Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical benefit of infectious diseases consultation: a monocentric prospective cohort study

  • Clinical and Epidemiological Study
  • Published:
Infection Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the association of clinical outcomes with the adherence to Infectious Diseases Consultation (IDC) recommendations.

Methods

From March to August 2009, all patients hospitalized in our hospital, for whom an IDC was requested, were prospectively enrolled. The adherence to recommendations was ascertained after 72 h from the IDC. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the clinical cure rate 1 month after the IDC, according to the adherence to IDC recommendations.

Results

An IDC was requested for 258 inpatients. The infectious disease (ID) was most often non-severe (66 %), community-acquired (62 %), and already under treatment (47 %). IDC proposals were most often formulated via a formal consultation (57 %). Physicians’ adherence to IDC recommendations was 87 % for diagnostic tests and 90 % for antibiotherapy. In the multivariate analysis, severe infections and direct consultation were independently associated with increased odds of adherence to recommendations for performing diagnostic tests (odds ratios 5.4 and 4.0, respectively). The overall clinical cure rate was 84 % and this did not differ according to the adherence to IDC recommendations for diagnostic tests (84.3 vs. 71.4 %, p = 0.15) and antimicrobial treatment (84.8 vs. 77.8 %, p = 0.34).

Conclusions

Some limitations of the study may explain the lack of evidence of a clinical benefit, such as the very high level of adherence to IDC recommendations and the low proportion of severe infections. However, clinical improvement was always better when recommendations were followed. Therefore, further larger randomized multicentric studies including more patients suffering from more severe IDs may be needed in order to demonstrate a clinical impact.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sarkar P, Gould IM. Antimicrobial agents are societal drugs: how should this influence prescribing? Drugs. 2006;66:893–901.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Scheckler WE, Bennett JV. Antibiotic usage in seven community hospitals. JAMA. 1970;213:264–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Roberts AW, Visconti JA. The rational and irrational use of systemic antimicrobial drugs. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1972;29:828–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Reimann HA. The misuse of antimicrobics. Med Clin North Am. 1961;45:849–56.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Marr JJ, Moffet HL, Kunin CM. Guidelines for improving the use of antimicrobial agents in hospitals: a statement by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. J Infect Dis. 1988;157:869–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kislak JW, Eickhoff TC, Finland M. Hospital-acquired infections and antibiotic usage in the Boston city hospital—January, 1964. N Eng J Med. 1964;271:834–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. John JF Jr, Fishman NO. Programmatic role of the infectious diseases physician in controlling antimicrobial costs in the hospital. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;24:471–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cosgrove SE. The relationship between antimicrobial resistance and patient outcomes: mortality, length of hospital stay, and health care costs. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42:S82–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Roberts RR, Hota B, Ahmad I, Scott RD 2nd, Foster SD, Abbasi F, Schabowski S, Kampe LM, Ciavarella GG, Supino M, Naples J, Cordell R, Levy SB, Weinstein RA. Hospital and societal costs of antimicrobial-resistant infections in a Chicago teaching hospital: implications for antibiotic stewardship. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49:1175–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Spencer RC. The role of antimicrobial agents in the aetiology of Clostridium difficile-associated disease. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1998;41:21–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Ghantoji SS, Sail K, Lairson DR, DuPont HL, Garey KW. Economic healthcare costs of Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect. 2010;74:309–18.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. McFarland LV. Update on the changing epidemiology of Clostridium difficile-associated disease. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;5:40–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dellit TH, Owens RC, McGowan JE Jr, Gerding DN, Weinstein RA, Burke JP, Huskins WC, Paterson DL, Fishman NO, Carpenter CF, Brennan PJ, Billeter M, Hooton TM. Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America guidelines for developing an institutional program to enhance antimicrobial stewardship. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44:159–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Davey P, Brown E, Fenelon L, Finch R, Gould I, Hartman G, Holmes A, Ramsay C, Taylor E, Wilcox M, Wiffen P. Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices for hospital inpatients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(4):CD003543.

  15. Patel D, Lawson W, Guglielmo BJ. Antimicrobial stewardship programs: interventions and associated outcomes. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2008;6:209–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fowler VG Jr, Sanders LL, Sexton DJ, Kong L, Marr KA, Gopal AK, Gottlieb G, McClelland RS, Corey GR. Outcome of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia according to compliance with recommendations of infectious diseases specialists: experience with 244 patients. Clin Infect Dis. 1998;27:478–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kim BN. Compliance with an infectious disease specialist’s advisory consultations on targeted antibiotic usage. J Infect Chemother. 2005;11:84–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lo E, Rezai K, Evans AT, Madariaga MG, Phillips M, Brobbey W, Schwartz DN, Wang Y, Weinstein RA, Trenholme GM. Why don’t they listen? Adherence to recommendations of infectious disease consultations. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38:1212–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gómez J, Conde Cavero SJ, Hernández Cardona JL, Núñez ML, Ruiz Gómez J, Canteras M, Valdés M. The influence of the opinion of an infectious disease consultant on the appropriateness of antibiotic treatment in a general hospital. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1996;38:309–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Méan M, Pavèse P, Tudela E, Dinh-Van KA, Mallaret MR, Stahl JP. Consultations with infectious disease specialists for patients in a teaching hospital: adherence in 174 cases. Presse Med. 2006;35:1461–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pulcini C, Pradier C, Samat-Long C, Hyvernat H, Bernardin G, Ichai C, Dellamonica P, Roger PM. Factors associated with adherence to infectious diseases advice in two intensive care units. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006;57:546–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sellier E, Pavese P, Gennai S, Stahl JP, Labarère J, François P. Factors and outcomes associated with physicians’ adherence to recommendations of infectious disease consultations for inpatients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65:156–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sellier E, Labarère J, Gennai S, Bal G, François P, Pavese P. Compliance with recommendations and clinical outcomes for formal and informal infectious disease specialist consultations. Eur J Clinical Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;30:887–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Gennai S, François P, Bal G, Epaulard O, Stahl JP, Vittoz JP, Pavese P. Evaluation of a remote infectious disease consultation. Med Mal Infect. 2009;39:798–805.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Fraser GL, Stogsdill P, Dickens JD Jr, Wennberg DE, Smith RP Jr, Prato BS. Antibiotic optimization. An evaluation of patient safety and economic outcomes. Arch Intern Med. 1997;157:1689–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Honda H, Krauss MJ, Jones JC, Olsen MA, Warren DK. The value of infectious diseases consultation in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Am J Med. 2010;123:631–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Jenkins TC, Price CS, Sabel AL, Mehler PS, Burman WJ. Impact of routine infectious diseases service consultation on the evaluation, management, and outcomes of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46:1000–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Byl B, Clevenbergh P, Jacobs F, Struelens MJ, Zech F, Kentos A, Thys JP. Impact of infectious diseases specialists and microbiological data on the appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy for bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;29:60–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Evans RS, Pestotnik SL, Classen DC, Clemmer TP, Weaver LK, Orme JF Jr, Lloyd JF, Burke JP. A computer-assisted management program for antibiotics and other antiinfective agents. N Eng J Med. 1998;338:232–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Taur Y, Smith MA. Adherence to the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines in the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44:769–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Girotti MJ, Fodoruk S, Irvine-Meek J, Rotstein OD. Antibiotic handbook and pre-printed perioperative order forms for surgical antibiotic prophylaxis: do they work? Can J Surg. 1990;33:385–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. MacDougall C, Polk RE. Antimicrobial stewardship programs in health care systems. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2005;18:638–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mol PGM, Wieringa JE, NannanPanday PV, Gans ROB, Degener JE, Laseur M, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM. Improving compliance with hospital antibiotic guidelines: a time-series intervention analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;55:550–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Linkin DR, Paris S, Fishman NO, Metlay JP, Lautenbach E. Inaccurate communications in telephone calls to an antimicrobial stewardship program. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006;27:688–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

No conflicts of interest were reported by any of the authors. No funding was received for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Infectious Diseases Unit, University Hospital of Caen, 14000, Caen, France

    A. de La Blanchardière, J. Boutemy, J. Michon & R. Verdon

  2. Department of Hygiene and Public Health, University Hospital of Caen, 14000, Caen, France

    P. Thibon

  3. Department of Microbiology, University Hospital of Caen, 14000, Caen, France

    V. Cattoir

Authors
  1. A. de La Blanchardière
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Boutemy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Thibon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Michon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R. Verdon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. V. Cattoir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. de La Blanchardière.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

de La Blanchardière, A., Boutemy, J., Thibon, P. et al. Clinical benefit of infectious diseases consultation: a monocentric prospective cohort study. Infection 40, 501–507 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-012-0283-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-012-0283-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation