoned Notification of Positive Clostridium difficile Test Results on the Time to the Ordering of Antimicrobial Therapy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Brandon P. Verdoorn
Affiliation:
Mayo Medical School, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
Robert Orenstein
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
John W. Wilson
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
Lynn L. Estes
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
Randy F. Wendt
Affiliation:
Division of Clinical Support Services, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
Cathy D. Schleck
Affiliation:
Division of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
William S. Harmsen
Affiliation:
Division of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
Lisa M. Nyre
Affiliation:
Division of Clinical Microbiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
Robin Patel*
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota Division of Clinical Microbiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
*
Division of Clinical Microbiology College of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (patel.robin@mayo.edu)

Abstract

The time between electronic-medical-record reporting of a positive result of a test for Clostridium difficile toxin in stool and the ordering of antimicrobial therapy was compared during consecutive periods when results were not telephoned (n = 274) and when results were telephoned (n = 90) to the clinical service. The mean times to the ordering of antimicrobial therapy were 11.9 and 3.6 hours, respectively (P < .001).

Type
Concise Communications
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Howanitz, PJ, Steindel, SJ, Heard, NV. Laboratory critical values policies and procedures: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes Study in 623 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2002;126:663669.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.McDonald, LC, Owings, M, Jernigan, DB. Clostridium difficile infection in patients discharged from US short-stay hospitals, 1996–2003. Emerg Infect Dis 2006;12:409415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.McDonald, LC, Killgore, GE, Thompson, A, et al. An epidemic, toxin gene-variant strain of Clostridium difficile. N Engl J Med 2005;353:24332441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Warny, M, Pepin, J, Fang, A, et al. Toxin production by an emerging strain of Clostridium difficile associated with outbreaks of severe disease in North America and Europe. Lancet 2005;366:10791084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Owens, RC. Clostridium difficile–associated disease: changing epidemiology and implications for management. Drugs 2007;67:487502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Kuijper, EJ, van Dissel, JT, Wilcox, MH. Clostridium difficile: changing epidemiology and new treatment options. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2007;20:376383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Bartlett, JG. Narrative review: the new epidemic of Clostridium difficile-associated enteric disease. Ann Intern Med 2006;145:758764.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Dubberke, ER, Reske, KA, Yan, Y, et al. Clostridium difficile-associated disease in a setting of endemicity: identification of novel risk factors. Clin Infect Dis 2007;45:15431549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar