Browsing by Subject "Clinical impact"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    158. Diagnostic Yield and Clinical Utility of Broad Range PCR Testing at a Tertiary Children’s Hospital
    (Oxford University Press, 2023-11-27) Schneider, Jack; Prabhudas-Strycker, Kirsten; Samaro, Matthew; Goings, Michael; Mellencamp, Kagan A.; Khan, Haseeba; Boyd, LaKeisha; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background: Broad range PCR testing (BR-PCR) targets highly conserved DNA sequences of bacteria, fungi, or mycobacteria to detect a broad range of organisms in various clinical samples. Given its potential impact in providing timely diagnoses that cannot always be made through conventional testing (CT), we evaluated the diagnostic yield and clinical impact of BR-PCR at our institution. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated all clinical specimen types obtained for BR-PCR at Riley Hospital for Children from October 2019 to May 2022. Percent positivity (PP) was determined by specific PCR test type (Bacterial/Fungal/NTM/TB), along with median turn-around times (in days) from sample collection. Medical charts were reviewed, and clinical impact of results was determined. Results: We identified 956 BR-PCR tests sent from 271 specimens collected from 178 patients. Only 14.5% yielded a positive result with a median days-to-result being the longest for fungal PCR at 8.1 days (7.0, 10.1) and TB PCR being the fastest at 7.8 days (6.8, 9.9). Bacterial BR-PCR yielded an overall PP of 42.6% while Fungal BR-PCR was 10.7%. Positivity rates for NTM and TB were 0% and 0.5%, respectively. Bronchial lavage was the most common specimen type (35.5%) with an overall PP of 19.9%. Of the 271 specimens, 245 returned conclusive results from both BR-PCR and clinical testing (CT) for comparison. A clinically significant organism based on CT was identified in 68 specimens (27.8%), 45 of which were confirmed by BR-PCR. 23 (33.8%) were detected by CT but not BR-PCR. 21 clinically significant organisms not detected by CT were identified by BR-PCR, which led to a change in clinical management in 12 instances: new diagnosis (91.7%); or appropriate initiation (91.7%), escalation (25.0%), or de-escalation (25.0%) of antimicrobial therapy. Conclusion: BR-PCR overall had low diagnostic yield at our institution but was influenced by specimen type. The clinical utility was predominantly seen in immunocompromised patients in which conventional testing was negative. Further data is needed to determine which specimen types and diagnoses will increase the yield and clinical value of BR-PCR and thus, aid in enhancing diagnostic stewardship.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    P-1606. Utilizing Diagnostic Stewardship to Help Increase the Yield and Clinical Value of Broad Range PCR Testing at a Tertiary Children’s Hospital
    (Oxford University Press, 2025-01-29) Fortna, Sarah; Alali, Muayad; Prabhudas-Strycker, Kirsten; Mellencamp, Kagan A.; Boyd, LaKeisha; Goings, Michael; Khan, Haseeba; Fahey, Mackenzie; Samaro, Matthew; Schneider, Jack G.; Graduate Medical Education, School of Medicine
    Background: Broad range PCR testing (BR-PCR) in various clinical samples has the ability to provide timely diagnoses that cannot always be made through conventional testing (CT), yet its diagnostic yield and clinical impact have been variable, especially by specimen type. As such, we developed an ID-physician led diagnostic stewardship approval protocol to help optimize test usage. Methods: We conducted a single-center, retrospective pre/post study to assess the impact of an ID-led diagnostic stewardship approval protocol for BR-PCR testing. All clinical specimen types obtained for BR-PCR at Riley Hospital for Children were evaluated between 10/1/2019 to 4/30/2022 (pre-intervention) and 5/1/2022-12/31/2023 (post-intervention). Clinical relevancy of BR-PCR results was determined after review from two ID physician experts and compared between the two time periods, along with clinical impact and overall cost savings. Results: A total of 931 BR-PCR tests were sent from 238 specimens collected from 175 patients in the pre-intervention period, while 208 BR-PCR tests were sent from 65 specimens collected from 65 patients in the post-intervention period. Clinical relevancy of results was determined to be 30.7% and 56.9% for pre-and post-intervention periods, respectively (p< 0.001). 23.1% of post intervention results led to a change in clinical management, compared to 12.6% in the pre-intervention period (p=0.035). Bronchial lavage (BAL) was the most common specimen type with 52.9% of results being clinically relevant post-intervention, compared to 29.6% in the pre-intervention period; p=0.068). Results that led to a clinical change in management were also slightly higher but non-significant for BALs post-intervention (11.8% vs 9.9% pre intervention; p=0.816). Overall cost savings post-intervention was estimated to be $200,000. Conclusion: Use of an ID-physician led diagnostic stewardship approval protocol led to an overall improvement in clinical utility for BR-PCR testing at our institution and was influenced by specimen type. Prospective, multi-center studies are needed to determine which specimen types, diagnoses, and potential diagnostic stewardship measures will help increase the yield and clinical value of BR-PCR testing.