Increasing the reliability of fully automated surveillance for central line–associated bloodstream infections

OBJECTIVETo increase reliability of the algorithm used in our fully automated electronic surveillance system by adding rules to better identify bloodstream infections secondary to other hospital-acquired infections.METHODSIntensive care unit (ICU) patients with positive blood cultures were reviewed. Central line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) determinations were based on 2 sources: routine surveillance by infection preventionists, and fully automated surveillance. Discrepancies between the 2 sources were evaluated to determine root causes. Secondary infection sites were identified in most discrepant cases. New rules to identify secondary sites were added to the algorithm and applied to this ICU population and a non-ICU population. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and kappa were calculated for the new models.RESULTSOf 643 positive ICU blood cultures reviewed, 68 (10.6%) were identified as central line–associated bloodstream infections by fully automated electronic surveillance, whereas 38 (5.9%) were confirmed by routine surveillance. New rules were tested to identify organisms as central line–associated bloodstream infections if they did not meet one, or a combination of, the following: (I) matching organisms (by genus and species) cultured from any other site; (II) any organisms cultured from sterile site; (III) any organisms cultured from skin/wound; (IV) any organisms cultured from respiratory tract. The best-fit model included new rules I and II when applied to positive blood cultures in an ICU population. However, they didn’t improve performance of the algorithm when applied to positive blood cultures in a non-ICU population.CONCLUSIONElectronic surveillance system algorithms may need adjustment for specific populations.Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2015;36(12):1396–1400</jats:sec

Which comorbid conditions should we be analyzing as risk factors for healthcare-associated infections?

OBJECTIVETo determine which comorbid conditions are considered causally related to central-line associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and surgical-site infection (SSI) based on expert consensus.DESIGNUsing the Delphi method, we administered an iterative, 2-round survey to 9 infectious disease and infection control experts from the United States.METHODSBased on our selection of components from the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices, 35 different comorbid conditions were rated from 1 (not at all related) to 5 (strongly related) by each expert separately for CLABSI and SSI, based on perceived relatedness to the outcome. To assign expert consensus on causal relatedness for each comorbid condition, all 3 of the following criteria had to be met at the end of the second round: (1) a majority (&gt;50%) of experts rating the condition at 3 (somewhat related) or higher, (2) interquartile range (IQR)≤1, and (3) standard deviation (SD)≤1.RESULTSFrom round 1 to round 2, the IQR and SD, respectively, decreased for ratings of 21 of 35 (60%) and 33 of 35 (94%) comorbid conditions for CLABSI, and for 17 of 35 (49%) and 32 of 35 (91%) comorbid conditions for SSI, suggesting improvement in consensus among this group of experts. At the end of round 2, 13 of 35 (37%) and 17 of 35 (49%) comorbid conditions were perceived as causally related to CLABSI and SSI, respectively.CONCLUSIONSOur results have produced a list of comorbid conditions that should be analyzed as risk factors for and further explored for risk adjustment of CLABSI and SSI.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:449–454</jats:sec

The effect of adding comorbidities to current centers for disease control and prevention central-line–associated bloodstream infection risk-adjustment methodology

BACKGROUNDRisk adjustment is needed to fairly compare central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates between hospitals. Until 2017, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) methodology adjusted CLABSI rates only by type of intensive care unit (ICU). The 2017 CDC models also adjust for hospital size and medical school affiliation. We hypothesized that risk adjustment would be improved by including patient demographics and comorbidities from electronically available hospital discharge codes.METHODSUsing a cohort design across 22 hospitals, we analyzed data from ICU patients admitted between January 2012 and December 2013. Demographics and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) discharge codes were obtained for each patient, and CLABSIs were identified by trained infection preventionists. Models adjusting only for ICU type and for ICU type plus patient case mix were built and compared using discrimination and standardized infection ratio (SIR). Hospitals were ranked by SIR for each model to examine and compare the changes in rank.RESULTSOverall, 85,849 ICU patients were analyzed and 162 (0.2%) developed CLABSI. The significant variables added to the ICU model were coagulopathy, paralysis, renal failure, malnutrition, and age. The C statistics were 0.55 (95% CI, 0.51–0.59) for the ICU-type model and 0.64 (95% CI, 0.60–0.69) for the ICU-type plus patient case-mix model. When the hospitals were ranked by adjusted SIRs, 10 hospitals (45%) changed rank when comorbidity was added to the ICU-type model.CONCLUSIONSOur risk-adjustment model for CLABSI using electronically available comorbidities demonstrated better discrimination than did the CDC model. The CDC should strongly consider comorbidity-based risk adjustment to more accurately compare CLABSI rates across hospitals.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1019–1024</jats:sec

Machine learning liver-injuring drug interactions with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) from a retrospective electronic health record (EHR) cohort

Drug-drug interactions account for up to 30% of adverse drug reactions. Increasing prevalence of electronic health records (EHRs) offers a unique opportunity to build machine learning algorithms to identify drug-drug interactions that drive adverse events. In this study, we investigated hospitalizations\u27 data to study drug interactions with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) that result in drug-induced liver injury (DILI). We propose a logistic regression based machine learning algorithm that unearths several known interactions from an EHR dataset of about 400,000 hospitalization. Our proposed modeling framework is successful in detecting 87.5% of the positive controls, which are defined by drugs known to interact with diclofenac causing an increased risk of DILI, and correctly ranks aggregate risk of DILI for eight commonly prescribed NSAIDs. We found that our modeling framework is particularly successful in inferring associations of drug-drug interactions from relatively small EHR datasets. Furthermore, we have identified a novel and potentially hepatotoxic interaction that might occur during concomitant use of meloxicam and esomeprazole, which are commonly prescribed together to allay NSAID-induced gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Empirically, we validate our approach against prior methods for signal detection on EHR datasets, in which our proposed approach outperforms all the compared methods across most metrics, such as area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC)